zzffnn wrote:Outstanding photos! Thank you for sharing.
Anyone knows what is that thing/structure in the second photo? A baby?

It is one of the two "branches" of the female reproductive system. What you see are developing ovocytes.

Chris S. wrote: But the software end is not so obvious to me—once one obtained the eight pictures, how would one combine them?
--Chris

PhotoAcute (http://www.photoacute.com/) might do the trick. I tried it once long time ago, but not recently and not with this type of images.

Another interesting soft focus lens is Tamron Adaptall-2 70-150/2.8, which, like Minolta MD 85mm and Minolta MAF 100mm (and probably others) introduces spherical aberration by moving some of the lens elements. It is rather sharp when soft focus effect is set to "0". I have been shooting with one for...

1--What equipment did you use for your images? Custom made dual camera setup with one regular camera and one full-spectrum modified camera. 2--What wavelengths of light did you record? Visible image was recorded by ordinary camera, so somewhere between 410 and 690 nm. Reflected UV image represents ...

The BBC article seem to be oversimplifying the UV "story" but I have no grounds to comment on it. Instead, here are two examples of spiders shot in visible (top) and UV (bottom) spectrum.

Thanks Ray!

I was still contemplating about this lens when I found another review that showed what noone else showed - lens performance at medium focusing distance, and the distortion it produces: http://regex.info/blog/2015-02-26/2530

I assume it is not so much of a problem at higher magnification, is it?

Today I found this review: https://www.wimarys.com/venus-60mm-macro-lens-review/ . If one checks the test charts, one can see noticeable chromatic aberration in the corners of the frame even at F/11 (tested on full-frame camera). The center looks much better. So my question to you, Ray - how much ch...

darwin wrote:I would not be surprised that they would belong to the same genus. Cephalobidae are a taxonomic mess, and these probolae are highly variable.

Thank you, it is always good to have expert opinion in such cases.

It is a peculiar lens. So what is your conclusion about its optical properties, comparing to MP-E65?

Third and fourth are Cervidellus, second and fifth are indeed Acrobeles

It is a male of one of the genera of the family Tobrilidae. To identify it properly, one needs to see details of the anterior end.