www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Photolithography lenses + astro cameras = extreme macro
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Photolithography lenses + astro cameras = extreme macro
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1799
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very interesting to see the results of a monochrome camera + filters on a terrestrial subject. This should give much better resolution than a same-size sensor with a Bayer matrix. Every pixel is contributing data for all three colors. It is almost like the Sigma Foveon sensor in that respect.

Thanks for the tip about Astraimage!
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Smokedaddy



Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 800
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just curious, has anyone experimented with Imagej and these plugins?

https://imagej.net/Deconvolution

-JW:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
JohnyM



Joined: 24 Dec 2013
Posts: 166

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, but it really only works with fluorescence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kds315*



Joined: 02 Feb 2009
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not surprised to see these rather sad results, have done similar many years ago also with disappointing results. Sold my S-Planars and Ultra Micro Nikkors later, luckily with quite a profit due to their rarity... :-)

In a way funny to see how history repeats itself ever so often...
_________________
Klaus

http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV diary
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1799
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sad??? The image circle of the lens shown above is 144mm. The single shots above are 2x enlargements of crops 500 pixels wide of an image that would be 42000 pixels wide. Edit-see below.
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com


Last edited by Lou Jost on Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:28 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1799
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Edit to the above: It is difficult to compare lenses with very different image circles. There is no best way, it depends on what you want to do with the lens. If you have a fixed sensor size and don't want to stitch, then our normal crops at 100% (or blown up even more, to 200% or 400%) are most informative. But if you have a choice of sensors or if you can stitch across the aerial image, then a better measure of lens quality is the total information it can capture. One measure of this would be the mean resolution (on the image side) times the image circle diameter. The same measure could be calculated on the object side, and I would think the two numbers would be equal. This measure would tell us what's the maximum amount of information we could squeeze out of a single image.

Our way of expressing a zoom factor is also not always appropriate for comparing lenses with different image circles. In addition to our standard way of expressing the zoom factor (eg Photoshop zoom percentages), it would be helpful to express the size of the crop relative to the size of the whole image (either the whole aerial image or the whole image on the sensor, depending on the purpose). For example, relative to the aerial image, my crop above is roughly 500/420000 pixels, so it is about 1% of the total aerial image. For a typical microscope image that just covers an APS sensor, a typical 100% crop (using Photoshop percentage) posted on this forum at 1024 pixels wide is about 15-20% of the total aerial image.
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group