The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

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

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Online
Adalbert
Posts: 2429
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:09 pm

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by Adalbert »

Hi Javier,
With the OLympus UMPLanFI 50x / 0.80 I managed to take some usable photos.
But its working distance is also about 1mm :-(
Best,
ADi

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6053
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by Pau »

seta666 wrote:
Mon Mar 22, 2021 9:16 am
...
The BD plan 100/0.80 ELWD was ok to work with, but I do not own it anymore; I also own a LU plan 50/0.80 which is OK to work with but I am selling to fund my microscope project. Fastest lens I am keeping for my vertical set up is a nikon CF BD 40/0.65
I have a Nikon MPlan Apo 40/0.80 210/0 and it is difficult to work with because its small WD but with flat enough uncovered specimens it rocks. Having a high NA no cover objective is sometimes useful
https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/ ... 63#p262563
https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/ ... 23#p261723
Pau

seta666
Posts: 1071
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:50 am
Location: Castellon, Spain

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by seta666 »

Pau wrote:
Mon Mar 22, 2021 10:26 am
I have a Nikon MPlan Apo 40/0.80 210/0 and it is difficult to work with because its small WD but with flat enough uncovered specimens it rocks. Having a high NA no cover objective is sometimes useful
Good to know, it looks nice indeed!!
I ordered the BD plan version a week ago, it should be easier to work with than the with the M plan; waiting for it..;-)

Online
Adalbert
Posts: 2429
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:09 pm

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by Adalbert »

Hello everybody,
And now a part of the test target:
Image
Of this one:
Image
Best,
ADi

Scarodactyl
Posts: 1619
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:26 am

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by Scarodactyl »

I am going to go out on a limb and guess the noise in this and the first image in the thread were not caused by lighting issues or high NAs.
What camera are you using?

JH
Posts: 1307
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:46 am
Location: Vallentuna, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by JH »

Hi Adalbert
Interesting lens and topic, thank you.
I think it is quite possible to do ok with a 100x NA 0.9.
I have also seen yellow (and orange scales) look that the ones you have in the first picture but with lower NA.
May I ask how you light the subject?

Best regards
Jörgen
Jörgen Hellberg, my webbsite www.hellberg.photo

Online
Adalbert
Posts: 2429
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:09 pm

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by Adalbert »

Hi Scarodactyl,
EOS M6 Mark II
Best, ADi

Online
Adalbert
Posts: 2429
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:09 pm

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by Adalbert »

Hi Jörgen,
Normally I use flashes, but this time I lit with 2 COB LEDs and 3 LED torches.
As diffusor I used a normal printer paper.
Best, ADi

Scarodactyl
Posts: 1619
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:26 am

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by Scarodactyl »

The latest test photo looks like it has some very coarse noise (maybe with post processing on top of it?) giving it an odd texture across the image and the colors look a bit odd as well. That has to be something in the camera or post processing.

Online
Adalbert
Posts: 2429
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:09 pm

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by Adalbert »

Hi Scarodactyl,
I edit all images with the same workflow.
The effects are from Topaz.
I will probably have to reduce some values for the high NA.
Best, ADi

Scarodactyl
Posts: 1619
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:26 am

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by Scarodactyl »

I just played around with my own 100x/0.9 a bit (a shucked Olympus m fluorite bd), and I think I understand it now. Coaxial illumination gives a usable image but lighting it from the side, even with the relatively accessible front element post-shucking which looks similar to the Union one, gives a very dim image with a flat wafer no matter how I adjust my fiber optic goosenecks (diffusion does cut down the light further, but without it's an awful mess as one would expect). It seems likely Topaz isn't sure what to do do with noise above a certain level, and it's instead rendering it into a fine texture. I have never used it before, are there settings that can be adjusted?
I hope you don't mind, but just to show what I'm seeing here's a resized portion from the picture: Image
That texture is also what was making the first image look odd to me: Image

I have a feeling this objective would need some sort of custom lighting setup for non-coaxial illumination.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23564
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Re: The new bargain: PL M 100 / 0.90 ∞

Post by rjlittlefield »

Scarodactyl wrote:
Sat Mar 27, 2021 2:08 pm
lighting it from the side, even with the relatively accessible front element post-shucking which looks similar to the Union one, gives a very dim image with a flat wafer no matter how I adjust my fiber optic goosenecks
Think of the flat wafer as a mirror. If the mirror were perfectly flat and perpendicular to the optical axis, then any light that goes around the lens on its way in, and hits the center of the subject, gets reflected so that it also goes around the lens on its way out. A good mirror will look quite dark under these conditions, which is why that lighting technique is called "episcopic darkfield". With episcopic brightfield, same as what you're calling coaxial illumination, the mirror will look bright because all the light coming from the lens gets reflected back into the lens.

With the wafer illuminated from the side, mostly what you're seeing are the edges of features, where the surface is not flat.

--Rik

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic