As I wait for my new-to-me oldie (hard to argue with free) I'm trying to sort out what I need in order to attach my camera to it.
For starters this is the same model of what I'm getting:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/252960722676?h ... t&LH_BIN=1
An eventual upgrade to this would also be a 160mm tube microscope. I just like old stuff.
The camera I'm using is a Fujifilm X-E2 with their X-mount standard. I think it also has threads for direct M42 mounting...
So the obvious choice would be their 2x microscope to camera adapter for $129:
https://www.telescopeadapters.com/for-m ... f8QAvD_BwE
Does it makes sense to spend $129 for the adapter? Meaning; am I getting $129 worth of value or is there a more frugal alternative that would do the trick? I mean there is a sub $20 adapter which I imagine is just a fancy tube with no optics:
https://www.amazon.com/Microscope-Adapt ... B081GJQ98N
How much image quality would that sacrifice?
Attaching camera to microscope
Re: Attaching camera to microscope
I'm not as familiar with the AO finite offerings as I am their infinity, but there's a chance that the eyepieces might not be 23.2mm diameter, so I presonally would hold off on any adapters until it arrives and you can check it or get confirmation from someone who knows.
I don't do direct projection, so take this for what it's worth....The X-E2 appears to be an APS-C sensor, so direct projection should result in some cropping, but it may be acceptable.
I don't do direct projection, so take this for what it's worth....The X-E2 appears to be an APS-C sensor, so direct projection should result in some cropping, but it may be acceptable.
Re: Attaching camera to microscope
don1357, when it arrives, see if there is a way to unscrew the silver eyepiece tube / the top of the microscope's main tube ...
With a microscope with a shorter main-tube, as yours looks to be, it is possible to set your camera's sensor in roughly the same place as the image would be picked up by the eyepiece.
If the whole top of the main tube can be removed (hard to tell from the photos) a lens-less adapter can be put into the barrel of the main tube, with a bush of some kind, to hold it central.
With a longer-tubed microscope it is not easily possible to get the sensor at the designed distance away from the objective. (but should be easier with a mirrorless design camera).
The photos of the microscope give a hint of aluminium construction ...seized threads in aluminium can be really tricky, even impossible ... feeding the threads with a thin lubricant over a long period of time (days) might help.
If you dont already have a shed-load of adapters, extension tubes et al. then the lenseless adapter seems a bit of a bargain..for $10 or so, you can put an M42:RMS converter disc on the front of the extension tube bit and stick your lowest magnification objective on that .. to get an even lower magnification.. more macro than micro, which is sometimes what you are really after
With a microscope with a shorter main-tube, as yours looks to be, it is possible to set your camera's sensor in roughly the same place as the image would be picked up by the eyepiece.
If the whole top of the main tube can be removed (hard to tell from the photos) a lens-less adapter can be put into the barrel of the main tube, with a bush of some kind, to hold it central.
With a longer-tubed microscope it is not easily possible to get the sensor at the designed distance away from the objective. (but should be easier with a mirrorless design camera).
The photos of the microscope give a hint of aluminium construction ...seized threads in aluminium can be really tricky, even impossible ... feeding the threads with a thin lubricant over a long period of time (days) might help.
If you dont already have a shed-load of adapters, extension tubes et al. then the lenseless adapter seems a bit of a bargain..for $10 or so, you can put an M42:RMS converter disc on the front of the extension tube bit and stick your lowest magnification objective on that .. to get an even lower magnification.. more macro than micro, which is sometimes what you are really after
-
- Posts: 2816
- Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm
Re: Attaching camera to microscope
On these older systems the eyepiece is as much a part of the system as the objective. You'd likely get better results attaching a lens to your camera to pick up the image coming out of the eyepiece.
Re: Attaching camera to microscope
Hmmm, having caught the front of my camera lens on the eyepeice monkeying about like that in the past I can strongly recommend that you do not even try it handheld.
There is less momentum with a mirrorless ..so maybe not as serious a donk, perhaps.
There is less momentum with a mirrorless ..so maybe not as serious a donk, perhaps.
Re: Attaching camera to microscope
I dont want to be full of tales of woe.. but
Be aware that you might get some lenses that are not parfocal with each other and then you can get very lost and rack the tube the wrong way and crash ..broken slide.
Even if they were all perfectly parfocal ..when you put an adapter on, they will cease to be.
So consider taking the oil immersion lens off, at least when taking photos..and if you are going to use it, treat that as a 'special event'.
Somehow the slide that you love the most ...will be the one that gets broken.
Be aware that you might get some lenses that are not parfocal with each other and then you can get very lost and rack the tube the wrong way and crash ..broken slide.
Even if they were all perfectly parfocal ..when you put an adapter on, they will cease to be.
So consider taking the oil immersion lens off, at least when taking photos..and if you are going to use it, treat that as a 'special event'.
Somehow the slide that you love the most ...will be the one that gets broken.