Olympus E-P2 Resolution

Here you can discuss everything related to taking light micrographs and videos.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
75RR
Posts: 7592
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:34 am
Location: Estepona, Spain

Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#1 Post by 75RR » Thu Aug 16, 2018 1:14 pm

Was running some evaluations using Kemp's 8 Form Test on the new (to me) Trinocular head 47 30 28 on my Zeiss WL
Was surprised, (again?) at the depth of focus or lack thereof on the Planapo 63x/1.4
Shot a video to show the steps. Video shot at HD 1280 x 720 on an Olympus E-P2

Zeiss Standard WL (somewhat fashion challenged) & Wild M8
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)

User avatar
75RR
Posts: 7592
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:34 am
Location: Estepona, Spain

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#2 Post by 75RR » Thu Aug 16, 2018 1:34 pm

It seemed to me as I was working on the video that it lacked detail compared to what was visible through the eyepieces,
so I thought I would post a stacked image of the Navicula lyra as a comparison. Images were taken at the same time.

Planapo 63x/1.4, DIC, 13 image stack in Photoshop
Olympus E-P2 4032 x 3024 pixels

Image
Zeiss Standard WL (somewhat fashion challenged) & Wild M8
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)

Hobbyst46
Posts: 3102
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 9:02 pm

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#3 Post by Hobbyst46 » Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:19 pm

Thanks 75RR,
An impressive and instructive demonstration of fine microscopy and stacking. I save it for future reference since I own the same objective model.
Questions:
1. The resolution is dictated by the objective and the illumination (the latter due to the contrast) - I believe. By "E-P2 resolution" you probably mean that the pixel-wise camera resolution is more than adequate to convey the full resolution of the image? (I copied the stack and made a blow-up in software to verify it)
2. The depth of focus is due to its being a DIC, I guess, not the objective?
3. How is the stack image uploaded, given it is a 12MP pixel image?
Zeiss Standard GFL+Canon EOS-M10, Olympus VMZ stereo

User avatar
75RR
Posts: 7592
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:34 am
Location: Estepona, Spain

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#4 Post by 75RR » Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:36 pm

Thanks Hobbyst46
1. The resolution is dictated by the objective and the illumination (the latter due to the contrast) - I believe. By "E-P2 resolution" you probably mean that the pixel-wise camera resolution is more than adequate to convey the full resolution of the image? (I copied the stack and made a blow-up in software to verify it)
I was contrasting the video resolution vs the image resolution.
2. The depth of focus is due to its being a DIC, I guess, not the objective?
Will look into that. Will compare COL as well.
3. How is the stack image uploaded, given it is a 12MP pixel image?
Linked to imgur

Here is a 1024 length version uploaded directly:
Attachments
Navicula lyra.jpg
Navicula lyra.jpg (127.84 KiB) Viewed 3707 times
Zeiss Standard WL (somewhat fashion challenged) & Wild M8
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)

User avatar
Crater Eddie
Posts: 1829
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 4:39 pm
Location: Illinois USA

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#5 Post by Crater Eddie » Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:51 pm

That sure is a fine final image.
CE
Olympus BH-2 / BHTU with Olympus E-P1 MFT camera mounted
LOMO BIOLAM L-2-2
LOMO POLAM L-213 / BIOLAM L-211 hybrid
LOMO Multiscope (Biolam)

User avatar
KurtM
Posts: 1618
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2015 12:08 am
Location: League City, Texas
Contact:

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#6 Post by KurtM » Thu Aug 16, 2018 3:07 pm

new (to me) Trinocular head 47 30 28 on my Zeiss WL
Have you discussed trino heads for your WL elsewhere - if so, link please? Memory is good, but recall dismal -- is this a new piece of equipment, what were you using before? New camera too? Apologies if this has already been addressed, but sometimes I get caught napping.

Google search results being less than crystal clear on the subject, may I confirm the "Trinocular head 47 30 28" is the Seidentopf (gull wing) type, as opposed to Jentz (flat, laterally sliding eyepieces)? This is an "20/80" type trino? I have always been unclear on how that works, every trino I've ever owned has been 100% one or the other.

Oh yes, focus plane on Zeiss 63x/1.4 planapo 160 is hideously thin. I am demanding that diatoms be made flatter in the future.

EDIT: Agree with CE. 8-)
Cheers,
Kurt Maurer
League City, Texas
email: ngc704(at)aol(dot)com
https://www.flickr.com/photos/67904872@ ... 912223623/

User avatar
zzffnn
Posts: 2714
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2015 3:57 am
Location: Houston, Texas
Contact:

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#7 Post by zzffnn » Thu Aug 16, 2018 3:21 pm

I had an E-PM2 before, but upgraded to E-M10 II. From both of those cameras, video is a crop of photo and resolution is figuratively lower (look up and compare resolution of each). Many m4/3 cameras are that way.

You may want a 4k video camera. I don't know if those top of line m4/3 models, such as GH5, offer no-crop video. Please google it. Even stills from 4k video would have less resolution than a regular photo from the same camera.

E-P2 does not have full electronic shutter, correct? Full E shutter will even improve still photo resolution (diatom dotting), over electronic front-curtain shutter on camera isolated from scope.

I was not expecting a visible dotting improvement from full e shutter compared EFCS without flash, but I clearly saw it in photos of Frustulia diatom. This was with EFCS on E-M10 II, 10 seconds of delayed shutter release, anti-shock set to 1/4 seconds and isolated tripod. I personally would not go back to E-PM2 for microscopy, after seeing the difference (I don't think my E-PM2 has even EFCS).

But full e shutter requires lower shutter speed, to avoid LED frequency banding in photos. If you use a LED with banding issues, that is. Or use flash or halogen light to avoid LED banding.

User avatar
75RR
Posts: 7592
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:34 am
Location: Estepona, Spain

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#8 Post by 75RR » Thu Aug 16, 2018 6:20 pm

Thanks KurtM
Is this a new piece of equipment, what were you using before? New camera too?
Was using a cube before that gave me a permanent 50/50

Liked the 50/50, only problem was that I had to join the Optovar and the Cube, did that by eliminating the top Telan of the Optovar and the bottom Telan of the cube.
This effectively created an extended infinity space. Worked ok, only it limited the field of view a bit.

See image 1

Came up with that partly because there were financial and logistical difficulties in obtaining a 47 30 28
Google search results being less than crystal clear on the subject, may I confirm the "Trinocular head 47 30 28" is the Seidentopf (gull wing) type, as opposed to Jentz (flat, laterally sliding eyepieces)? This is an "20/80" type trino? I have always been unclear on how that works, every trino I've ever owned has been 100% one or the other.
Yes, it is a (gull wing) Siedentopf (which gives 20/80 eyepiece/photo tube or 100 eyepiece) as opposed to a sliding Jentzsch (which I was using upside down on the cube).
Need to open it to clean it at some point. Will post pictures.

See image 2 and 3

Note: 3rd image also includes info on the fototubus that I used with the cube. It is a hollow tube (no lenses) that has a 10mm height adjustment to enable parfocality with the eyepieces.
Note: Prefer the 45 degree angle of the Jentzsch, still getting used to the 30 degree Siedentopf .
Oh yes, focus plane on Zeiss 63x/1.4 planapo 160 is hideously thin. I am demanding that diatoms be made flatter in the future.
:)
Attachments
WL+Cube Head.jpg
WL+Cube Head.jpg (108.87 KiB) Viewed 3678 times
Siedentopf.jpg
Siedentopf.jpg (38.15 KiB) Viewed 3678 times
47 30 28  +         47 30 24.png
47 30 28 + 47 30 24.png (352.07 KiB) Viewed 3678 times
Last edited by 75RR on Fri Aug 17, 2018 5:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Zeiss Standard WL (somewhat fashion challenged) & Wild M8
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)

User avatar
75RR
Posts: 7592
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:34 am
Location: Estepona, Spain

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#9 Post by 75RR » Thu Aug 16, 2018 6:47 pm

Thanks zzffnn
I had an E-PM2 before, but upgraded to E-M10 II. From both of those cameras, video is a crop of photo and resolution is figuratively lower (look up and compare resolution of each). Many m4/3 cameras are that way.
Most probably true on my E-P2 as well I expect.
You may want a 4k video camera.
That would be nice! Funds as usual are as always a little short.
Need however to work out how many pixels I actually need.

Found this, not had a chance to look at it carefully yet: https://www.microscopyu.com/tutorials/m ... resolution
E-P2 does not have full electronic shutter, correct?
No E shutter unfortunately, that is where the clunk comes from!
If you use a LED with banding issues, that is. Or use flash or halogen light to avoid LED banding.
Using 60w tungsten at the moment. Did solve the problem of banding on LEDs by using a Luxdrive constant current driver. See link:
https://www.ledsupply.com/led-drivers/b ... led-driver
Zeiss Standard WL (somewhat fashion challenged) & Wild M8
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)

User avatar
75RR
Posts: 7592
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:34 am
Location: Estepona, Spain

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#10 Post by 75RR » Thu Aug 16, 2018 6:49 pm

Crater Eddie wrote:That sure is a fine final image.
CE
Many thanks Eddie!
Zeiss Standard WL (somewhat fashion challenged) & Wild M8
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)

Hobbyst46
Posts: 3102
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 9:02 pm

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#11 Post by Hobbyst46 » Thu Aug 16, 2018 7:13 pm

75RR: question please. What is the advantage of the combination cube+Jentzsch head over the plain Jentzsch trinocular? is the former more massive or is it the 50/50 eyepiece/camera vs 0/100-100/0?
Zeiss Standard GFL+Canon EOS-M10, Olympus VMZ stereo

User avatar
75RR
Posts: 7592
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:34 am
Location: Estepona, Spain

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#12 Post by 75RR » Thu Aug 16, 2018 8:15 pm

What is the advantage of the combination cube+Jentzsch head over the plain Jentzsch trinocular? is the former more massive or is it the 50/50 eyepiece/camera vs 0/100-100/0?
To me, as I had spent quite some time sharing a plain Jentzsch binocular with a camera, it was the 50/50 minus the crick in the neck that attracted me.
Could not get my head around 0/100, 100/0. Seemed counter intuitive not to view through the eyepieces.

Note: The 20/80 of the Siedentopf trinocular actually works quite well.
Zeiss Standard WL (somewhat fashion challenged) & Wild M8
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)

Hobbyst46
Posts: 3102
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 9:02 pm

Re: Olympus E-P2 Resolution

#13 Post by Hobbyst46 » Thu Aug 16, 2018 8:25 pm

Thanks!
I am used to the 0/100 trino head... will put the Seidentopf on my future list.
Zeiss Standard GFL+Canon EOS-M10, Olympus VMZ stereo

Post Reply