Microscope Digital Camera Image Quality Comparisons
-
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 3:54 pm
Microscope Digital Camera Image Quality Comparisons
With the endless number of microscope digital cameras available, it is no wonder that there is confusion when deciding what one is good for our use. I've tried everything within economic reason and have been disappointed in all of the images I have created.
I don't know if it is something I am doing wrong, or the camera. I know its not the microscope because visual image quality is exceptional. Has anyone actually compared one camera to the other ?
Although I am not speaking with any level of expertise, I do know what a good image looks like. I have tried a 20MP large sensor (1") camera and a much smaller sensor, more expensive, camera, and of course the more expensive camera yields the better image. Why does a smaller sensor with less pixels yield a better image than a high megapixel large sensor camera ? So within certain parameters, the sensor size is not the most important factor. Same for the number of pixels. More is not always better, based on the price of the camera. So what camera is better than nother ?
I don't know if it is something I am doing wrong, or the camera. I know its not the microscope because visual image quality is exceptional. Has anyone actually compared one camera to the other ?
Although I am not speaking with any level of expertise, I do know what a good image looks like. I have tried a 20MP large sensor (1") camera and a much smaller sensor, more expensive, camera, and of course the more expensive camera yields the better image. Why does a smaller sensor with less pixels yield a better image than a high megapixel large sensor camera ? So within certain parameters, the sensor size is not the most important factor. Same for the number of pixels. More is not always better, based on the price of the camera. So what camera is better than nother ?
-
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am
Re: Microscope Digital Camera Image Quality Comparisons
This is a pretty big question for a lot of people. I don't think there are universal or easy answers because there are many possible reasons why a digital image does not come out as good as the optical image.
Maybe post some examples with explanations along with your set up. There are some people getting really good pictures. Many of them probably would have some input.
Maybe post some examples with explanations along with your set up. There are some people getting really good pictures. Many of them probably would have some input.
Re: Microscope Digital Camera Image Quality Comparisons
When I was looking for a camera for my microscope, I found the following link to be helpful: https://www.lmscope.com/en/camera_for_m ... on_en.html
I use a Canon EOS Rebel 6T and I really like the quality of photos and videos that I get from this camera. It is also very convenient to use the EOS Utility and Live View to be able to take pictures remotely on my computer.
I use a Canon EOS Rebel 6T and I really like the quality of photos and videos that I get from this camera. It is also very convenient to use the EOS Utility and Live View to be able to take pictures remotely on my computer.
Re: Microscope Digital Camera Image Quality Comparisons
I assume you are not trying to take photos through the eyepiece (which for economy scopes and cameras often gives the best image). Are you using an infinity scope with the manufacturers tube lens? If not, maybe the problem is that your microscope eyepieces are designed to correct for aberrations in the objective. Microscopes differ in this respect so there is no one size fits all solution. Are you using a camera with a built-in relay lens? Such lenses are designed to optimize the match between the sensor size and the field of view, but they cannot be optimal for every objective in terms of aberration correction. More pixels does not necessarily mean a better image since there is higher readout noise. Calculate how many pixels you need to match the resolution of the microscope objective - additional pixels record empty magnification i.e you get a nicer image of the diffraction-limited blur.I know its not the microscope because visual image quality is exceptional.
Re: Microscope Digital Camera Image Quality Comparisons
Hi AntoniScott,
I unfortunately don’t have much advice to give on how to overcome image quality challenges, although in terms of camera comparisons, fellow forum member Rob Berdan did a very good and in-depth camera comparison here: https://www.microbehunter.com/microsco ... 503#p87503. Perhaps you will find some answers there! Keep in mind that there are many aspects to creating a good picture. Techniques like focus stacking make a huge deal in the quality of the final image.
I unfortunately don’t have much advice to give on how to overcome image quality challenges, although in terms of camera comparisons, fellow forum member Rob Berdan did a very good and in-depth camera comparison here: https://www.microbehunter.com/microsco ... 503#p87503. Perhaps you will find some answers there! Keep in mind that there are many aspects to creating a good picture. Techniques like focus stacking make a huge deal in the quality of the final image.
-
- Posts: 2794
- Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm
Re: Microscope Digital Camera Image Quality Comparisons
This was my exact trajectory as well, and I hve not regretted it. However it has helped that my scopes have typically been easy to adapt for aps-c, which is not always the case.tlansing wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:07 pmWhen I was looking for a camera for my microscope, I found the following link to be helpful: https://www.lmscope.com/en/camera_for_m ... on_en.html
I use a Canon EOS Rebel 6T and I really like the quality of photos and videos that I get from this camera. It is also very convenient to use the EOS Utility and Live View to be able to take pictures remotely on my computer.
The t6 can be had for about 200 bucks used. It was trending down pre-pandemic but everyone wanted to get back into photography so prices have been stable for a while.
Re: Microscope Digital Camera Image Quality Comparisons
Oliver (who runs this site) has some videos on using cameras of different types, including one in which he does the math to show that a 5MB sensor is more than enough to capture the available resolution of a microscope (at least in theory). I get reasonable results with an Amscope 5MB AMU503B--this is the USB3 version, better for video transfer than slower USB2. It definitely does a better job than the 1.6MB digital camera it replaced. For larger sensors, a DSLR camera (or mirrorless equivalent) with APS-C sensor is hard to beat--just be sure the camera has EFCS (Electronic First Curtain Shutter) or similar and remote control so that camera shake does not destroy the resolution. Canon EOS cameras of the past 5-10 years provide a bunch of models that offer this (as do other major brands)--I use a Canon EOS 550D. Sadly, my feeling is, when all is said and done, that while it's nice to have a camera on a dedicated camera port, what we are really doing is trying to achieve the same results that can be achieved afocally with a modern cell phone camera attached to an eyepiece with a $20 adapter. It's disgusting how well those little things work.
-
- Posts: 457
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2021 12:10 pm
-
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 3:54 pm
Re: Microscope Digital Camera Image Quality Comparisons
Clearly I am not alone in my image quality issue concerns. To answer one member, yes, I am using an Olympus trinocular head on my microscope and not going through the eyepiece. I am curious why one member stated that Oliver claims that a 5MB sensor is more than enough to capture the available resolution of a microscope (at least in theory).
It seems that back in the days of film (i.e. Kodachrome 64 Tungsten balance) photography through a microscope was much easier and was probably the best way to capture images. All you had to worry about was the prroper exposure. Now that we are in the field of digital, the number of pixels seems to be less important than the size of the pixels, although this is a difficult thing to quantify.
Does anyone know what the best microscope camera is that takes the absolutely best images, regardless of the cost ? I'm curious.
It seems that back in the days of film (i.e. Kodachrome 64 Tungsten balance) photography through a microscope was much easier and was probably the best way to capture images. All you had to worry about was the prroper exposure. Now that we are in the field of digital, the number of pixels seems to be less important than the size of the pixels, although this is a difficult thing to quantify.
Does anyone know what the best microscope camera is that takes the absolutely best images, regardless of the cost ? I'm curious.
Re: Microscope Digital Camera Image Quality Comparisons
The best images are taken not by a camera but by a combination of camera, relay optics and microscope, but above all the microscopist.AntoniScott wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 9:05 pmDoes anyone know what the best microscope camera is that takes the absolutely best images, regardless of the cost ? I'm curious.
Wonderful images have been shown on this forum with more modern and less modern digital cameras, installed on 60-70 years old microscopes as well as modern ones.
Back in the days of film, photomicrography was much less available to amateurs than it is today.
Just my opinion.
Last edited by Hobbyst46 on Mon Oct 18, 2021 9:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 2794
- Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm
Re: Microscope Digital Camera Image Quality Comparisons
There is no single best camera for every application and every microscope. I think quality dslrs and mirrorless cameras tend to take better photos than dedicated microscope cameras in the same price bracket if properly connected to the microscope, but there are limitations as well.
The film days of photomicrography were kind of a nightmare from what I can glean--every shot was expensive and hard to preview, not to mention stacking being infeasible.
The film days of photomicrography were kind of a nightmare from what I can glean--every shot was expensive and hard to preview, not to mention stacking being infeasible.