|
jarlywarly posted:Anyone got any strong opinions on focus stacking software, Zerene or Helicon? Zerene seems cool but Helicon can input raw, both are expensive.
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 20:17 |
|
|
 A neat diffraction pattern on a fracture (cleavage plane) inside a crystal of zircon. I had never seen one that followed the crystal structure this way or produced such striking colors.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2019 11:44
|
|
|
Reviews I have read on photomacrography suggest they are surprisingly decent in some cases, but still not as good as exporting source images and stacking them yourself. But I haven't sought out the topic specifically so searching on a model by model basis could give better information.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
I picked up a preconverted canon t6 for a friend on eBay for about the cost of a new one and it worked great for him.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Comic relief lighting option: (I think I am going to try this).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2020 18:41
|
|
|
I have no idea what I'm doing, but I wanted to be able to do some field macro (most of what I do is photomicrography of gems and minerals). I used my 3d printer to make a mount for this lens out of a 20 dollar primefilm film scanner: Seems to work well on aps-c (though I am used to not having internal focusing or aperture). Gives about a 75mm FoV when mounted as pictured. It's at least good enough to scratch the itch when I'm on a nature trail, though it wouldn't be great for a moving target.  Red Chanterelles(?) by Stephen Challener, on Flickr
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2020 21:58
|
|
|
I don't think anyone will ever complain about seeing cool SEM imagery, but there is a microscopes and photomicrography microthread over here which could really use some activity.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2020 08:50
|
|
|
Cogratulations! That shot is great, definitely well-earned.
Scarodactyl fucked around with this message at 09:23 on Apr 8, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2021 09:19
|
|
|
I just got back from a trip to NY and finally had a chance to try out my Kubotek line scan lens in the field. I still have very little idea what I'm doing--turns out non-studio macro is pretty different from working on a microscope, who'd have thought. Still had a lot of fun with it anyway. The long-legged flies and dragonflies decided to be unusually cooperative. This one was sort of stacked, or at least clumsily combined from two photos.  long legged fly on raspberry by Stephen Challener, on Flickr green dragonfly by Stephen Challener, on Flickr brown dragonfly face by Stephen Challener, on FlickrThese damselflies were particularly fun to watch in motion--the spot on their tail almost looks fluorescent, and in the shadows they look like a pair of spots gliding through the air.  damselfly on knotweed by Stephen Challener, on Flickr
Scarodactyl fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Jun 23, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
I was just trying out an omegaron enlarger lens I've had for a while but hadn't had a chance to actually use. I prefer my linescan lens, but for a ~$20 lens (plus a $23 helicoid and adapters) it seems to perform pretty well.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
Cool! Looks like you're getting good results. Which lens did you get? Spotted this leaf-footed bug(?) on my peppers today. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2021 22:17
|
|
|
theHUNGERian posted:Dope!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2022 04:56
|
|
|
There are a lot of factors for selecting the right objective and lens (called a 'tube lens'). You need to get an infinity objective of an appropriate brand (one that isn't expecting special optics to correct aberrations). You also need to be sure your lens is suitable--most infinity objectives want to be put on a 180mm or 200mm lens, though they can usually tolerate some variation (longer focal length lenses will increase mag, shorter will reduce it). If you use a zoom lens it will generally introduce vignetting if you go much below the maximum zoom. It's not the most active but there is a thread for photomicrography as well if you want to get more in depth about micro gear. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3902840&pagenumber=2&perpage=40
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2022 15:51
|
|
|
theHUNGERian posted:I am potentially interested in magnifications between 2x and 5x without crazy short working distances, and without going below the image quality of my 180 mm Canon macro at 1x, but I am not interested in stacking. Perhaps microscope objectives are not the way to go. Will have to read a bit more. You might want to consider a Nikon MM5x on aps-c (or full frame with a teleconverter). 64mm working distance, good resolution, not apochromatic but not bad. You just need empty spacers, and if you use a helicoid you can push the mag down a ways, at least to 3x from the one I tried.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2022 03:20
|
|
|
Teleconverters resize your image without changing the resolution. Extension tubes can increase resolution along with increasing magnification. Which will give better results will be pretty contextual.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2023 03:31
|
|
|
You make a compelling case. Nice shots!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2023 03:06
|
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:Man this stuff is HARD. Fun though.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2023 02:59
|
|
|
It's a pretty incredible advancement, though I have yet to see testing I'm fully satisfied with (ie Robert O'Toole of closeuphotography.com). It should be at least comparable to a suite of Mitutoyo objectives (though not usable for me since I need coaxial illumination).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2023 00:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 20:17 |
|
|
It is manual, yes.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2023 06:28
|
|