Hy guys, I found this great community 2 days ago and I can't stop reading topics about microscope photography... There are a lot of interesting topics around and I can say I already learned a lot but I'm still confused regarding the microscopes. I'm totally new to this so, I'm asking you for help.
I want to buy a microscope that will initially work with my old but still in shape Canon 20D till spring when I'll change it for a 6D. I want to shoot microorganisms & cells (photo & video), like in this photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/pwnell/10655617516/ (I know the microscope used for that cost more than a car...).
I'm thinking I can spend around $1000 - $1300.
I understand the High Power ones are 2D and can go pretty deep using bigger objectives like 100x while stereo ones can't go so deep but they have 2 pairs of optics that gives you a 3D image. Can I still see cells and bacterias with stereo microscopes?
What about the trinocular microscopes? I understand I can mount a camera on the 3'rd viewfinder, but can a stereo one can be also trinocular? If yes, what about the camera? Will it use only one optic system? Only my eyes will see a 3d image? Does a stereo microscope improve the photo compared to a 2d one?
What about the light? I played with a cheap Celestron and while using a 40x objective, the distance between the lens and the slide was very very small, there was no way to add a top light so I had to rely on the light that comes from under the microscope. This means I have to carefully prepare all the slides and I will not be able to shoot a bug that's not transparent?
I saw some images of stereo microscopes and I noticed there is a big space between the objectives and the subject, that would allow me to put the light above the slide, am I wrong?
Finally, can you share with me what kind, brand, model of microscope you're using (or others, not necessary to be yours..) but also to give me an example of what kind of photo was shot with it?
Sorry for my english. Thanks a lot!
What microscope you're using?
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
Re: What microscope you're using?
This, your last question is the easiest to answerduzit wrote:
Finally, can you share with me what kind, brand, model of microscope you're using (or others, not necessary to be yours..) but also to give me an example of what kind of photo was shot with it?
I use an Olympus BH2-BHS, and if you look through the :
"Photography Through the Microscope" forum and look at the images by NikonUser you will see examples with this scope.
Here are a few images of Volvox using the BH2:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... t=num10061
NU.
student of entomology
Quote – Holmes on ‘Entomology’
” I suppose you are an entomologist ? “
” Not quite so ambitious as that, sir. I should like to put my eyes on the individual entitled to that name.
No man can be truly called an entomologist,
sir; the subject is too vast for any single human intelligence to grasp.”
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr
The Poet at the Breakfast Table.
Nikon camera, lenses and objectives
Olympus microscope and objectives
student of entomology
Quote – Holmes on ‘Entomology’
” I suppose you are an entomologist ? “
” Not quite so ambitious as that, sir. I should like to put my eyes on the individual entitled to that name.
No man can be truly called an entomologist,
sir; the subject is too vast for any single human intelligence to grasp.”
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr
The Poet at the Breakfast Table.
Nikon camera, lenses and objectives
Olympus microscope and objectives
NikonUser, your photos are amazing, thanks for your reply!
I saw that the best photos are made with DIC microscopes and they are pretty expensive.
this is what you have?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Olympus-BHS-BH2 ... 3f2b6837d4
I also found a BH2 BHS with phase contrast (no DIC) thats 3.5k cheaper. I wonder if it is possible to upgrade it later, if the components are rare and how much can cost. For sure I have to increase my budget...
Anyone else wants to share with me his setup?
I saw that the best photos are made with DIC microscopes and they are pretty expensive.
this is what you have?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Olympus-BHS-BH2 ... 3f2b6837d4
I also found a BH2 BHS with phase contrast (no DIC) thats 3.5k cheaper. I wonder if it is possible to upgrade it later, if the components are rare and how much can cost. For sure I have to increase my budget...
Anyone else wants to share with me his setup?
Please note that the linked ebay BH2 is a reflected light microscope. This kind of DIC is only adequate for reflected light with metallic specimens, not for transmitted light with biological ones like the usual DIC images you can find in the forum. Not to be recommended except for that specialized application.
About microscopes.. there are so many...
This is mine:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 9260#99260
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 9265#99265
About microscopes.. there are so many...
This is mine:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 9260#99260
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 9265#99265
Pau
Pau is correct, a DIC for transmitted light would likely serve you better than a reflective light setup. I have the transmitted light setup. Transmitted DIC for the BH2 is hard to find, and then very expensive.
Theoretically a BH2 is easy to upgrade, several interchangeable parts. However, it may take a long time (years) to find a part you want.
I find that the BH2-KP "Simple Polarizing Attachment" gives very nice images with a variety of transparent subjects.
I have no idea about video.
For non-transparent subjects perhaps the best way to go is with a lens attached to a camera. Several lenses are suitable ranging from 'regular' camera lenses, through enlarging lenses, and microscope objectives. Normally such lenses have to mounted on some sort of adapter (such as a bellows or extension tubes) before being attached to the camera. Lots of examples of the technique here on PMG.net. With the correct lens you can get enough space between the subject and the lens to get light on the subject and get magnifications up to 60x although 20x is a more practical limit.
Some very useful objectives for this latter technique (camera+tubes+lens; no microscope) are Nikon CF finite objectives.
With this in mind you may find that a Nikon Labophot2 microscope fitted with CF/CFN objectives is your best alternative. These objectives can also be used directly attached to a camera (via extension tubes, etc.).
For a microscope I would definitely select one with a trinocular viewing head.
Theoretically a BH2 is easy to upgrade, several interchangeable parts. However, it may take a long time (years) to find a part you want.
I find that the BH2-KP "Simple Polarizing Attachment" gives very nice images with a variety of transparent subjects.
I have no idea about video.
For non-transparent subjects perhaps the best way to go is with a lens attached to a camera. Several lenses are suitable ranging from 'regular' camera lenses, through enlarging lenses, and microscope objectives. Normally such lenses have to mounted on some sort of adapter (such as a bellows or extension tubes) before being attached to the camera. Lots of examples of the technique here on PMG.net. With the correct lens you can get enough space between the subject and the lens to get light on the subject and get magnifications up to 60x although 20x is a more practical limit.
Some very useful objectives for this latter technique (camera+tubes+lens; no microscope) are Nikon CF finite objectives.
With this in mind you may find that a Nikon Labophot2 microscope fitted with CF/CFN objectives is your best alternative. These objectives can also be used directly attached to a camera (via extension tubes, etc.).
For a microscope I would definitely select one with a trinocular viewing head.
NU.
student of entomology
Quote – Holmes on ‘Entomology’
” I suppose you are an entomologist ? “
” Not quite so ambitious as that, sir. I should like to put my eyes on the individual entitled to that name.
No man can be truly called an entomologist,
sir; the subject is too vast for any single human intelligence to grasp.”
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr
The Poet at the Breakfast Table.
Nikon camera, lenses and objectives
Olympus microscope and objectives
student of entomology
Quote – Holmes on ‘Entomology’
” I suppose you are an entomologist ? “
” Not quite so ambitious as that, sir. I should like to put my eyes on the individual entitled to that name.
No man can be truly called an entomologist,
sir; the subject is too vast for any single human intelligence to grasp.”
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr
The Poet at the Breakfast Table.
Nikon camera, lenses and objectives
Olympus microscope and objectives