Focusing rail: What do you use?

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: Pau, rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S.

lauriek
Posts: 2402
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:57 am
Location: South East UK
Contact:

Post by lauriek »

I understand completely Rik but you have to admit

Here is the base.

followed by a picture of an Owl, that _is_ funny! :D (especially followed by a Canada goose stand and a gopher ball head!)

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21116
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

No disagreement on that! In fact I burst out laughing aloud when I saw it -- my family wondered what I had stumbled onto this time. Then I thought perhaps we were the victims of an elaborate practical joke. I still haven't completely ruled out that possibility!

--Rik

Craig Gerard
Posts: 2877
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 1:51 am
Location: Australia

Post by Craig Gerard »

That thread is a classic, especially if you read the commentary for each image.....

I still burst out laughing whenever I read it and Tesselator's comments.

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... c&start=15


Craig
To use a classic quote from 'Antz' - "I almost know exactly what I'm doing!"

yeatzee
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:13 am

Post by yeatzee »

Ok back to the topic :wink:

How do you know what increments to use for each stack? Also how do I know how much each little tick on the micrometer represents?

Craig Gerard
Posts: 2877
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 1:51 am
Location: Australia

Post by Craig Gerard »

Some information regarding micrometers and increments.
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... php?t=4571

Craig
To use a classic quote from 'Antz' - "I almost know exactly what I'm doing!"

elf
Posts: 1398
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 12:10 pm

Post by elf »

yeatzee wrote:Ok back to the topic :wink:

How do you know what increments to use for each stack? Also how do I know how much each little tick on the micrometer represents?
You need to calculate the DOF for your lens and bellows extension :)

p.s. Or you could try one of the spreadsheets or other threads explaining how:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... php?t=8054
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... php?t=8663
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... php?t=9056

yeatzee
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:13 am

Post by yeatzee »

Image

on the 1" starret micrometer

I used 2 "tick" increments between each shot for this one:

http://photomacrography.net/forum/viewt ... 2&start=15

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21116
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

The increment appears to be 0.001 . There should be 25 increments per rotation, each rotation moving the spindle by one small division on the linear scale. Each small division on the linear scale is 1/4 of 0.1, hence 0.025 . Your increments were 0.002", roughly 0.05 mm.

Your magnification was around 4.8 (=135/28, for the lens combo), and your effective f-number was then about f/23 (=4*(4.8+1), f_r*(m+1) ). Using standard formulas and a Circle of Confusion value = 0.030 mm, the calculated DOF is then 2*C*f_r*(m+1)/m^2 = 0.06 mm.

Sounds to me like you were pretty much dead on -- small enough, not too small.

--Rik

yeatzee
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:13 am

Post by yeatzee »

rjlittlefield wrote:The increment appears to be 0.001 . There should be 25 increments per rotation, each rotation moving the spindle by one small division on the linear scale. Each small division on the linear scale is 1/4 of 0.1, hence 0.025 . Your increments were 0.002", roughly 0.05 mm.

Your magnification was around 4.8 (=135/28, for the lens combo), and your effective f-number was then about f/23 (=4*(4.8+1), f_r*(m+1) ). Using standard formulas and a Circle of Confusion value = 0.030 mm, the calculated DOF is then 2*C*f_r*(m+1)/m^2 = 0.06 mm.

Sounds to me like you were pretty much dead on -- small enough, not too small.

--Rik
Awesome, thanks!

yeatzee
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:13 am

Post by yeatzee »

Wait when you say it looks like .001 increments do you mean .001 mm or .001"? The latter right?

If I needed to use 2 increments between each shot for that, how high of a magnification can I manage? Im not even at a high magnification yet and im already running out of precision movements? I thought I'd be spinning and spinning the micrometer to get to the focus I wanted between shots :roll:

edit: I realize I am failing at putting my thoughts into sentences.... I don't know how to say what im thinking :wink:

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21116
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

when you say it looks like .001 increments do you mean .001 mm or .001"? The latter right?
Yes, 0.001" per increment. 0.0254 mm = 25.4 µm (microns).
I don't know how to say what im thinking
My guess would be that it's something like "Good grief what am I getting myself into?! :shock: "

Well, basically what you're getting yourself into is microscopy without the microscope.

When you shoot something with a DSLR at 10X, it's roughly the same as looking through a 100X microscope. The DOF as far less than paper-thin, as it's easy to appreciate by looking at a piece of paper at 100X and observing that you have to crank the fine focus knob up and down to catch the top and bottom surfaces. In fact the DOF of a typical 10X objective is around 15 microns = 0.015 mm = 0.0006", about 3/5 of one increment on your micrometer, and about 1/5 the thickness of a piece of paper.

At 20X the problem is worse, with DOF around 5 microns = 0.005 mm = 0.0002", about 1/5 of one increment on your micrometer. Probably that's around the practical limit of your micrometer, and you'll find it touchy and annoying. At least I always did, since that's also the limit of the screw table that I used for many years.

For convenient operation at high magnification, people use microscope focus blocks, which (no surprise!) are designed to make the kind of small movements that are required when looking through microscope objectives. The StackShot rail -- a "simple" screw driven by a stepper motor -- can also work fairly conveniently down to around 1 micron (1 µm = 0.001 mm), due solely to the small angular increments that its motor can move reliably.

I wish I could instantly make you comfortable working in this regime, but I have no idea how to do that. It'll come in time, honest. :)

--Rik

ChrisR
Site Admin
Posts: 8563
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:58 am
Location: Near London, UK

Post by ChrisR »

I found it a big help to tape a Loupe over the micrometer, which makes it much easier to do fractions of a tick mark.
And I do too many steps on purpose, if they're tricky to set. That way I'm less ikely to miss, and get a fuzzy band.

NB there's likely to be some "play" in the screw, so if you overshoot, back off more than necessary, and wind up to the point you wanted from the same direction as the other steps.

SONYNUT
Posts: 635
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 2:27 pm
Location: Minnesota USA

Post by SONYNUT »

..............................................................................
Just shoot it......

yeatzee
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:13 am

Post by yeatzee »

Could you elaborate more on this? Looks interesting!

SONYNUT
Posts: 635
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 2:27 pm
Location: Minnesota USA

Post by SONYNUT »

take out the screw out of the end of your micrometer and pop on the washer..makes it easier to eyeball positions..i made a 24 16 12 8 6 position /hole..washers..

you can do it with a printed out sticker or something too..I use the 24 position indexer on my mill to drill the holes
..............................................................................
Just shoot it......

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic