Crane fly head

pwnell · Post by **pwnell** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 8:10 pm

Second attempt - I think I got the lighting much better this time, and the subject is a bit better preserved.

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 9:45 pm

This looks good! Can you remind me, please, what optics and stacking method you're using? Can we see an actual-pixels crop, also?

--Rik

pwnell · Post by **pwnell** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 10:56 pm

Nikon E200 with 10x CFI Plan objective, tethered to Canon 600D with direct projection. Was working on the microscope's stage so it was a bit awkward.

Lighting was comprised of three Ikea LED lamps. This is a stack of 132 images using Zerene Stacker in PMax mode.

Below a 100% crop.

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 12:53 am

The crops still look good. You could perhaps coax a little more visible detail out of them by sharpening, but they look very good as is.

pwnell wrote:Nikon E200 with 10x CFI Plan objective, tethered to Canon 600D with direct projection.

Just to make sure I understand...

CFI objectives are intended to be used in conjunction with a tube lens. I'm guessing that the E200 includes a tube lens someplace near the bottom of the head, so what "direct projection" means in this case is that there was no eyepiece -- the tube lens formed its image directly on the camera's sensor.

Is that correct?

Was working on the microscope's stage so it was a bit awkward.

"A bit awkward", yes, nicely put. That's a common problem when working within the confines of a microscope frame, and actually that's the key discriminator between "Photography Through the Microscope" and "Technical and Studio Photography". Use a CFI objective and Nikon's own tube lens in an open bellows setup and we here at photomacrography.net call it "Technical and Studio". But use the very same optics within the mechanical constraints of a commercial microscope and we call it "Photography Through the Microscope". It's a delicate distinction, to be sure, but we use it as a way of helping people figure out how to work with the equipment they have at hand.

Given how your image was shot, I'm now thinking that this thread would be better moved to "Photography Through the Microscope". Does that seem right?

--Rik

pwnell · Post by **pwnell** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 8:48 am

rjlittlefield wrote:The crops still look good. You could perhaps coax a little more visible detail out of them by sharpening, but they look very good as is.

I did sharpen it - first a smart sharpen filter to coax more local contrast, and then an unsharp mask for fine details. Cannot make it much sharper - but I am working on my technique to try and get better start images which sharpen better. This is already much better than my first attempt simply due to better light diffusion.

rjlittlefield wrote:Just to make sure I understand...

CFI objectives are intended to be used in conjunction with a tube lens. I'm guessing that the E200 includes a tube lens someplace near the bottom of the head, so what "direct projection" means in this case is that there was no eyepiece -- the tube lens formed its image directly on the camera's sensor.

Is that correct?

Yep - The camera is mounted to the trinocular head. If there are other optics involved they must reside in that head. Between the tronocular mount and the camera body there is a Y-T TV tube for Nikon cameras, a T-ring adapter and a home made PVC adapter. No eyepieces.

rjlittlefield wrote:Given how your image was shot, I'm now thinking that this thread would be better moved to "Photography Through the Microscope". Does that seem right?

Absolutely. As you know I am new to these forums - not to photography and not even to macro photography - but to the world of microscopes / larger than 5 x magnification I am still learning a lot. If that is the distinction between the two topics then by all means move it. I will remember next time as I was unsure where it belonged.

Thank you for your feedback - I really do appreciate it.

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 12:06 pm

Topic moved.

You're very welcome for whatever feedback and assistance I can provide. Collectively learning how to do things better is what photomacrography.net is all about.

--Rik

Mitch640 · Post by **Mitch640** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 7:32 pm

Very nice Waldo, looks like you got everything to work together.

pwnell · Post by **pwnell** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 7:47 pm

Mitch640 wrote:Very nice Waldo, looks like you got everything to work together.

Thanks to your idea for coupling the camera to the microscope! But I need a lot more practise...

Mitch640 · Post by **Mitch640** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 7:51 pm

Did your Nikon Tech show up? I've been wondering what he found.

pwnell · Post by **pwnell** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:33 pm

Well that is another story. Have been calling him every other day but he is a no show. Will keep trying.