Euromex MB 1051, Canon m6 (projection)

What equipment do you use? Post pictures and descriptions of your microscope(s) here!
Post Reply
Message
Author
Nerdoid
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:06 pm
Location: 46N
Contact:

Euromex MB 1051, Canon m6 (projection)

#1 Post by Nerdoid » Tue Oct 15, 2019 7:14 pm

I acquire video through an APS-C sensor 22.3 x 14.9 mm with a 22mm lens f/2 (that’s the Canon m6 with the stock pancake lens). I set it so that it looks through the 10mm eyepiece of the Euromex MB 1051 sporting three objectives: 4/0.10, 10/0.25, 40/0.65 (160/0.17).

The camera connects to an iPad which shows a live view of what the camera sees. I record what is shown on the screen of the iPad. I Can control the camera’s diaphragm, ISO and exposure, as well as the luminosity of the specimen, so the result can be tweaked according to what you’re looking at.

I wonder if the camera adds magnification. Anyone have an idea?

Photos of the setup:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fk7qQ ... p=drivesdk

https://drive.google.com/file/d/16lGJu ... p=drivesdk
Shroedinger’s cat walked into a bar, and didn’t.

Videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/EcceCluj
Website: https://swampmicroscopy.wordpress.com/

Scarodactyl
Posts: 2775
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm

Re: Euromex MB 1051, Canon m6 (projection)

#2 Post by Scarodactyl » Tue Oct 15, 2019 7:26 pm

Typically a 40mm lens is used for afocal onto aps-c. A 22mm is probanly about doubling magnification vs a 10x eyepiece.

Nerdoid
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:06 pm
Location: 46N
Contact:

Re: Euromex MB 1051, Canon m6 (projection)

#3 Post by Nerdoid » Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:57 pm

Is there a particular reason 40mm is preferred for afocal?
Shroedinger’s cat walked into a bar, and didn’t.

Videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/EcceCluj
Website: https://swampmicroscopy.wordpress.com/

Scarodactyl
Posts: 2775
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm

Re: Euromex MB 1051, Canon m6 (projection)

#4 Post by Scarodactyl » Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:24 am

40mm tends to produce an image with edges that almost hit the edge of the 10x eyepiece's field of view (when focused to infinity), giving you a nice near-optimal rectangle with no vignetting:
Image
This is the entire image through a 10x eyepiece (taken with my phone camera) with a photo taken over an eyepiece with a 40mm pancake on aps-c. Not much mpre field of viww available to the camera--a 35mm might work even better.

That said, I had it flipped. A 22mm focused to infinity seems like it should be producing an image too small for an aps-c sensor? Are you getting any vignetting? It would be good to know more about your setup.

MicroBob
Posts: 3154
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 9:11 am
Location: Northern Germany

Re: Euromex MB 1051, Canon m6 (projection)

#5 Post by MicroBob » Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:11 am

The 22mm camera lens leads to the circular image on the sensor with a lot of black around it. This is no big problem but you don't use all camera resolution that is available and have always to do a cutout to use a picture.
In video mode some cameras use only a smaller inner part of the sensor image, this would in your case not be a disadvantage.
Do you use the images saved on camera or on the Ipad? Often the computer connection only transfers images and videos in reduced resolution so you should compare and choose wisely.

Bob

Nerdoid
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:06 pm
Location: 46N
Contact:

Re: Euromex MB 1051, Canon m6 (projection)

#6 Post by Nerdoid » Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:36 pm

Scarodactyl wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:24 am
40mm tends to produce an image with edges that almost hit the edge of the 10x eyepiece's field of view (when focused to infinity), giving you a nice near-optimal rectangle with no vignetting:
Image
This is the entire image through a 10x eyepiece (taken with my phone camera) with a photo taken over an eyepiece with a 40mm pancake on aps-c. Not much mpre field of viww available to the camera--a 35mm might work even better.

That said, I had it flipped. A 22mm focused to infinity seems like it should be producing an image too small for an aps-c sensor? Are you getting any vignetting? It would be good to know more about your setup.
Here’s a couple of photos of the setup:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fk7qQC ... p=drivesdk

https://drive.google.com/file/d/16lGJue ... p=drivesdk

The live image from the camera is shown on a tablet screen. When shown at full resolution vignetting is no longer an issue. I do believe, however, that a higher focal would increase resolution.
Shroedinger’s cat walked into a bar, and didn’t.

Videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/EcceCluj
Website: https://swampmicroscopy.wordpress.com/

Nerdoid
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:06 pm
Location: 46N
Contact:

Re: Euromex MB 1051, Canon m6 (projection)

#7 Post by Nerdoid » Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:47 pm

MicroBob wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:11 am
The 22mm camera lens leads to the circular image on the sensor with a lot of black around it. This is no big problem but you don't use all camera resolution that is available and have always to do a cutout to use a picture.
In video mode some cameras use only a smaller inner part of the sensor image, this would in your case not be a disadvantage.
Do you use the images saved on camera or on the Ipad? Often the computer connection only transfers images and videos in reduced resolution so you should compare and choose wisely.

Bob
I don’t actually record in video mode on the camera. I capture what the tablet screen shows. Quality is sufficient for the details I want to have and is quite practical for yt.

You are correct in what you say, best quality is on the raw files on the camera.
Shroedinger’s cat walked into a bar, and didn’t.

Videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/EcceCluj
Website: https://swampmicroscopy.wordpress.com/

Scarodactyl
Posts: 2775
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm

Re: Euromex MB 1051, Canon m6 (projection)

#8 Post by Scarodactyl » Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:44 pm

Ah, ok, that makes sense. Yeah, if you have enough resolution in your camera this approach makes sense, as you can always crop more later.

Post Reply