Wondering if someone would be kind enough to offer advice on the following.
Im helping a friend who is an Iridologist (taking pictures of the eye for
analysis) who needs to setup a Digital camera with Macro lens to replace an
older video capture based system which utilized a video camera and capture
software to take still frame shots of the eye. The video camera works ok but
the capture card died and new capture cards are not compatible with the
Iridology software she used. So we thought to go to a digital camera based
system which should provide much better pictures.
The Digital Camera has the same mount as the video camera and can screw into
the platform which then has limited movement up, down, left and right. The
patient whose eye will be photographed puts their chin on a frame to keep
still such that the camera can then be aligned with their eye for placement
of the shot. The camera platform can move to within 2 cm of the patients eye
but only moves back a maximum of about 20cm from the front of the lens to
the eye of the patient. My question is, if I buy a Macro lens such as the
Canon EF 100mm F2.8 which I beleive is a good lens or perhaps a Tamron AP
AF 90mm and attach it to a EOS 300D, is this going to be a problem with the
limited distance I can move the camera back from the patient?. The specs for
the Canon say the minimum focus length is 31cm and the Tamron 29cm. Does
this mean the lens cant focus if the camera is closer than 31cm/29cm to the
subject?. If so I wont be able to use this camera mount rig and does anyone
have any solution for taking digital shots of the eyeball using the current
rig, any other lenses or adaptors I can use?. TIA for any help.
Colin_D - 08 Dec 2006 11:14 GMT
> Wondering if someone would be kind enough to offer advice on the following.
>
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> have any solution for taking digital shots of the eyeball using the current
> rig, any other lenses or adaptors I can use?. TIA for any help.
The 100mm is really too long for your purposes, and is a full-frame
lens, as is the Tamron 90mm.
If you have a 300D, 350D, 400D, 20D, or 30D, you would be better to look
at the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro lens, which will focus down to 1:1 at
20cm from the object - in this case, an eye. This distance is measured
to the image plane mark on the camera body, a small circle with a line
through it. If you've got about 20cm to the front of the lens, you will
be ok for distance.
There is another Canon macro, a 50mm compact, but it will only go down
to 1:2, i.e. half life size without an extension ring.
The 60 mm is your best bet.
Colin D.

Signature
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
James McNangle - 10 Dec 2006 09:15 GMT
>Wondering if someone would be kind enough to offer advice on the following.
> .... If so I wont be able to use this camera mount rig and does anyone
>have any solution for taking digital shots of the eyeball using the current
>rig, any other lenses or adaptors I can use?. TIA for any help.
Canon EOS400d + EFS60 macro:
Mounting point to object min ~200mm
Front of lens - object ~95mm
Max magnification 1:1
Nikon 8700
Mounting point to object min ~137mm
Front of lens - object ~35mm
Max magnification 1:2 approx
I don't know if either of these would be optically suitable for your purpose,
but if you are in Melbourne you could probably persuade me to let you try both
of them to find out.
With best wishes,
James McNangle
Joe - 10 Dec 2006 13:17 GMT
Thanks for your suggestions and kind offer to help James . Unfortunately Im
not in Melbourne. Since my post I have discovered that I was able to swing
the mounting bracket 180 degrees and work it in reverse such that now I have
35cm clearance between the lens and the subject's eye. I think this distance
will now allow me to work with the Macro lenses I envisaged.
>>Wondering if someone would be kind enough to offer advice on the
>>following.
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
> James McNangle