Back Modifications (5)
Views 89 Unique 41 Award Shortlist   


By Squirrel  
Dudler suggested that I repost this to the Critique gallery
Advice needed on this one please. Any one do microphotography?
I have recently purchased a Kern OSE416 microscope to help me with my botanical studies. I am so excited. This was taken with my canon 7d attached to the microscope with a Canon EOS microscope kit. The kit arrived yesterday so it is its first use. I wasn't sure if I had all the right bits because it arrived with no instructions. I contacted the place where I purchased it from and they realised that they had sent out some of the old kit with some of the new designed kit. So I am expecting the replacement tomorrow with the new instructions.
The T2 adaptor fits onto the camera and then there is a 34mm microscope adaptor onto T2 which in turn then slips over the left eyepiece of the microscope.
The method is as follows looking through the right eyepiece with the microscope set to the 10x magnification I use the stand and focus dial to get the subject in focus. I then switch to 30x and using the focus dial adjust as needed. I then switch back to 10x and looking through the left eyepiece adjust the dioptre ring until it is in focus. That way the object will be in focus on any magnification setting.
At this point I can put the camera on the microscope. I have tried live view but because there is no lens on the camera I then have to adjust the microscope to get it correct and because it is a bit time consuming sometimes the live view switches off. I tried looking through the camera eye piece but because the camera is large it is a bit restrictive space wise because you have to take into consideration the other eyepiece on the scope.
This is my first go. The kit also comes with 4 extension tubes that can be used to increase the magnification of the subject.........I need to walk before I start to run.

Tags: Specialist and abstract Anther microphotography

Save 40% On inPixio Photo Studio 12 - Now 29.99


pablophotographer 11 2.0k 429
21 Oct 2020 12:12PM
You are already miles ahead so you might wish to enlighten us. Do I guess wrongly that you have used high ISO to compensate for the diameter of the T2 adaptor?

By the way the object under the microscope looks you have used a wide aperture. I guess the object would have looked sharper if you were using a smaller aperture.That being said, analytical as you were on your text, do you mind uploading a picture from your mobile of the whole contraption? How many apertures do you have available when you use the microscope? Are they controlled by the microscope or can be adjusted by the camera?

I suppose if you have strong lights on the side of the microscope, or even an illuminated surface below your subject (i.e. a leaf) you could use lower ISO values.

You will get some VERY interesting photos, I am sure. Looking forward to seeing them here.


chase Plus
17 2.4k 628 England
21 Oct 2020 12:16PM
I'm not adventurous enough to even attempt micro stuff, and, I don't have a microscope so, I can only off critique as I see this.
Firstly, I would have removed the squiggly bit on the lower half of the image and the few dust spots dotted around the frame.
The subject doesn't quite look in focus but I wouldn't be able to offer any suggestions on how to improve things there, sorry.
If you hadn't told us what this was, I would never have guessed.
Your approach seems sensible but I think it's a case of practise, practise, different settings, different subjects etc, etc.

I did a very quick mod..
cloned away the squiggly bit.
Removed several dust spots.
Cropped from the bottom to put your subject further into the viewers eyeline.
Added a very simple levels layer, which brightened the whole thing up.
Squirrel 15 471 7 England
21 Oct 2020 1:11PM
Hi Pablophotographer.
There is no lens therefore no aperture. It all depends on the lens in the eyepiece of the microscope. There are two magnifications on the microscope 10X and 30X. unless I start to use the extension tubes in which case the magnification will be greater. I used a high ISO as a starting point because its my first foray into this.

Hi Chase
The anther that I was looking at is one from a Penstemon flower. The Anther is curved which is why the bottom half is not in focus. My next step is probably to make a slide in which case the whole specimen will be flat. The slight shadow behind the Anther that goes down the image is the stamen to which the Anther is attached.

regards Jacq
Squirrel 15 471 7 England
21 Oct 2020 2:40PM
I've uploaded an image of the camera on the microscope as a mod. (I seem to have uploaded it twice. ) it will give you an idea of how it sits.
Squirrel 15 471 7 England
21 Oct 2020 2:42PM
I've also uploaded a mod of the camera with all the attachments on it.
dudler Plus
19 1.9k 1948 England
21 Oct 2020 3:14PM
Thank you for the versions - that gives a real feel for things!

I don't have any additional thoughts about the image - I posted some thoughts in the mail gallery yesterday:

Quote:If you're getting a sharp image, you're doing something right!

Live view is probably a VERY good idea, and I'd suggest using mirror lock/delayed action to avoid any shake. That would allow you to reduce the ISO for greater quality and still have a sharp image. That's all theory as I don't have a microscope.

I'm not sure if any of the other members of the Critique Team have shot this kind of thing - but if you really want advice, post in the Critique Gallery.

Thank you for putting it here - as you can see, it's drawn more attention and thoughtful comments, and I really hope that someone who has used a microscope with a camera since they were at school (I have memories of a 120 Rollex* back on a microscope in the Biology Lab around 1968, and I'm not sure that anyone else in living memory had used it...)

* That's the right spelling. It's not the same as the watches!
chase Plus
17 2.4k 628 England
21 Oct 2020 3:16PM
From your images, thanks for those, your camera is attached to only one of the two viewing scopes on the microscope, does that give you the image you saw using both eye pieces ?
Squirrel 15 471 7 England
21 Oct 2020 5:45PM
Hi Chase yes sort of. When you look through both eyepieces the human eye sees the subject differently its sharp all the way through. that's why you have to play a bit when the camera is on the scope. I looked at three types of microscope. The first just had one eyepiece bit like the ones I used at school (back in the dark ages) what I would call a traditional school microscope but it didn't have the magnification that I wanted. Then there was the one I purchased with two eyepieces and then there is the triocular. The 3rd eye piece is used for linking a camera to. The 3rd eyepiece sits above the whole thing. They are a lot more money and they are bigger. If you have to carry the thing around weight is an issue.
Light is also important. The 416 has a light underneath the glass inlay. It great for back lighting things. It also has a light above but the you can't have both on at the same time and the strength of the light is fixed.
Its a different way of working and looking at things. (It also doesn't help having an audience of cats sitting there watching, with that 'I wouldn't do it that way' look on their faces.Grin)
chase Plus
17 2.4k 628 England
21 Oct 2020 6:43PM
So generally, what you 'see' is not what you get in the grand scheme of things. The adjustments you need to make must be eyes have already gone wonky just thinking about it, a very frustrating but rewarding process when you get it right.

PS...put blindfolds on the Cats Wink Wink
dark_lord Plus
18 2.9k 825 England
21 Oct 2020 9:26PM
I've never done anything like this so I can't advise little on the practical side of assembling all the items.

However, I have done a mod and I made a Levels adjustment so the background came out white and the made the subject brighter. The same rules apply about post processing and exposure as in general pgotography.

It isn't crisp and while there are sharper looking areas I guess the high ISO hasn't helped. The subject is stationary so you could use a much lower ISO. If you end up with an exposure of a second or two it won't therefore matter. Any vibration would die down quickly and not impact on sharpness.

I remember reading somewhere, and it may well have been in EOS Magazine, that shutter speeds in the range you're using can be affected by miniscule vibrations. As you have a camera on top of a microscope there is going to be questions concerning solidity no matter how solid it may seem. Another reason I'd be happier using much slower speeds - ISO 100 would give you a 2 second exposure. I know in my normal macro work I'd take that.

In my mod I also ran the Chromatic Aberration filter. When using Canon's DPP, Lightroom, Adobe Camera RAW or processing a RAW file in Affinity on images shot using a known lens this correction is automatically applied. When that's not the case the CA filter is very useful (and works on scanned images too). That does make an image look clearer and helps when you apply final sharpening.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.