 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / November 2005microscopy
I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope. To cut down on vibration I would like to have a mirror lock. (I will be using x20 and x40 objectives.) Also a remote shutter release would be an advantage. I have read about iso settinga, and would also think of using a high value setting - say iso 1600. I understand what noise is, but can find little information comparing different cameras in this respect; ie which cameras are more noisy than others. Any suggestions as to suitable models to look at gratefully received. Robert > I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Robert I would suggest. Nikon Coolpix 4500 No mirror Remote shutter release available Pepe >I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Robert You seem to have accidentally duplicated your question; see my answer to your other post. David  SignatureDavid Littlewood >I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Robert You don't want to use any camera's 1600 ISO setting for microscopy unless you are shooting live, moving specimens and can't provide enough light for whatever reason. Volvox's are ok since they don't fly around like Paramecia! Try to provide a light souce that will allow you to use at max. 200 ISO in order to preserve detail, colour, tone and keep noise down. -Rich >You don't want to use any camera's 1600 ISO setting for microscopy >unless you are shooting live, moving specimens and can't provide >enough light for whatever reason. Volvox's are ok >since they don't fly around like Paramecia! >Try to provide a light souce that will allow you to use at max. 200 >ISO in order to preserve detail, colour, tone and keep noise down. Don't forget; you are magnifying the image *before* the capture, so if the image is not going to be shown at large sizes, noise is not going to be a big compromise o the quieter cameras. In fact, with microscopy I would assume that the scenes will be lower contrast than with macroscopy, especially backlit media, which will also be high-key, and with these situations, getting a high exposure is as much of an issue in avoiding noise as is ISO. A high-key image exposed at +2.5 or +3 in RAW mode at ISO 1600 (on a camera that uses 12 bits for ISO 1600) is going to have less noise than the same image exposed at 0EC (metered average) at ISO 200. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< >>You don't want to use any camera's 1600 ISO setting for microscopy >>unless you are shooting live, moving specimens and can't provide [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >to have less noise than the same image exposed at 0EC (metered average) >at ISO 200. If he's using really good objectives and eyepieces (plan-apo) then he should concentrate on any noise that may crop up. But for the most part, you are right that the images will be high key image if it's transmission imaging. As for microscopy not using large prints, I have a 16" x 20" microscopic shot of sugar (taken through a Leitz with twin polarizers) on my wall! -Rich >> I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope. >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Try to provide a light souce that will allow you to use at max. 200 > ISO in order to preserve detail, colour, tone and keep noise down. manual focus, then i-ttl strobe like SB800 ? > -Rich > I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Robert You may want to ask in the Yahoo! Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CoolpixPhotoMicMac/ where people are already doing this sort of work. The Nikon Coolpix range are held in high regard in this application. David On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 10:49:08 GMT, "David J Taylor" <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote: >> I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope. >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > >David Problem is the same with using telescopes, that the using a fixed-lens camera requires (in most cases) a huge eyepiece in either the microscope (difficult) or telescope (easier) in order to provide a fully-illuminated field when doing "afocal" photography. With a DSLR, the problem is easier avoid since the DSLR would be used without a lens, using the microscope or telescope eyepiece only as the relay element. That is called "eyepiece projection" photography. Before, when sensors in prosumer and p&s cameras were small, their lenses were small (front diameter) as well, meaning it was easier to get near or full field illumination in the camera with a conventional microscope or telescope eyepiece size. Now, with long zooms and large front elements on prosumers, it's more difficult. The Coolpix cameras(995, etc) like Olympus's C30xx series had relatively small front lens elements and full field illumination was easier to achieve with conventional eyepieces. -Rich |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.