Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
c h u n k
OP c h u n k Senior Member • Posts: 1,564

John K wrote:

c h u n k wrote:

...At least nothing that even comes close to our diy designs.

This is the only diffuser I know of and if memory serves me correctly it didn't cut the hot spot out of the MT-24EX. Not the diffuser's fault though, the MT-24 doesn't really have a built in diffuser. The Fresnel plastic on the front of the flash heads is a joke.

I have the MT-26EX-RT version of Ian's diffuser on my desk and hope to field test it this weekend for a review. I expect it to perform better just because the MT-26 does have a built in diffuser that works, and the flash heads are a little bigger than the MT-24.

The only down side to the diffuser is that they are a little wider than I'd like them to be, so it's not possible to position the flash heads at 12 and 3 for a traditional key and fill effect, but I think I can get them close enough to get the shadow control that I want.

Oh yeah, I saw a post with that guys design and couldnt find it. Can you link me, please. Also, if you could share your review and some results, that would be great. I know you primarily shoot bees, but if you come upon any jumping spiders, ladybirds/ladybugs or other shiny beatles to really see how it holds to hot spots, that would be great. I recently saw polarizers being used, and the results, though a bit flat, were extraordinary as there was literally no specular highlights.

Ive been goin crazy recently looking for better material. Mostly, I need something like a placemat which can either be frosty white (and help diffuse itself) or clear and I can just attach foam sheets.

The change I recently made for my 100mm lens diffuser was to bring down the width, but increase the length and have it bend around just outside of the fov. Before I just had a HUGE diffuser to deal with working distance, and the results were nice, though a bit harsher than I wanted. I found that if I just got it much closer to the subject to adjust to relative size (think inverse square law) I could reduce size and make it easier to pack, and hopefully, with it being so much closer, the light quality would improve. I succeeded in both ways. The downsides are this - Because the diffuser gets so much closer to the subjects, its proven a bit tougher with the more skittish of insects, as they really dont like it when something is on top of them. Also, when adding the Raynox 250, there is a lot of wasted light and other designs Ive made specifically for that set up have been better. Unfortunately, its self defeating to change diffusers because I added the Raynox. The whole reason I use the Raynox instead of tubes is for the versatility of putting it on and removing it quickly. Ideally, I would be able to make a faster adjustment when adding the Raynox.

-- hide signature --

Some of my photos here: https://flic.kr/ps/2i6XL3
“You're off to Great Places! Today is your day! Your mountain is waiting, So... get on your way!” --Dr. Seuss

 c h u n k's gear list:c h u n k's gear list
Canon EOS 70D Canon 6D Mark II Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Tamron AF 28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) +7 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow