Monarch

[robar]

the tammy 300 is not that good when close focusing. think i'll keep it tho.

roy

[robar]

,

[robar]

.

[penolta]

Roy, ypu folks in Texas (and those in Florida) have four similar butterflies to distinguish from one or another. Three of them are closely related milkweed butterflies, the Monarcn, the smaller Queen and Soldier, and the unrelated Viceroy (a nonmilkweed and therefore tasty Monarch mimic). The butterfly in #1 and the larger one in #3 are femaleMonarchs;#2 and the smaller one in #3 are male Queen butterflies. Nice BfIF by the way - a good capture anda coup to get thetwo species togrther in the same frame.

[robar]

docP,
i can't tell the diff. probably even if i knew how. the BFIF was bonus but i thought i had both of them inflight. these things fly so slow but are next to impossible to catch IF. thanks for really mixing me up..:shock:lol

roy

[NonEntity1]

BFIF are tough with any lens, I would not want to try it with the 300/2.8! The Adaptall 300/5.6 is a very good lens for long range closeups though.

Tim

[penolta]

robar wrote:

docP,
i can't tell the diff. probably even if i knew how. the BFIF was bonus but i thought i had both of them inflight. these things fly so slow but are next to impossible to catch IF. thanks for really mixing me up..:shock:lol

roy

You are welcomed.:twisted:

The Queen has two rows of white dots across the brown areaof the forewing. The Monarch has spots within a black band nearer the tip of the orange wing; it is also noticably larger.

[mtngal]

Roy - interesting pictures! Penolta - even more interesting about the various species. Having tried to capture butterflies with the A300 (with little success), I can't imagine trying to do it with your Tamron 2.8

[Rodney9]

Well done with a 300, this is my attempt with my Sigma 70-300mm DG APO from early this year.