Check out this classic image
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
Check out this classic image
An example of an early photomicrograph, from 1904!
http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/ima ... dphot2.jpg
and check out the scope used to get it!
http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/ima ... dphot1.gif
©http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/
http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/ima ... dphot2.jpg
and check out the scope used to get it!
http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/ima ... dphot1.gif
©http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/
- rjlittlefield
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23625
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
- Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
- Contact:
It's really no different to adding bellows and a camera on top of the microscope in a vertical position, but rather than needing a 6 foot copy stand to do so it is easier horizontally. The only reason for a microscope being vertical that I can see is gravitational effects on the subject. If the "scope" is vertical the stage is horizontal and gravity acts downwards on the subject on the slide, handy if it is in liquid. Turn the microscope horizontal and unless the subject is stuck to the slide it will slide off due to gravity, particularly if in a liquid.
If you don't have enough extension tubes and should you want to make a 6'-0" to 8'-0" set of bellows to try it out, here's how:-
http://www.cyberbeach.net/~dbardell/bellows.html
http://my.net-link.net/~jsmigiel/bellows.html
Who needs extension tubes!
DaveW
If you don't have enough extension tubes and should you want to make a 6'-0" to 8'-0" set of bellows to try it out, here's how:-
http://www.cyberbeach.net/~dbardell/bellows.html
http://my.net-link.net/~jsmigiel/bellows.html
Who needs extension tubes!
DaveW
- rjlittlefield
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23625
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
- Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
- Contact:
I'd have thought that you would remove the eyepiece and then project the image onto the screen. No hang on that wouldnt work would it, masive vignetting(in fact thinking about it, you'd be lucky to see anything!)
I guess Im just used to using bellows/extension tubes on a camera where you have to remove the lens.
I guess Im just used to using bellows/extension tubes on a camera where you have to remove the lens.
- rjlittlefield
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23625
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
- Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
- Contact:
Cyclops,
Actually it works OK with respect to vignetting. Your typical microscope is set up to deliver a roughly 20 mm diameter field at the eyepiece, some 160 mm away from the objective. That ratio, 20/160, applies to longer extensions as well, so if you used a 1 meter extension instead, the field would be around 125 mm diameter.
The big hit is that microscope objectives are designed to work best at a very specific distance corresponding to the tube length. Adding a long extension takes the objective way outside its "sweet spot" and you pick up bad stuff like aberrations and curvature of field. The better the objective, the worse the hit. But in absolute terms, I don't know how bad the degradation would be for any particular lens. Might make an interesting experiment...
--Rik
Actually it works OK with respect to vignetting. Your typical microscope is set up to deliver a roughly 20 mm diameter field at the eyepiece, some 160 mm away from the objective. That ratio, 20/160, applies to longer extensions as well, so if you used a 1 meter extension instead, the field would be around 125 mm diameter.
The big hit is that microscope objectives are designed to work best at a very specific distance corresponding to the tube length. Adding a long extension takes the objective way outside its "sweet spot" and you pick up bad stuff like aberrations and curvature of field. The better the objective, the worse the hit. But in absolute terms, I don't know how bad the degradation would be for any particular lens. Might make an interesting experiment...
--Rik
Makes me wonder how he got such a sharp image!Adding a long extension takes the objective way outside its "sweet spot" and you pick up bad stuff like aberrations and curvature of field. The better the objective, the worse the hit
Must have had a cracker of an lens set!
Canon 5D and 30D | Canon IXUS 265HS | Cosina 100mm f3.5 macro | EF 75-300 f4.5-5.6 USM III | EF 50 f1.8 II | Slik 88 tripod | Apex Practicioner monocular microscope