Micro meteorites

[Argu]

Hi there,
İ am a new member and new to macro photography. As my first post i would like to ask if anybody has photographed micro meteorites. They are mosty granules or spheres of 0,1 or 0,2 mm diameter, also larger and smaller in size.They may be metallic of mostly iron origin or non metallic. Researchers lately collect them also in urban areas including roof tops. I am collecting iron dust from beach sand with neomydium magnets in a plastic bag and i think there in may be candidates of micro meteorites. There is a good book about them by Jon Larsen, with beautiful photographs. For a beginner would anyone have suggestions how to photograph them crisply, also maybe by focus stacking. What kind of beginner equipment ( cheap) would you propose.
Many thanks.
Argu Sağtürk

[Lou Jost]

What an incredibly interesting idea!!!!

You will certainly have to stack to get images like the one you show here.

[rjlittlefield]

Argu, welcome aboard!

Due to the small size of the subjects, photos like this must be shot through microscope objectives and focus stacked. if the sample shown here is 0.2 mm, then it was shot with at least a 10X objective, more likely 20X. At that magnification, you'll be needing focus steps in the range of 0.010 to 0.002 mm. There are well known processes and equipment for doing this, but they do not fit nicely with the words "beginner" and "cheap".

What budget do you have in mind, and what photographic equipment do you currently have?

--Rik

[Argu]

What an incredibly interesting idea!!!!

You will certainly have to stack to get images like the one you show here.

Many thanks, probably. Today i bought a konus college 600 microscope with 4x,10x and 40x lenses. I do have a canon 60D, also recently got a cheap russian bellows and a 75 mm russian enlarger lens on it for my canon. With iphone i managed to get this pictures with 4x and 10x microscope lenses, with 40 couldn't even light it enough or see it.(probably the lens has to be too close to the specimen. Lighting is tricky. The good persons here with beautiful crisp photographs must be magicians. So much to learn, yet this forums are a treasure site.

[Argu]

Argu, welcome aboard!

Due to the small size of the subjects, photos like this must be shot through microscope objectives and focus stacked. if the sample shown here is 0.2 mm, then it was shot with at least a 10X objective, more likely 20X. At that magnification, you'll be needing focus steps in the range of 0.010 to 0.002 mm. There are well known processes and equipment for doing this, but they do not fit nicely with the words "beginner" and "cheap".

What budget do you have in mind, and what photographic equipment do you currently have?

--Rik

Rik, many thanks. I just saw your post. So apparently i have to find a way to connect my camera to a 10 or 20 microscope lens with a diy way to be able to focus stack, because my budget is nearly zero. Maybe begin with bigger objects, maybe invest in a decent macro, and learn on the way then gradualy go to micron sized if the equipment is expensive.

[Argu]

So this was the best capture i could get with 10x

[rjlittlefield]

Today i bought a konus college 600 microscope with 4x,10x and 40x lenses.

Like this? https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... cular.html

I do have a canon 60D

Given that microscope, and that camera, I suggest to remove the eyepiece from the microscope, suspend the camera just a little above the open tube of the microscope, and use "direct projection" from the objective straight up onto the sensor.

Optically it will be very much like the setup shown in the first image here: https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/ ... 29&t=12147 ("FAQ: How can I hook a microscope objective to my camera?")

With the camera suspended above the microscope, not putting any weight on the scope, you can use the fine focus of the microscope to do focus stepping. On this scope, the focus controls move the objective tube up and down, which moves the focus plane through the subject. In the setup that I'm suggesting, that movement will also change the distance from objective to camera sensor, but on that side such a slight change will make no significant difference.

You will need to DIY something to prevent light from leaking into the "air gap" between the microscope and the camera. A couple of pieces of black paper could be used to make nesting cylinders that would work pretty well. Or if you have some soft black fabric and can sew, a tube of that could work well. The key aspects are only that the microscope tube must be able to move up and down a little, without hitting the camera, and without leaking light into the camera.

Lighting is tricky

For what you want to do, the key is to have the subject surrounded by light, well diffused through something like paper or a ping-pong ball. I am fond of paper. A simple cylinder that fits around the subject and around the eyepiece, with light shining through it on all sides, would work well.

The good persons here with beautiful crisp photographs must be magicians.

True, but on the bright side we teach magic in addition to performing it.

--Rik

[Argu]

Today i bought a konus college 600 microscope with 4x,10x and 40x lenses.

Like this? https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... cular.html

I do have a canon 60D

Given that microscope, and that camera, I suggest to remove the eyepiece from the microscope, suspend the camera just a little above the open tube of the microscope, and use "direct projection" from the objective straight up onto the sensor.

Optically it will be very much like the setup shown in the first image here: https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/ ... 29&t=12147 ("FAQ: How can I hook a microscope objective to my camera?")

With the camera suspended above the microscope, not putting any weight on the scope, you can use the fine focus of the microscope to do focus stepping. On this scope, the focus controls move the objective tube up and down, which moves the focus plane through the subject. In the setup that I'm suggesting, that movement will also change the distance from objective to camera sensor, but on that side such a slight change will make no significant difference.

You will need to DIY something to prevent light from leaking into the "air gap" between the microscope and the camera. A couple of pieces of black paper could be used to make nesting cylinders that would work pretty well. Or if you have some soft black fabric and can sew, a tube of that could work well. The key aspects are only that the microscope tube must be able to move up and down a little, without hitting the camera, and without leaking light into the camera.

Lighting is tricky

For what you want to do, the key is to have the subject surrounded by light, well diffused through something like paper or a ping-pong ball. I am fond of paper. A simple cylinder that fits around the subject and around the eyepiece, with light shining through it on all sides, would work well.

The good persons here with beautiful crisp photographs must be magicians.

True, but on the bright side we teach magic in addition to performing it.

--Rik

Wow Rik, many thanks for your kind inputs.
Yes this is the same microscope.
Will definitely try your instructions.
Very excited.
Feeling very luck to have found this wonderful community.
Already begun reading the various articles about microscopes.
Thanks again a lot and wish you all best. ;o)
Argu

[JL]

Hi Argu.

If I recall correctly, Larsen used a Dino-Lite type of microscope. I guess that he stacked the images, but I do not remember how he proceeded for this.

Combing sands with a neodymium magnet will allow you to recover quite an amount of mineral grains. You will have to be very careful to be able to recognize, and separate, micrometeorites from other minerals and even metal particles from man-made objects.
On the other hand, depending on the geology of your area, you may get interesting specimens of iron oxides, pyroxenes, amphiboles, garnets, etc. etc.

Good luck.

[Olympusman]

I have Jon Larsen's "In Search of Stardust" and it is absolutely mind-boggling. Not only is the photography superb, but his in-depth classification of all the types marvels.

Mike

[Argu]

I have Jon Larsen's "In Search of Stardust" and it is absolutely mind-boggling. Not only is the photography superb, but his in-depth classification of all the types marvels.

Mike

Hi Mike, some minutes ago i saw that he and Jan Braly Kihle has written another book also.'The Atlas of Micrometeorites. İ guess this one also would be very interesting.

[Lou Jost]

What a fascinating field!

They are using not just microscopes but SEMS and spectrometers though, so much of the fun is beyond us hobbyists. Still it seems that with patience we could come up with something.....it is very tempting to start looking

[Argu]

What a fascinating field!

They are using not just microscopes but SEMS and spectrometers though, so much of the fun is beyond us hobbyists. Still it seems that with patience we could come up with something.....it is very tempting to start looking

Hi Lou,
They also use the SEMs in analyzing the spherules. But i think they have to coat them in conductive material for this means. So the surface look would be altered. But SEMs pictures are amazing too. Jans pictures are also. İ guess good technique with good optics can create wonders.

[Lou Jost]

İ guess good technique with good optics can create wonders.

Yes it can!

[Scarodactyl]

If I recall correctly, Larsen used a Dino-Lite type of microscope.

I would be shocked if a dino-lite could produce usable results at these mags, though I only read one of his books so far. There is definitely epi darkfield involved, though whether within the objective or with a ring light I am not sure.