Hi Ken... move in just a bit closer...closer....

Earlier images, not yet re-categorized. All subject types. Not for new images.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Charles Krebs
Posts: 5865
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
Contact:

Hi Ken... move in just a bit closer...closer....

Post by Charles Krebs »

Image

Not to worry though... this is really not that big. Left to right this scene covers about 4.5mm.

I pulled a chunk of moss covered bark off of a tree stump and this critter was on the back.

50mm EL Nikkor on bellows. Nikon D200. 30 image stack.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 22452
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Very nice. :D

No sign of feathered hairs.

Also no sign of dessication. Live, dead? If live, how did you get it to hold still?

--Rik

Ken Ramos
Posts: 7208
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:12 pm
Location: lat=35.4005&lon=-81.9841

Post by Ken Ramos »

Gad :shock: !

You know many a year ago a photograph such as this would put me in a fit, maybe I have just gotten used to them. :-k Rarely do I run across spiders when examining clumps of moss through the dissecting microscope but when I do they tend to startle me somewhat. This little thing reminds me of a tarantula. :lol: Great shot there Charlie, though I prefer your fantastic amoebae images much more. :wink:

DaveW
Posts: 1702
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:29 am
Location: Nottingham, UK

Post by DaveW »

Is it a spider or a mite? It does not seem to have enough eyes for a spider.

I have just bought a secondhand 50mm f2.8N EL Nikkor off EBAY Charles, with appropriate adapters to reverse mount it on my Nikon PB-6 bellows. What should be the maximum magnification I can get with my D200?

DaveW

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 22452
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

DaveW wrote:It does not seem to have enough eyes for a spider.
Looks to me like the normal complement of 8. The two bright blue ones are the posterior median eyes (PME). To the sides from them are the posterior lateral PLE) and anterior lateral eyes (ALE), which in this spider are very close together and appear as two lumps on the same structure. Directly in front of the PMEs (below, in this photo), are the anterior median eyes (AME). All eyes except the PMEs are facing sideways on the spider, so we're looking at the sides of those eyes. That viewpoint, and the fact that those eyes don't happen to catch the light in this photo, make them hard to recognize.

--Rik

Charles Krebs
Posts: 5865
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
Contact:

Post by Charles Krebs »

Dave,

Most definitely a spider. As Rik mentioned the, angle of the shot make it difficult to clearly see all the eyes.

Don't have the PB-6 myself, but it should put you into the 4-5X range. I like to add a short extension tube at the bellows front to get the lens sticking out a little more so the bellows rail is farther back and less likely to get in the way of other items in the "set". (Although I must admit, after working with some of these microscope objectives on a bellows, the working distance provided with the 50 EL Nikkor makes it seem like I'm shooting across the Grand Canyon!)

Charlie

DaveW
Posts: 1702
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:29 am
Location: Nottingham, UK

Post by DaveW »

I could only detect the big blue eyes Rik! :roll:

Thanks Charles, I have a full set of Nikon tubes I could stick on too (100.5mm in total). I gather the bellows at full extension is 208mm, so that would give 308.5mm in total

DaveW

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic