Latest Canon EOS cameras

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

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

MacroB
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 2:26 pm

Latest Canon EOS cameras

Post by MacroB »

Greetings All,

Am using a Canon Eos 50D for photomicrography of micro crystals and am pleased with the results. Just wonder, however, with all the new cameras appearing if there is anything better. Has anyone any experience with the EOS 6D mark ll or the 5DS R?

What would be the result of using a full frame, would that reduce size of image putting it in a larger frame? Or could one use a shorter connection to the mscope?

Would love to hear what you are using for shooting micro crystals.
Best wishes,
MicroB

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

With a new FF camera you can get some better image quality (less noise, more dynamic range...)
If you do use the same optics the magnification on sensor will be the same but the field will be about 1.6X larger. If you want the same framing you'll need about 1.6X more magnification.

I don't know what mscope means, please post more info and/or pictures. With some setups APSC is better like with many microscope objectives for direct projection because they don't cover FF at least with good quality while with classic finite corrected microscopes FF is often more convenient because the relay optics are better adapted for 35mm film cameras
Pau

MacroB
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 2:26 pm

Post by MacroB »

Hello Pau,

That's interesting to learn about the 1.6x mag of the FF camera. Might just upset the habit of using 4x or 10x because they give best results with crystals.ImageImage

Enclosing a couple of images for you to see examples of the results I'm getting on my Olympus BH2 microscope use the Canon EOS 50D. The 4x, 20x, 40x are all D Plan while the 10x is an S Plan Apo.

Best wishes,
Bob

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

If you use the BH2 in a conventional form with a NFK projective eyepiece to get the adequate coverage you need a very rare 1.67X NFK with APSC and a much more common and less expensive 2.5X NFK for FF
Pau

MacroB
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 2:26 pm

Post by MacroB »

Hello Pau,

I'm using a 3.5 NFK and I do have a 6.7. Sounds as if it could be a lot of money for no definite or specific improvement.

Thanks for your info that was helpful.
Regards,
Bob

dolmadis
Posts: 899
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:51 pm
Location: UK

Post by dolmadis »

Pau wrote:If you use the BH2 in a conventional form with a NFK projective eyepiece to get the adequate coverage you need a very rare 1.67X NFK with APSC and a much more common and less expensive 2.5X NFK for FF
and very, very expensive

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Olympus-Mikr ... SwjodaCcdH

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

MacroB wrote:I'm using a 3.5 NFK and I do have a 6.7. Sounds as if it could be a lot of money for no definite or specific improvement.
The 3.3X NFK crops too much on APSC, even for my taste it will crop an excess on FF. Even if you don't change the camera a 2.5X will be an improvement
dolmadis wrote: and very, very expensive

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Olympus-Mikr ... SwjodaCcdH
Yeah! although this german seller usually lists overpriced items
Pau

dolmadis
Posts: 899
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:51 pm
Location: UK

Post by dolmadis »

Pau wrote:The 3.3X NFK crops too much on APSC, even for my taste it will crop an excess on FF. Even if you don't change the camera a 2.5X will be an improvement
Which NFK would you consider using on M4/3 please?

BR

John

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

There isn't such NFK, for good standard coverage you would need around 1.2X.
An alternative is to switch to an afocal setup*: for example a 30mm camera lens over a 10X visual eyepiece. The problem is that Olympus BH2 trino head phototube doesn't allow to hold a wide visual eyepiece, you could modify the phototube, switch to an older BH head or use some models of Leitz Periplan** eyepieces

Some discussion here:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=24824

* http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=15607

** the compensation amount of Leitz and Olympus finite objectives is pretty close
Pau

dolmadis
Posts: 899
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:51 pm
Location: UK

Post by dolmadis »

Thank you.

John

dolmadis
Posts: 899
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:51 pm
Location: UK

Post by dolmadis »

Hi Pau

I have searched through my bit box and found a 6.3x Reichert (Plan) eyepiece which fits into the photo tube.

Not a piece I expected to use but came with a job lot a while ago.

An experiment but what FL Camera lens would be best on an M4/3 camera afocal please?

BR

John

Ichthyophthirius
Posts: 1152
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:24 am

Post by Ichthyophthirius »

dolmadis wrote:what FL Camera lens would be best on an M4/3 camera afocal please?
Hi John,

To calculare this, you have to decide first what image crop you want to capture.

Have a look here (requires Flash plugin): http://www.mikroskopie.de/pfad/dokumentation/acht.html

Choose eyepiece field number (e.g. 18) and sensor (4/3). A relay factor of 1.2 ("Vergrößerungsfaktor") is a good choice.

Relay factor = eyepiece magn. x (camera objective focal length / 250 mm)

1.2 = 6.3 x (FL/250)

FL = 47.6 mm

So you need something around 40-50 mm.

Regards, Ichty

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

6.3 X (camera lens FL)/250 = 1.2 ; Camera lens FL = 47.62mm

To get 1.2X relay magnification you would need an about 50mm camera lens.

An old prime like the Oly OM 50mm f1.8 MC would be both ideal and very inexpensive, but first test your Reichert eyepiece convenience, I have no info of them.
Pau

dolmadis
Posts: 899
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:51 pm
Location: UK

Post by dolmadis »

Thank you both.

BR

John

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic