Photocameras

Community and Forum → Insects photoshooting → Photocameras

Pages: 1 ...26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34... 42

Likes: 1

05.01.2018 19:18, ИНО

Garbage was made personally for Pan Stpovgo. And for photographers, they made different Jupiter 37A Tairs and many other things, foreign analogues of which, of course, can be used, but in some cases you will have to sell a kidney to buy it. But there is one "but" all those lenses were intended for a full frame, and not for a two-drop.

As for projectors, the method of their application dictates the need for high sharpness and minimal distortion along the edge of the field, foreign projectors also take pictures better than the vast majority of mass bourgeois photographic lenses of those years. In the USSR, everything was about the same with lenses as everywhere else. And by "everywhere" is meant Germany and Japan, other countries of the world in this industry rested. Well, maybe the Czechs did something else worthwhile. The Poles are already outright slag. It's even surprising: why have I never heard anything about American lenses? Have they even been to the US itself?

05.01.2018 20:17, Hierophis

I'll tell you one clever idea right now, but don't be offended
When shooting with a high magnification (for example, 5:1) the path of rays in the system corresponds to that in the microscope (and in the place where the intermediate image is obtained in the microscope, there is a matrix). Therefore, the best result should be given by a micro lens - it is specially designed to work in such conditions. What do you think?

Well, in principle, this is exactly what I'm doing here - I'm designing a toset for such a micro-project. And something like it is already working out - here is today's result

Yuri, I did such an experiment with Olympus SP510UZ with my own, it turned out that a sufficient resolution for its object is approx. 3 megapixels, and its matrix has 7 MP!So I then always shot in this resolution-about 3-4 MP, and the details were saved, and the place )
But you have a very striking result. I didn't do it that way, just when you increase the megapixel, no new details appeared, and that's it.

Pictures:
picture: P1300899.jpg

P1300899.jpg — (207.34к)

05.01.2018 20:30, Hierophis

Oh how) Almost like on MPE

Under water, in theory, you can take pictures through rubber product No. 2, although this is an exclusively expert opinion based on Internet rumors) Probably this will only happen with real soap dishes with a small shnobel or without zoom at all.
Or you can make a semi-box like a small aquarium, which is put on the object and part of the camera, since the main problem is the surface film of water-air, it should work. By lowering this box, you can take pictures of what is shallow under water through its glass.
In general, we need to ask Alex how his Olympus shot underwater, and what shots came out, but they didn't show us the main thing - it was the shots from the underwater shooting with the Olympus TG 610.

Pictures:
picture: 2P1300899.jpg

2P1300899.jpg — (196.01к)

06.01.2018 12:31, Бомка

For the sake of a scientific experiment, I bought a used Nikon 1 J1 carcass yesterday for 4 thousand re
and today I paired it with a Canon MP-E lens.
The Nikon-1 - Canon EF adapter, of course, is not on sale...
I had to glue the Nikon-1 bayonet cap to the back of the MP-E lens.
The MP-E's diaphragm is constantly open "to a full hole",
so I cut a hole with a 10 mm diameter with a file in a homemade adapter.
Like this:
picture: __1IMG_8672.jpg

---
And this is what the MP-E+Nikon 1J1 "bundle" looks like (the lens is larger than the camera):
picture: __2IMG_8676.jpg

---
And so it turns out the already familiar oca-
MP-E+Nikon 1J1, 10 mpx, sharpness at 0, full frame (reduced):
picture: __4DSC3198.jpg

And 100% crop from it:
picture: __5DSC3198.jpg

Because of the self-made 10 mm aperture in the adapter
, a "vignette"is clearly visible at the edges of the frame (when approaching from 3 to 5 times).
It is necessary to bore the diaphragm to 15-20 mm, but I don't know exactly how to calculate the diameter yet.

Likes: 2

06.01.2018 14:13, ИНО

H. t. d. Nikon 1 with the aptima matrix is a rare r... They say that noise reduction is particularly tricky in it and should be enabled on any ISO, except 100, so as not to frighten people.

And on the MP-E question: there, when switching the scale, the lenses are rearranged or just stupidly removed from the matrix, as if ordinary rings were placed?

P.S. So, it is also necessary to turn on noise cancellation on ISO 100. Thank you so much for this test. After all, I had the idea to buy this particular camera. And I saw from the pictures from the network that there was a complete seam with noise, but all the owners in one voice said that it just seems that the matrix, although small,but it makes no more noise than a micra, etc., etc. That's the power of persuasion of the crowd, and I almost fell for it. The only thing that can be recommended: add a lot of light. But in bright light, both ISO 100 and the soap dish will not make much noise.

This post was edited INO-06.01.2018 14: 19

Likes: 1

06.01.2018 18:23, Hierophis

Yes, it is worth admitting that the matrix for Nikon 1, at least for the younger/first models, is noisy

In principle, I don't care about noise, but it's still a shame ) But the detail is clearly more, and in general, why not shoot at a magnification of 3X ? Maybe there MPE will show itself with might and main) Because 5x is still extreme, I did not get such increases, everything is blurry on them at all.

Pribluda tests, close to severe conditions

In principle, will go, I was very surprised that even with the slanting sun there are not too many glare and nothing blurs.

Pictures:
picture: P1310029.jpg

P1310029.jpg — (144.1к)

picture: P1310146.jpg

P1310146.jpg — (103.38к)

picture: P1310152.jpg

P1310152.jpg — (112.17к)

picture: P1310118.jpg

P1310118.jpg — (89.68к)

picture: P1310048.jpg

P1310048.jpg — (155.07к)

picture: P1310041.jpg

P1310041.jpg — (116.17к)

picture: P1310215.jpg

P1310215.jpg — (136.58к)

Likes: 1

06.01.2018 22:08, Hierophis

It is necessary to look at the scheme.
Here it is - http://lens-club.ru/lenses/item/c_169.html

So does it still have manual focus, or not? They write differently everywhere.

Judging by the MTF graph, it is better not to use it when the aperture is open. As for the aperture - ideally, it should be located in the place where the optical center of the object is located, then even the strongest clamping of the diaphragm does not cause vignetting, and the edge rays are cut off clearly by the degree of clamping of the diaphragm. A very good indicator of the correct operation of the diaphragm is the absence of vignetting, if there is one - the diaphragm is placed in the wrong place and in fact does not work, and moreover - it cuts off part of the central rays and lets them pass, respectively. part of the regional ones.
The manufacturer places the diaphragm it is clear that it is always "there", and judging by where it is located in the MPE, it is not possible to set it up with an external diaphragm in front at all, in the back-it can work a little bit but poorly.
Electronic control of the aperture in such an object is of course another joke, and of course the aperture can only be used on Kenon cameras, so that the user buys not only this pribluda for macro, but also the camera too)))

07.01.2018 4:00, Юрий352

I look, my "working bundle" of Kodak Z1012 IS+Helios44-2 looks quite average within the "overall quality" range

Returning to underwater macro photography.

This idea requires some thought, but for now I have one option, but at the moment it has not been tested (as an "underwater vehicle") due to the direct use of the device as a regular DVR.

And so, there is a Carline sx 520 DVR, which includes a sealed box (I don't know how "underwater" it is yet, perhaps without modification - only from dirt).
user posted image

The main "BUT", in the device itself, the problem is not only in the wide-angle lens, but most importantly in the low resolution of the matrix (I think there is no real more than 640X480), plus wild JPG compression(although for video and direct use it is quite enough).
All configurable photo resolution 1,3-3-5 The Mp is most likely an interpolation.

The pictures were taken "in a hurry", the camera in the box + ENO's favorite lens .
user posted image

The full frame is reduced to an acceptable one, the circle frame is made by the tube of the "nozzle lens" directed forward (like a hood)

Other fragments with a slight exposure correction.
user posted image

This post was edited by Yuriy352-07.01.2018 04: 12

Likes: 2

Likes: 3

07.01.2018 19:25, ИНО

Pofotkal today a rare animal: a combination of I-90U and a single-lens lens from the filmoscope. Separately, I often put them on, but together it turns out to be a rather cumbersome, inconvenient to use and difficult to assemble and disassemble the design, so I used it in the field before only once or twice. And in vain, because for particularly small insects, the quality of images using this nozzle on the A540 still remains without alternative.

For comparison, first photos taken with a well-known magnifying glass:

And now the combo nozzle:

[attachmentid()=296785]

Moreover, the contrast in the first case in the camera is set to 0, the second-to -1...-2, because at 0 it turned out to be very redundant.

Of the disadvantages of this nozzle, in addition to those indicated above, it should be called a low aperture and a focusing distance of about 1.5 cm. Moreover, the front frame there turns out to be a type of lens hood, so that the object has to be almost shoved inside it. But in cool weather, when insects are not very shy, it is not very difficult, and the edges of the frame are convenient to rest on the substrate, thereby completely killing the wiggle even for 1/15 seconds.

What is especially interesting: with a combo nozzle, the scale is slightly larger than with a magnifying glass, despite the fact that the GRIP is also larger.

P.S. The beetle is about 3 mm long.

This post was edited INO-07.01.2018 19: 29