Handholding a 20x microscope objective for focus stacking?

[Sharks]

I saw this on Flickr;

"It’s also impossible to use. Everyone I’ve talked to have said that handholding a 20x microscope objective for focusing stacking is impossible. It can’t be done. I’m not going to say I’ve done a perfect job here, but it’s definitely proof that it CAN be done and it might just be a world first. If everyone thinks it’s impossible, it’s likely because no one has successfully done it before. That has just changed."

His Handholding setup;

"My 20x Mitutoyo M Plan Apo microscope objective was attached to my Canon 100-400L lens set to roughly 200mm, which is the required length for this series of lenses. With focus on the 100-400L set to infinity, the microscope lens “works”. Adapters to make it couple to the larger lens are needed, and the larger lens is set to its widest aperture. While I did built an aperture into the microscope object as part of this project, (and this next bit is important) it was shot wide open. Full resolution with no compromise to gain depth of field and sacrifice detail, focusing on just one arm of this snowflake."

Flickr Link: https://flic.kr/p/R7y6nW

Nothing is impossible, but can this be true?

[enricosavazzi]

The snowflake at the link is flat but apparently shot from a moderately oblique direction, so it is probably a stack rather than a single shot.

The EXIF says FL=65 mm, so apparently this image was not shot with the Mitutoyo 20x on 100-400 lens. The caption is also confusing. The first half of paragraph 2 says that the picture was shot with Canon MP-E 65 mm and extension tube, the second half with Mitutoyo 20x on 100-400 at 200 mm.

Hand holding is unlikely to succeed at 20x, but not impossible. The main question is how many times you are willing to try, and how much of an effort you are making to hold the lens and subject still. If you stick the subject on a stage attached to the front of the lens or to the lens collar, then you can wave the setup around as much as you wish, but it does not really count as hand-held. We also don't know how many shots in the stack and how long it took to shoot the stack.

That said, I am not going to attempt a 20x hand-held stack except in the case the subject is once-in-a-lifetime and I have no alternative. I still believe that success at this magnification is more a matter of luck than skill.

[rjlittlefield]

Nothing is impossible, but can this be true?

I have no reason to doubt the general description, though some of the details remain murky.

The EXIF says FL=65 mm, so apparently this image was not shot with the Mitutoyo 20x on 100-400 lens. The caption is also confusing. The first half of paragraph 2 says that the picture was shot with Canon MP-E 65 mm and extension tube, the second half with Mitutoyo 20x on 100-400 at 200 mm.

As I read it, that's because the caption would be referring to two different images. Quoting from https://www.flickr.com/photos/donkom/32235642284/ :

The full image was shot with my “12x” macro setup, which includes the Canon MP-E 65mm lens @ 5x coupled to 68mm of extension tubes and the Canon Lifesize Converter EF, which all add up to roughly 12x. This has been the setup I’ve used for all very small snowflakes, but I’ve recently come into possession of a 20x microscope optic to push things farther. This snowflake was one of my first tests with that lens.

My 20x Mitutoyo M Plan Apo microscope objective was attached to my Canon 100-400L lens set to roughly 200mm, which is the required length for this series of lenses. With focus on the 100-400L set to infinity, the microscope lens “works”. Adapters to make it couple to the larger lens are needed, and the larger lens is set to its widest aperture. While I did built an aperture into the microscope object as part of this project, (and this next bit is important) it was shot wide open. Full resolution with no compromise to gain depth of field and sacrifice detail, focusing on just one arm of this snowflake.

If we narrow this down to just that branch and compare my “conventional” 12x:

skycrystals.ca/comparison/DKP_2916-12x.jpg

To the 20x microscope:

skycrystals.ca/comparison/DKP_2916-20x.jpg

Because each was shot handheld, the angle differs slightly and sublimation of the snowflake from one image to the next accounts for more changes, but I’m sure the results are clear: The 20x microscope object makes a stellar macro lens at this scale, gathering far more detail with less chromatic aberration than my “daily driver” lens.

I'm still confused, however, because for me the Exif info in both of the linked .jpg's shows 200 mm and lists "EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM". Oddly, both images also show "Image Date: 2017-02-16 18:52:46 +0000". I have no idea why these two images don't seem to agree with their descriptions in text.

--Rik

[elf]

I recommend doing a forum search for LordV's handheld stacks if you want to be impressed by high magnification hand held focus stacks

[ChrisR]

Of course it's possible. If you add a suitable support of some sort then not difficult, even, but is that hand-held?
You won't get nice even steps perfectly aligned axially, and when I tried it, I rearranged some of the images into depth order after I'd taken them.
Somewhere along the line somebody says "cheating".
A big So what?

[enricosavazzi]

The EXIF says FL=65 mm, so apparently this image was not shot with the Mitutoyo 20x on 100-400 lens. The caption is also confusing. The first half of paragraph 2 says that the picture was shot with Canon MP-E 65 mm and extension tube, the second half with Mitutoyo 20x on 100-400 at 200 mm.

As I read it, that's because the caption would be referring to two different images.
(...)
I'm still confused, however, because for me the Exif info in both of the linked .jpg's shows 200 mm and lists "EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM". Oddly, both images also show "Image Date: 2017-02-16 18:52:46 +0000". I have no idea why these two images don't seem to agree with their descriptions in text.

--Rik

Aha, maybe I got it. I thought that the caption refers to the picture on the same Flickr page. Instead it refers to the two links lower in the text.

My comment about the EXIF refers to the picture on the Flickr page, as displayed by the EXIF button.

So the picture on the Flickr page was shot with the Canon MPE, while the two pictures at the links were both shot with the Mitutoyo 20x on 100-400. And one of the linked pictures is a detail cropped out of the other linked picture, so both display the same date/time.

[rjlittlefield]

I generally prefer asking over speculating, so I exchanged several emails with Don Komarechka, making him aware of this thread and asking for clarification.

Here is the trail, starting with my first email and working downward:

Don,

There has recently been some discussion, at http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=34068 , of your 20X images at https://www.flickr.com/photos/donkom/32235642284/ .

There are a couple of issues that puzzle me, as described in my post at http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 234#211234 .

The key bit for me is:

I'm still confused, however, because for me the Exif info in both of the linked .jpg's shows 200 mm and lists "EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM". Oddly, both images also show "Image Date: 2017-02-16 18:52:46 +0000". I have no idea why these two images don't seem to agree with their descriptions in text.

Can you clear up my confusion, and maybe clarify some of the other issues raised by Enrico, like whether the images are stacks?

Many thanks,
--Rik

Hey Rik,

Great to see my work with my Mitty 20 is getting some attention. The answer to your question is pretty simple in terms of the EXIF data. For the direct comparison shots, I overlayed the MP-E65mm shot on top of the 100-400 + 20X Mitutoyo to make them match perfectly. As they were now layers in the same space, I saved them out as JPGs and the MP-E image took the metadata on the 20X shot.

The original "full" snowflake, attached, as the proper EXIF data for the MP-E65mm + extension + Lifesize Converter shot, roughly 12:1. I'm also attaching another snowflake shot at 20X, a smaller plate where the entire crystal is visible.

Extra information: Each of these images are around 40-50 shots stacked on a slight angle to get surface reflection from the ring flash I used. The shots are all taken over the span of a minute or so per stack, with an obvious delay in shifting the gear around between 12:1 and 20:1 (two different stacks of the same snowflake).

I have about 6-7 more snowflakes photographed at this magnification but I haven't had the time to edit them yet. While luck may play some part, I'm pretty confident I could get identical results with any snowflake you put in front of me. For extra fun, this snowflake in question was my first attempt using the 20X handheld.

All the best,


DKP_2916.jpg
DKP_0312.jpg

Don,

Thanks for the explanation! I'm thinking you must have the steadiest hands of anybody on the planet!

So then, one further question about technique: do you shoot stacks with discrete focus steps, or is this a matter of shifting focus continuously while shooting?

Best regards,
--Rik

Hey Rik,

Impossible to predict perfect focus with this method. Maybe 200-300 shots are taken of each snowflake and I choose the puzzle pieces I need.

Thanks for the compliments in my work!

- Don Komarechka

Don,

Impossible to predict perfect focus with this method. Maybe 200-300 shots are taken of each snowflake and I choose the puzzle pieces I need.

Sure, that works! The approach of "shoot lots and prune heavily" works well in many other circumstances also.

Is it OK if I post some of this info at photomacrography.net, or would you rather post yourself, or should I just keep it private? (Or something else I haven't thought of?)

Best regards,
--Rik

Hey Rik,

Sorry for the delay in responding, I was on an intercontinental flight without internet access.

Yes, please it's my response!

- Don Komarechka

So there you have it!

Cheers,
--Rik