Lindolfi Posted March 17, 2012 Share #1  Posted March 17, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Recently there was a request for information on making micro photographs with an M  I am still struggling to see what I can do with an m8 (etc). for astrophotography. That is not so easy, same applies to microscopy where I would dearly like to use my M8.  Any comments & success stories are welcome.  Here is my setup   It is an M9 on Visoflex III on a homemade tube with an M mount ring. The tube sits in a LOMO microscope after adapting connection with the tube. There is a Leitz Photar 12.5 mm f 2.4 in the microscope as well as a Zeiss Luminar 40/4.0, both with RMS thread. Also a 60x Achromat.  With this setup you can do focus stacking with the scale on the micro height control knob.  Here's a result with 10 images stacked of hollyhock pollen. Top to bottom extends 0.7 mm in the real world.  Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 Hi Lindolfi, Take a look here Micro Photography with an M. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Michael Geschlecht Posted March 17, 2012 Share #2 Â Posted March 17, 2012 Hello Bert, Â Nice photos. Â Best Regards, Â Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted March 24, 2012 Share #3 Â Posted March 24, 2012 That is a really nice photo! The setup looked a bit "Heath Robinson" at first sight, the image proves otherwise. Â What is your reason for stacking, instead of using a small aperture & long exposure time? Do you loose too much resolution? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted March 24, 2012 Author Share #4 Â Posted March 24, 2012 Yes. The effective aperture is the magnification in the filmplane plus 1 times the f-number, so diffraction kicks in dramatically. Usually these micro lenses are used therefore at their largest opening or close to it. This then together with the magnification sets the DOF and with objects with some depth you can increase this with focus stacking. Â It's a lot of work, but it really gives the effect of 3D shapes in microphotography. Â Concerning the setup: just keep working at the bottlenecks in imageformation. You don't need a photomicroscope as used in our medical center to get images that are even better. Â Ultimately it is all in the sensor, the quality and use of the lens and the stability of the setup. Â With focus stacking focussing is not that critical as long as your stack covers the interesting part of the depth of the object and the steps are nicely distributed separated by not more than half the DOF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted March 24, 2012 Share #5 Â Posted March 24, 2012 I am very, very impressed... particularly with the result of focus stacking.... Â Do you ever get a chance to get some sleep with all this experimenting and research Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spydrxx Posted March 25, 2012 Share #6 Â Posted March 25, 2012 Many years ago, when I was an unspohisticated high school kid trying to enjoy microscopy, I came across a long ago discontinued Kodak pamphlet for those who had no money to buy expensive attachments but wanted to take photographs thru the microscope. The concept described in the pamphlet worked pretty well, at least until I got to college and acquired decent gear. The setup was very simple, you used a set of step up/down rings so that you could gently place your rangefinder camera-lens down, centered over the ocular, and had your lens focussed at infinity. (I constructed a wooden sliding attachment so I could readily try other things). Put a cable release on the camera. You focused the image by eye, put the camera in place and shot away. Exposure was pretty much guesstimate, but after an experimental roll or two it was easy to estimate. I wish I still had some of those negatives, but they were lost in a move in the late 1950s. I also brashly also telephoned a noted time lapse photographer for Disney, who lived nearby for tips...but he wasn't very interested in talking to a green-horned kid. Anyway some of my shots made it to the state science fairs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted March 25, 2012 Author Share #7 Â Posted March 25, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Spydrxx, that's a lovely story and very recognizable. This is where it all started for me: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asmith Posted March 25, 2012 Share #8 Â Posted March 25, 2012 Leitz used to make gear for coupling M cameras to their microscopes. Most labs used the M models without range-viewfinders for this purpose. I can see no reason why digital Ms could not be used similarly but I no longer know where or if the coupling gear is available. Alwyn Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted March 25, 2012 Share #9 Â Posted March 25, 2012 Well done. But would not the straight magnifier be more comfortable to work with than the prism finder? Â LB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted March 25, 2012 Author Share #10 Â Posted March 25, 2012 Partly LB. For my posture it would be better, but for the eye-hand control of the object it would take some recalibration.Up-and down would be flipped, but left-right not in the image and so also in the motion of the object table of the microscope. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.