beginner at stacking needing help

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

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

andre reichmann
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: sao paulo

beginner at stacking needing help

Post by andre reichmann »

hello dear macro shooters !
i am a beginner at focus stacking.
i am needing advice on focus rails !!!!
i have a manfrotto 454 but at over 1x it is quite poor equipment.
i am wondering if the newport linear staging rail plus a micrometer actuator would be the correct choice, but i am wondering how to fix a camera onto this linear stage.... anone using it ? how would i fix my pb6 bellows to it ? is the staret actuator a good choice ?

also is any one using the aoto stack shot from cognisys ? is it precise? or is the linear stage from newport a better option ?

i will be using a pb6 bellows with reversed nikkor 50mm lens initially i think as i already have all this ... i also have nikon 345 and 6t filters but don''t know if they are taht good at high mags....

sorry for the so basic questions !!!!!! :-)

thanks .

andre

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 5406
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

Hi Andre,
to beguin take a look at
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... php?t=7298
with lots of ideas and samples.
Pau

andre reichmann
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: sao paulo

Post by andre reichmann »

thanks pau
interesting reading for a begginner, even though most set ups are a bit too much for a stack begginner :-)

probably i would start with a newport manual stage rail with my bellows on a horizontal set up ... something simple... two leds and my macro tent diffuser...

if i thought of buying a first microscope used lens to work in a 2x to 10x range, what lens would i start looking at ? i wonder which adapters are needed to put a microscope lens on a pb6 bellows...

thanks a lot.

geetee50
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 1:23 pm

Post by geetee50 »

M42 adapters seem to be the norm for the objectives used for this type of work.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/200619047550? ... 1497.l2649

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Brand-New-RMS ... 3cc0e94ba3

Then a nice bellows to M42, sorted! ah yes which glass ...mind field!

A good place to start: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=15876

http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnhallme ... 4592459772

good luck

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21536
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Re: beginner at stacking needing help

Post by rjlittlefield »

andre reichmann wrote:also is any one using the aoto stack shot from cognisys ? is it precise? or is the linear stage from newport a better option ?
The StackShot is very precise. I use mine regularly even up to 20X and 40X objectives. See http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=16323 for some careful measurements about the precision & accuracy.

For a bench setup, I think you'd be very pleased with the StackShot. In the field, a manual stage is probably better because of all the other stuff you do not have to cart along (battery, controller, cables).

--Rik

andre reichmann
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: sao paulo

Re: beginner at stacking needing help

Post by andre reichmann »

rjlittlefield wrote:
andre reichmann wrote:also is any one using the aoto stack shot from cognisys ? is it precise? or is the linear stage from newport a better option ?
The StackShot is very precise. I use mine regularly even up to 20X and 40X objectives. See http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=16323 for some careful measurements about the precision & accuracy.

For a bench setup, I think you'd be very pleased with the StackShot. In the field, a manual stage is probably better because of all the other stuff you do not have to cart along (battery, controller, cables).

--Rik
ok, i hear ya !
i might go both ways eventually :-)
thanks so much.
just wondering if pb6 bellows attaches straightforward on a newport stage...

andre reichmann
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: sao paulo

Post by andre reichmann »

geetee50 wrote:M42 adapters seem to be the norm for the objectives used for this type of work.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/200619047550? ... 1497.l2649

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Brand-New-RMS ... 3cc0e94ba3

Then a nice bellows to M42, sorted! ah yes which glass ...mind field!

A good place to start: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=15876

http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnhallme ... 4592459772

good luck
thanks so much
excellent initial reading.
adaptors are easy.
choosing a microscope lens for someone who has never used one seems a bit more complicated ;-)

andre

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21536
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

andre reichmann wrote:choosing a microscope lens for someone who has never used one seems a bit more complicated ;-)
I assume you have an APS-sized sensor (crop factor 1.6). In that case, if you are willing to buy new, there are some standard recommendations that make the task simpler.

At 4X and finite, I recommend the Cnscope Plan Achromatic described HERE. It has very good quality at $25.

At 10X and finite, buy from Edmund Optics their part number NT59-935, the Nikon Finite Conjugate 10X NA 0.25 objective described HERE. It is currently selling for $78 in the US and should be available from Edmund Optics in the UK for a similar price. (Note: do not buy the Nikon Finite Conjugate 4X NA 0.10 objective that is advertised on the same page. It is not as good optically as the less expensive Cnscope objective noted above.)

At both 4X and 10X and infinite (requiring a ~200 mm "tube lens"), the Nikon CFI BE objectives sold by Optics Planet HERE are excellent. Examples of these objectives in use are provided HERE and HERE.

If you need discussion of finite versus infinite, or if you have not read it already, then see our FAQ: How can I hook a microscope objective to my camera?.

Life gets harder at higher magnifications. At 20X and above, working distance becomes a huge issue and you'll probably be needing to use ELWD or SLWD objectives. Those are relatively expensive, so ask for specific recommendations.

The objectives that I've noted above are what I consider excellent inexpensive objectives. I use them all routinely. The next big step up would be to the Mitutoyo Plan Apochromats. Those are 5-10X more $$, for a quality improvement that may well go unnoticed by the casual observer.

--Rik

andre reichmann
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: sao paulo

Post by andre reichmann »

rjlittlefield wrote:
andre reichmann wrote:choosing a microscope lens for someone who has never used one seems a bit more complicated ;-)
I assume you have an APS-sized sensor (crop factor 1.6). In that case, if you are willing to buy new, there are some standard recommendations that make the task simpler.

At 4X and finite, I recommend the Cnscope Plan Achromatic described HERE. It has very good quality at $25.

At 10X and finite, buy from Edmund Optics their part number NT59-935, the Nikon Finite Conjugate 10X NA 0.25 objective described HERE. It is currently selling for $78 in the US and should be available from Edmund Optics in the UK for a similar price. (Note: do not buy the Nikon Finite Conjugate 4X NA 0.10 objective that is advertised on the same page. It is not as good optically as the less expensive Cnscope objective noted above.)

At both 4X and 10X and infinite (requiring a ~200 mm "tube lens"), the Nikon CFI BE objectives sold by Optics Planet HERE are excellent. Examples of these objectives in use are provided HERE and HERE.

If you need discussion of finite versus infinite, or if you have not read it already, then see our FAQ: How can I hook a microscope objective to my camera?.

Life gets harder at higher magnifications. At 20X and above, working distance becomes a huge issue and you'll probably be needing to use ELWD or SLWD objectives. Those are relatively expensive, so ask for specific recommendations.

The objectives that I've noted above are what I consider excellent inexpensive objectives. I use them all routinely. The next big step up would be to the Mitutoyo Plan Apochromats. Those are 5-10X more $$, for a quality improvement that may well go unnoticed by the casual observer.

--Rik
rik, thankyu so much for this advice.
i will probably start with the more inexpensive lenses and maybe in the future upgrade if necessary !!!
i am now using a d800 so i can use it fullframe at 36 megapix ou cropped to aps size at 16 megapix. ( whic should be fine. )
lenses good for fullframe are probably more expensive i imagine ?
i read j hallmen's article on finite x infinite lenses ...
andre.

andre reichmann
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: sao paulo

Post by andre reichmann »

rjlittlefield wrote:
andre reichmann wrote:choosing a microscope lens for someone who has never used one seems a bit more complicated ;-)
I assume you have an APS-sized sensor (crop factor 1.6). In that case, if you are willing to buy new, there are some standard recommendations that make the task simpler.

At 4X and finite, I recommend the Cnscope Plan Achromatic described HERE. It has very good quality at $25.

At 10X and finite, buy from Edmund Optics their part number NT59-935, the Nikon Finite Conjugate 10X NA 0.25 objective described HERE. It is currently selling for $78 in the US and should be available from Edmund Optics in the UK for a similar price. (Note: do not buy the Nikon Finite Conjugate 4X NA 0.10 objective that is advertised on the same page. It is not as good optically as the less expensive Cnscope objective noted above.)

At both 4X and 10X and infinite (requiring a ~200 mm "tube lens"), the Nikon CFI BE objectives sold by Optics Planet HERE are excellent. Examples of these objectives in use are provided HERE and HERE.

If you need discussion of finite versus infinite, or if you have not read it already, then see our FAQ: How can I hook a microscope objective to my camera?.

Life gets harder at higher magnifications. At 20X and above, working distance becomes a huge issue and you'll probably be needing to use ELWD or SLWD objectives. Those are relatively expensive, so ask for specific recommendations.

The objectives that I've noted above are what I consider excellent inexpensive objectives. I use them all routinely. The next big step up would be to the Mitutoyo Plan Apochromats. Those are 5-10X more $$, for a quality improvement that may well go unnoticed by the casual observer.

--Rik
excellent threads rik. amazing.

i have the micro nikkor 200mm / f4 lens which is optically very good. wondering if it should work well with infinte lenses .

i am now puzzled as i have the micro nikkor 200 ( 62mm thread) and also a pb6 bellows .... anybody could give an insight about quality of images comparing the finite x infinite route ???

are working distances between lens and subject the same ? i would be working with a 4x and 10x lenses and maybe give a try to a 20x lens :0

thanks guys !!!! :-)

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21536
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Working distances vary and there are also some interactions with the shape of the barrel. Generally any 4X objective will be comfortable but most 10X objectives that are plan achromat or better corrected are uncomfortably short.

The main exceptions are the Mitutoyo Plan Apochromats, which are both very well corrected and have huge working distances. For example the table HERE shows that the Mitutoyo 10X NA 0.28 has 33.5 mm of working distance. The remainder of the series is similar -- hence the description: "Mitutoyo Infinity-Corrected Long Working Distance Objectives".

Both of the 10X objectives that I mentioned earlier (Nikon CFI BE and Edmund's Nikon Finite Conjugate) have fairly short working distances, 6.7 mm and 5.6 mm respectively. However those objectives also have narrow ends that are relatively simple to illuminate around. The tip of the CFI BE is 12.5 mm diameter, and the Finite Conjugate is only 8.7 mm.

In contrast, the Mitutoyo 10X is 32.3 mm diameter at 35.5 mm back from the subject. If you work the angles, the Mitutoyo is definitely narrower than the Nikons, but not so much so as you might think from just the working distances.

There is no consistent difference between finites and infinites for working distance or image quality. You have to look at each lens for itself.

The coverage question is a bit subtle, full frame versus crop sensor. Yes, full frame is harder to cover at the same magnification on sensor. However, that's mainly because you're asking the lens to cover a 1.6 times wider area on the subject. If you change the setup (expand the image) so that the lens only has to cover the same area on the subject, thus at 1.6 times higher magnification on sensor, then covering the full frame gets a lot easier. To do that requires adding extension to a finite setup, or using a longer tube lens for infinite, or adding a teleconverter at the camera for either.

But note that a 10X NA 0.25 and a 4X NA 0.10 objective are both running at effective f/20 at rated magnification. That's diffraction limited on APS at 15 megapixels. If you expand the image to cover full frame, it will still be diffraction limited at 15 megapixels. At 36 megapixels and full frame, your D200 sensor would be overkill.

Switching subjects... If you're interested in 20X, then scurry out to eBay and grab one of the several remaining JML's, eBay number 200718941277. This is a long working distance objective with modest NA and decent CA. See brief discussion HERE (and the surrounding thread) and many images in "JML 20X Results (keep adding pictures)".

--Rik

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21536
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

By the way, I recently posted out some etched metal photographed with the Nikon CFI BE 10X and 4X, see HERE.

Looking at individual frames in the stack, I'm quite pleased by the low level of CA in both lenses.

--Rik

andre reichmann
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: sao paulo

Post by andre reichmann »

rjlittlefield wrote:Working distances vary and there are also some interactions with the shape of the barrel. Generally any 4X objective will be comfortable but most 10X objectives that are plan achromat or better corrected are uncomfortably short.

The main exceptions are the Mitutoyo Plan Apochromats, which are both very well corrected and have huge working distances. For example the table HERE shows that the Mitutoyo 10X NA 0.28 has 33.5 mm of working distance. The remainder of the series is similar -- hence the description: "Mitutoyo Infinity-Corrected Long Working Distance Objectives".

Both of the 10X objectives that I mentioned earlier (Nikon CFI BE and Edmund's Nikon Finite Conjugate) have fairly short working distances, 6.7 mm and 5.6 mm respectively. However those objectives also have narrow ends that are relatively simple to illuminate around. The tip of the CFI BE is 12.5 mm diameter, and the Finite Conjugate is only 8.7 mm.

In contrast, the Mitutoyo 10X is 32.3 mm diameter at 35.5 mm back from the subject. If you work the angles, the Mitutoyo is definitely narrower than the Nikons, but not so much so as you might think from just the working distances.

There is no consistent difference between finites and infinites for working distance or image quality. You have to look at each lens for itself.

The coverage question is a bit subtle, full frame versus crop sensor. Yes, full frame is harder to cover at the same magnification on sensor. However, that's mainly because you're asking the lens to cover a 1.6 times wider area on the subject. If you change the setup (expand the image) so that the lens only has to cover the same area on the subject, thus at 1.6 times higher magnification on sensor, then covering the full frame gets a lot easier. To do that requires adding extension to a finite setup, or using a longer tube lens for infinite, or adding a teleconverter at the camera for either.

But note that a 10X NA 0.25 and a 4X NA 0.10 objective are both running at effective f/20 at rated magnification. That's diffraction limited on APS at 15 megapixels. If you expand the image to cover full frame, it will still be diffraction limited at 15 megapixels. At 36 megapixels and full frame, your D200 sensor would be overkill.

Switching subjects... If you're interested in 20X, then scurry out to eBay and grab one of the several remaining JML's, eBay number 200718941277. This is a long working distance objective with modest NA and decent CA. See brief discussion HERE (and the surrounding thread) and many images in "JML 20X Results (keep adding pictures)".

--Rik
i am extremely greatful for your input and for the time you spent in this thread giving some precious information for a newbie like me :-)
i will try not to "steal" your time more !!!!!!!!!
the information in this forum is just fantastic....
i'll try to ost some stacks in the future when i am prepared to do them !!!!!

thanks , regards

andre.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic