MicrobeHunter.com Microscopy Forum

She was found in a salt marsh in Brooklyn, NY. 100x, 0.4 mm. This is my first contribution to this forum.

It moved only slightly.

Does this look familiar to anybody? It lived in a salt marsh and was photographed at 400x. Thanks in advance.

Lesson learned- I will measure from now on.

The tick/mite was not visible to the naked eye but was huge compared to anything else I have seen so far. Mites live everywhere, but ticks (I think) are rare in cities.

Again, thanks for your help.

Crusty

I thought so, but it was difficult to confirm from the pictures on the internet. Thank you

thanks. I thought so but couldn't confirm it with the pictures I saw on the web.

This photo is a still from a movie. The top one is fighting to get out of the web that already killed bottom one. The sample was gathered from moss growing on a tree. It's not great art, but I would love some help identifying them.

Thanks ahead of time.

Crusty

I've taken a few videos of moving animals and gotten a few stills from that.

Another great book- Practical Digital Photomicrography by Brian Matsumoto. It's mainly about how best to use the equipment- the lens, digital cameras and how to mount them to the microscope, improving the images, and buying a microscope. It's an excellent book for the informed beginner.

Got it. Direct projection it is. thanks

Just a few things to keep in mind with a BH-2. 1) If you're using Olympus objectives, and not their eyepiece or NFK projection lens, you'll get uncorrected (or improperly corrected) images, with significant lateral chromatic aberration. This will limit your results you can achieve, once you work th...

I would be happy with an NFK 2.5, but at $140 on ebay, they're not totally cheap. I realize that I would probably need to buy a canon body to pull this off. V1s and J1s are hard to find and as expensive as the used rebels I'm contemplating. One question that occurred to me- will this solution make t...

so only an NFK should be used here. I was unclear- I do have a 3.3 NFK which I have read that should be changed to a 2.5. From what I have read, for the projection method I have to drop an eyepiece adapter over that, connect it to a photomicro adapter L. The adapter L is constructed to fit into an ...

In Afocal, you can place a focusing rail on a tripod (as I do) which will give you fine adjustment or use a darkroom copy stand. I think yours is the solution I'm looking for. If it isn't too much trouble, would you send me a picture of your setup so that I can visualize it more clearly? There has ...

It needs to be parfocal - follow the instructions in the link. Krebs' instructions seem to be predicated on having a microscope with an adjustable trinocular tube. Mine is not. Please tell me if I have misunderstood the essay. place an eyepiece in the trinocular port and place a lens on the camera....

I think the first question is how do things look visually through the scope? Is the illumination good there? Are you able to focus properly? If that is not right we need to deal with that first. I can focus properly. The microscope is not parfocal. I focus first through the binoculars, then focus t...

Thank you all for your thoughtful replies. Please keep in mind that I am very new to this and mechanically clueless. Not all of my pictures are terrible, but they are so dark that they're fuzzy by the time I finish processing them. Many, if not most of the people on this site and amateurMicography.n...

My photos come out dark and poorly focused. I don't know if it's incompetence on my part or the inexpensive adapter from I bought from Amazon, (AmScope CA-CAN-NIK-OLY-SLR-II Canon and Nikon SLR). Would it make a huge difference if I bought a good system- lens adapter, camera adapter, and photo eyepi...