Surely the problem with vibration when using long lenses is because of the
pendulum effect, which would be pretty minimal with a microscope.
John
On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 20:57:42 +0100, Don Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi William,
The camera will be on a large, very rigid, microscope. But the
magnification might be more like 1500X. The slightest shake can ruin
things. Up to now I've been using a special film camera and other
digital cameras with no vibrating components. The *ist D is a new
departure and has been chosen mainly for economic reasons. The cheapest
dedicated cameras to do what I want (~6 mp) cost around $5000 - $6000.
The microscope itself is on an anti-vibration mount and this helps a
lot. TTL Flash will also be useful for some things.
The film advance mechanism in the Wild MPS camera causes vibrations that
die down in a tenth of a second or so but this does limits the rate at
which pictures can be taken at high magnification. Long exposures are
not practical with living specimens and mine are alive -- often very
much so.
By the way do you still have the Leitz instrument you got from your
father?
D
William Robb wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Andre Langevin"
Subject: RE: Digital finally
Two seconds may not be enough for microscope shots. I've had a private
email exchange with Herb recently where he suggests that a period
longer
than 2 seconds would provide sharper pictures when using very long
focal
lenghts. And if I understand it right, 2000 mm is equivalent to a 40X
magnification.
Were you discussing a tripod mount or a microscope mount. It is much
more
difficult to keep a tripod mounted camera vibration free than a
microcope
mounted one due to the different mounting method, and because
microscopes are inherenty more stable than tripods..
William Robb
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
