Culex? - Culex quinquefasciatus

wow!

your photos are crisp. yes this is definitely a Culex. I zoomed in into your photo and it is clear that the prespiracular setae are absent. With this much detail I believe you can get a species ID (I'll leave that to Sean). May I ask what camera and lens you use?

… Omar Fahmy, 2 November, 2006 - 7:45pm

The camera is a Canon S3. I have a couple of close-up lenses I use. A Raynox MSN-202 is good for tiny insects. These were taken with a Raynox DCR-250. I really can't recommend the camera but the close-up lenses make it relatively useful. I guess it's OK for what it cost but there are much better options for macro work.

… Perry Babin, 2 November, 2006 - 7:53pm

...

Fantastic photos. I think it is safe to say that this is Culex quinquefasciatus. I am basing this on "large lateral scale patches" rather than "pale patches rounded posteriorly", as the dorsum of the abdomen is obscured.
I myself use an S2IS and a Raynox DCR 250. DO you use an auxilliary flash?

… Sean McCann, 2 November, 2006 - 9:50pm

I use home-made diffusers and the on-board flash for most images. I have another flash that I use when I need to light from behind or from the bottom.

… Perry Babin, 2 November, 2006 - 10:24pm

...

I use the onboard as well, with styrofoam bowls as the diffuser. Sometimes I wish I had more light though.

… Sean McCann, 3 November, 2006 - 9:36am