Connecting DSLR directly through eyepiece tube, too heavy?

[JustAQuickQuestion]

Hello all,

I was just wondering if connecting a d3100 directly to the eyepiece tube of an Apex Practitioner microscope via a simple aluminium c type adapter would be too heavy and cause damage to my microscope? If anyone knows the answer it would be much appreciated.

[apochronaut]

The best way to do that is to mount your camera on a tripod and suspend it over the eyepiece tube, for afocal photography. Attaching the camera to the eyepiece tube is possible but complications such as the weight of the camera and mirror vibration will contribute to making a physical attachment more difficult. Many older systems, where they used either 35mm film cameras or 4 x 5 film holders , mounted the camera body on a separate stand, suspended over the trinocular tube.

Your principal issue using such a system will be alignment, whereas a physical attachment uses the eyepiece tube to center the camera. It isn't that hard, though and the camera vibration is isolated.

[JustAQuickQuestion]

Perfect, thank you for your fast reply! So the main issue is actually the practicality of such a setup, not that the weight of the camera would cause any damage to the scope itself?

[apochronaut]

That's a monocular with a fairly long viewing tube?

[JustAQuickQuestion]

It is a monocular yes, I don't know if the tube is particularly long as I have nothing to compare it to,

Here is a photo of it, if that helps? It is a fairly solid metal design and dosen't seem to move at all when I insert the camera, but I am just super paranoid about damaging my equipment.

[JustAQuickQuestion]

I have just seen that Apex themselves sell something like this, . I assume that means that the company expects that some people will attach cameras in this way?

[apochronaut]

It seems then, that it should be o.k. I think that your DSLR, should be not much over 1 lb. The Apex attachment does stretch over a bit of the optical tube and couples the camera directly to a bayonet adapter so it is not afocal . The system is just substituting the ocular tube for a trinocular tube, using a visual eyepiece as the relay lens. It should be more secure than one where you would be coupling a camera lens to the eyepiece as in afocal.
The only real difference between this and a DSLR on a trinocular tube is that the camera is on a cantilever, rather than exerting it's weight straight down. I doubt if that would matter much, except if the mirror slap was very high and the exposure pretty long.

[JustAQuickQuestion]

Thank you so much for your help, I really appreciate you taking the time to do that and explain some of these concepts to a newbie like myself! I can't wait to begin snapping away.

[Scarodactyl]

I have heard it can damage things, but not seen any issues with brief tests using an eyepiece adapter with my canon t6.

[JustAQuickQuestion]

Thanks for your reply, the microscope seems so sturdy and is an all metal construction so I am hoping that the weight will not be a problem, I am using a c mount adapter, but not the one that is sold by Apex. Since they offer a connection which also connects at the same point, even thought the method of connection is slightly different as pointed out by apochronaut, I am hoping that the scope is manufactured with this in mind, or at-least that the company expects cameras to be mounted directly to the eyepiece tube. The weight of the camera is 500g, so surely this can not compromise metal?

[apochronaut]

Without knowing how the unit you have chosen mounts or how far towards the end of the tube it connects, it is hard to say. 500 gm. cantilevered on the end of the eyepiece tube , exerts quite a bit more force than 500 gm. connected to the tube an inch farther down. I still doubt if there could be any mechanical damage but the system could be much shakier. There is also the issue of the weight of the actual microscope and how stable it will be with a camera hanging off of it's eyepiece tube. It doesn't look too heavy. I guess you will find out.

[MicroBob]

The Nikon d3100 doesn't have a shutter with elecronic first shutter curtain function. So the shutter will be activated when released from live view. This can blur the photos considerably, especially at higher magnifications. I think this will be as much a problem as the leverage on the tube and the lack of stability.
Do you have a smartphone with a halfway good camera? These often give very nice results when equipped with a holder to keep them in position over the eyepiece.

Bob

[apochronaut]

The Nikon d3100 doesn't have a shutter with elecronic first shutter curtain function. So the shutter will be activated when released from live view. This can blur the photos considerably, especially at higher magnifications. I think this will be as much a problem as the leverage on the tube and the lack of stability.
Do you have a smartphone with a halfway good camera? These often give very nice results when equipped with a holder to keep them in position over the eyepiece.

Bob

Correct. The cantilever will just exacerbate the problem. The design of the emmulsion film set up didn't look too bad. They clearly set it up to insulate the camera's mirror slap and shutter vibration, and reduce the amplification of that by the tube. I'm not sure one could improve upon that with that microscope , aside from putting the camera on an aligned tripod. Trying to do photomicrography with DSLR's on microscopes of that category are pushing the envelope a little.

[JustAQuickQuestion]

All of your replies have been so insightful and helpful, thank you all so much. I will put into practice the things that have been mentioned so far while using the equipment I have and look to address some of the limitations of my equipment in the not too distant future as my skills increase. Hopefully I will be able to produce some still interesting images at slightly more modest magnifications in the meantime and perhaps share them with you not too long from now.

Thanks again.

[apochronaut]

It should all work out. If the 1/2 kg. of your camera proves to be a problem, there are other, lighter inexpensive options, which can still use the same adapter, sometimes with a small modification.