[eeyore]

I'm not going to get into an argument here - and am happy to agree to differ - all i meant was that paul harcourt davies has certainly written a lot about macro photography and made a lot of money both out of photos in magazines etc (so it seems that not every picture editor shares your opinion), and from books on the subject, and is therefore in a position to give an authorative definitive definition of the term

I have the robert thompson book too (and several others) but i must admit that thompson lost my trust in his expertise when he wrote that " only Medium format is really suitable for macro work as 35mm and digital really do not deliver sufficient quality" hmm not in my experience....

however despite differing on authors i am happy to agree with your last statement - good technique with a set of tubes and a 50mm f1.8 will get better pictures than bad technique combined with the most expensive lens on the market