Lightnings taking a ride

by ceinmart

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

11

You can use focus stacking. It is a way to combine similar pictures at lower DOF to create a picture of larger DOF. This video details the procedure.


7

You can't do it with the 100-150mm macro lens exactly. If you look at the images again you can see the fibres within threads that the snowflake is sat upon and that's some extreme magnification going on there well outside the parameters of a normal macro lens. What the author of the images in the article has done is created a reverse mount setup. Normally ...


7

Always use as much data as you can. It's actually easier to reduce noise when there's more information to begin with. (Reducing resolution is a brute-force noise removal tool, throwing away both noise and signal.) If you're still concerned about the size final image, reduce the resolution at that point, after flattening.


4

If you have a SLR, it's as simple as pulling one of the microscope eyepieces, removing the SLR lens, and pointing the camera lens-box at the eyepiece hole. You generally need to hold the camera about 1-2" from where the eyepiece sits. Nikon D80 AF sensor You lose contrast from light-leakage, but it works pretty well.


4

You cannot do what you are asking to do. There is no lens which will give you the desired magnification combined with minimal focal distance to perform microscopic photos. Even if you took something like the Canon MP-E 65mm F2.8 1-5x macro and added a zoom element inbetween: you wouldn't be there. If you could somehow manage to get enough magnification: I ...


3

Why can't you just use the sensor you have in a smartphone or in a simple hand-held camera with a microscope and get better quality more cheaply? You're starting from a false premise — that the resolution tells you much about the image quality. The $6000 camera from your link has a 1/1.2"-format sensor, which has an area roughly 5× that in an iPhone. ...


3

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how lenses and microscopy works. Typical photographic lenses, including macro lenses have a minimum focal distance. That is the minimum distance from the lens at which they can focus. This means that the actual meaningful magnification of such a lens is not actually all that high. Microscopes are ...


3

Scopetronix carries a whole line of eyepieces and adapters to allow afocal photography for telescopes and microscopes. I have used their stuff for my telescope assembly for planetary work where the subject is relatively small from the entire field. Their website used to work better back when it wasn't modern, but now it's a mess with poorly designed css and ...


3

The depth of field is a function of the relationship between the image magnification and the diaphragm opening (aperture). You will have to reduce the aperture at that magnification or reduce the magnification at that aperture. Changing the lens focal length to affect d.o.f. from a given subject-camera distance is changing the image magnification, in ...


2

You can buy adapters for just about any DSLR mount that will allow you to resolve a microscopic image onto a camera sensor. They are pretty easy to find on just about any microscope store's website. Expect to spend anywhere from $40 to $400 depending on the quality you want. They most commonly go in place of the eyepiece of the microscope.


2

The depth of field is based on viewing distance and magnification. You can reduce the size of the aperture through which the light travels, but this would have to be done using different optics in the microscope itself. I don't think most microscopes have a depth of field adjustment available. Focus stacking is the other option which basically works by ...


2

You could reverse stack two lenses, which can give you an effective lens length of 2000mm (that's the right number of zeros) or more.I recently did this with the only two lenses I have - a 55-250 mounted on the camera, and a 18-55 reverse mounted onto that: The trade of with using this method is that the focusing plane of the finished setup will be ...


1

Just about any DSLR will suffice by todays standards. For what its worth both Nikon and Cannon make a full set of lenses that will cover everything except for you Microscope and Telescope photography. When it comes to your telescopes adapters are pretty easy to come buy I have one for my D3300 that connects it to a 500mm refracting lens(very similar to this ...


1

The difference is a higher reliability and compliance to different (industry) standards. Say for example you are building automated assembly lines for other companies that at some point require computer vision. If this assembly line fails and stops doing whatever it is supposed to do, the company that bought it from you will charge you by the minute (and ...


1

But does it include or bypass eyepiece magnification? As the camera in the included image is clearly not looking through either of the eyepiece, it obviously doesn't include magnification due to those eyepieces. The camera likely has its own lens, however, that may provide a similar overall effect. For example, it looks like most of the AmScope cameras ...


1

You could take a video and extract individual frames from that. You can then blend the frames together into one long exposure (For instance, in photoshop you can use Load Files into Stack and after converting it into a smart object stack you can set the stack mode to Mean, although you'll need a powerful computer for this method). You should probably take ...


1

Lance, The brands mentioned in an earlier answer are the typical, well respected, brands. I used a Leica microscope years ago. When selecting a microscope, you want to look for a "tri-nocular" set up, so that you can have your camera affixed to the microscope while you look through the eye pieces. Microbehunter(dot)com has a discussion on affixing cameras ...


1

I have a consumer camcorder which gives 32X optical zoom and after using it for a year I wanted a DSLR which would do the same thing. For a DSLR lens to offer the same zoom range is unheard of and I was disappointed to learn how the DSLR makers aren't making such lenses. I have a 10X zoom lens for my DSLR which all by itself is larger and heavier than the ...


1

A good solution is to use a dissection microscope which is low magnification compared to a regular microscope, but it has considerably greater depth of field. Get the specific particle in sharp focus, then image right through the eyepiece using a SLR. You have to move the camera around a bit to get the image centered on the SLR. Makes really good pics of ...


1

I don't have too much to add, but I have some limited experience with focus stacking on microscopes that I can share. I've done focus stacking on an SEM, the following image is a stack of only two images. I wish I had a third to fill in the blur in the middle. Image of a flower I took with a scanning electron microscope. The near foreground and the 'sky' ...


1

The easiest way that I have tried is simply to put a point and shoot camera into macro mode, and hold the camera up to the lens of the microscope. The view isn't the greatest, but it works in a pinch. If you are unfamiliar with Macro mode, usually it is the symbol of a flower or leaf on the camera, and it allows(or forces) the camera to focus on objects ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible