DSLR microphotography

I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope.

To cut down on vibration I would like to have a mirror lock.
(I will be using x20 and x40 objectives.)

Also a remote shutter release would be an advantage.

I have read about iso settinga, and would also think of using a high
value setting - say iso 1600. I understand what noise is, but can find
little information comparing different cameras in this respect; ie which
cameras are more noisy than others.

Any suggestions as to suitable models to look at gratefully received.

Robert

In article , John A. Stovall
writes
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 22:39:23 GMT, Volvox
wrote:

I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope.

To cut down on vibration I would like to have a mirror lock.
(I will be using x20 and x40 objectives.)

Also a remote shutter release would be an advantage.

I have read about iso settinga, and would also think of using a high
value setting - say iso 1600. I understand what noise is, but can find
little information comparing different cameras in this respect; ie which
cameras are more noisy than others.

Any suggestions as to suitable models to look at gratefully received.

Take a look at the Canon 20A. Yes, A not D.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...l/eos20da.html

Mirror lock up and live preview.

Canon is known for it's low noise at high ISO's.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...0d-part2.shtml

First, it's the 20Da.

Second, it costs over twice as much as the 20D.

Third, it needs to be fitted with an IR filter for most uses; it is
optimised for astrophotography and in particular the H alpha IR light.

Fourth, Canon state the live preview is only for use with very dim
images; I have not seen any information confirming that it can be used
in this application (though it would be very good to have it so
confirmed).

To the OP

You will find more information on the web if you search using the
correct term, photomicrography. SLRs of any kind (digital or film) are
not necessarily the best devices to use for PM work. However, they are
perfectly practicable.

The Canon 10D and 20D are satisfactory; they have mirror lock-up (which,
as you suggest, is essential) and they will meter quite happily when
used without a lens fitted. They use a CMOS sensor which has a very good
low noise performance. I have used my 10D with extreme ND filtration and
30 second exposures to test this, and the images are perfectly usable.
If you are on a tight budget and don't particularly need to use the DSLR
for non-PM work, then the 10D has more resolution than you will be able
to get from your microscope, and a second hand one will be half the
price of a 20D. The 20D will wildly oversample the image and waste
resolution.

The main drawback I find with a DSLR on a microscope is focussing. The
focus screens on most AF cameras are very poor for manual focussing;
even using a Canon right-angle finder with 2.5x magnification it is not
easy to get really spot-on focussing. In many ways a good compact is
easier to use and will give equally good results in most circumstances.
I use a Nikon Coolpix 995; the later 4500 may be better (4MP). This
family is very popular in the PM community, and you will find plenty of
information on the web about using them on a microscope. The video
output is very useful for focussing.

Tell us what kind of subjects you will be using it for, and what you
want to do with the output and we can maybe give more specific help.

Also, you will find far more expertise in sci.techniques.microscopy and
the Yahoo Microscopes group.

David
--
David Littlewood

I use a Canon Digital Rebel for that purpose. The main drawbacks a
No mirror lockup
A very poor viewing screen for microscope work.
Otherwise it does a good job.
I shoot at ISO 100 and see no sign of noise with exposure times up to about
2 second.
Canon makes a electronic remote release that works well but I now use some
software that came free with the camera for remote control. Its a better
method as I can change the exposure from the keyboard and other functions
too. And I get a bigger LCD display, that is full screen on the laptop if I
wish. Also I can download the pictures to the laptop as I shoot, and as I
run a wireless network, the pictures can be sent to my main computer for
processing and printing as desired, a good thing as I shoot RAW. If I was
able to do it over again I would get the 20D but I would like very much a
DSLR with interchangeable view screens so I could have one that worked
better than the one in the Digital Rebel.


--
John Passaneau
State College Pa.

"Volvox" wrote in message
k...
I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope.

To cut down on vibration I would like to have a mirror lock.
(I will be using x20 and x40 objectives.)

Also a remote shutter release would be an advantage.

I have read about iso settinga, and would also think of using a high value
setting - say iso 1600. I understand what noise is, but can find little
information comparing different cameras in this respect; ie which cameras
are more noisy than others.

Any suggestions as to suitable models to look at gratefully received.

Robert

Volvox wrote:
I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope.

To cut down on vibration I would like to have a mirror lock.
(I will be using x20 and x40 objectives.)

The Olympus E-500 has mirror lockup, which is perplexingly called
"anti-shake" in the camera settings.

Also a remote shutter release would be an advantage.

There's a wireless remote sold separately.

John A. Stovall wrote:
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 22:39:23 GMT, Volvox
wrote:


I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope.

To cut down on vibration I would like to have a mirror lock.
(I will be using x20 and x40 objectives.)

Also a remote shutter release would be an advantage.

I have read about iso settinga, and would also think of using a high
value setting - say iso 1600. I understand what noise is, but can find
little information comparing different cameras in this respect; ie which
cameras are more noisy than others.

Any suggestions as to suitable models to look at gratefully received.


Take a look at the Canon 20A. Yes, A not D.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...l/eos20da.html


That's 20Da. It's a 20D, hence the D in the Da, with astrophotography
features. Christ, it shows the D in the headline of the article you
posted the URL to.

Gregh

Many thanks for useful replies - and so rapid in coming.
I should perhaps have explained that some of the objects I wish to
photograph move fast especially at x400 - vibration has been a problem
with my 35mm Dynax 5 hence my questions. Often iso 400 is not
sufficiently sensitive at x400 to record moving objects at above x100.

Yes, indeed, if it doesn't move, iso 200! That is certainly the best way
and produced good results. Fuji film particularly good for the purpose,
(but now i'm drifting off topic, so apologies to moderator!)

Volvox wrote:
I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope.

To cut down on vibration I would like to have a mirror lock.
(I will be using x20 and x40 objectives.)

Also a remote shutter release would be an advantage.

I have read about iso settinga, and would also think of using a high
value setting - say iso 1600. I understand what noise is, but can find
little information comparing different cameras in this respect; ie which
cameras are more noisy than others.

Any suggestions as to suitable models to look at gratefully received.

Robert

On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 17:31:17 -0800, Kyle Jones
wrote:

Volvox wrote:
I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope.

To cut down on vibration I would like to have a mirror lock.
(I will be using x20 and x40 objectives.)

The Olympus E-500 has mirror lockup, which is perplexingly called
"anti-shake" in the camera settings.

Also a remote shutter release would be an advantage.

There's a wireless remote sold separately.

It's resolution and sensor size would make it the ideal microscopy
camera.
-Rich

Check out this page. The company makes adapters for various cameras
plus optics to replace conventional microscope eyepieces.

http://scopetronix.com/

On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 19:09:01 GMT, Volvox
wrote:

Many thanks for useful replies - and so rapid in coming.
I should perhaps have explained that some of the objects I wish to
photograph move fast especially at x400 - vibration has been a problem
with my 35mm Dynax 5 hence my questions. Often iso 400 is not
sufficiently sensitive at x400 to record moving objects at above x100.

Yes, indeed, if it doesn't move, iso 200! That is certainly the best way
and produced good results. Fuji film particularly good for the purpose,
(but now i'm drifting off topic, so apologies to moderator!)

Volvox wrote:
I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope.

To cut down on vibration I would like to have a mirror lock.
(I will be using x20 and x40 objectives.)

Also a remote shutter release would be an advantage.

I have read about iso settinga, and would also think of using a high
value setting - say iso 1600. I understand what noise is, but can find
little information comparing different cameras in this respect; ie which
cameras are more noisy than others.

Any suggestions as to suitable models to look at gratefully received.

Robert

"Volvox" wrote in message
k...
I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope.

To cut down on vibration I would like to have a mirror lock.
(I will be using x20 and x40 objectives.)

Also a remote shutter release would be an advantage.

I have read about iso settinga, and would also think of using a high value
setting - say iso 1600. I understand what noise is, but can find little
information comparing different cameras in this respect; ie which cameras
are more noisy than others.

Any suggestions as to suitable models to look at gratefully received.

Robert

Robert,

Just how much are you prepared to spend?

Cheers.

Pete

"Volvox" wrote in message
k...
I'm looking around for a DSLR for use with a microscope.

To cut down on vibration I would like to have a mirror lock.
(I will be using x20 and x40 objectives.)

Also a remote shutter release would be an advantage.

I have read about iso settinga, and would also think of using a high value
setting - say iso 1600. I understand what noise is, but can find little
information comparing different cameras in this respect; ie which cameras
are more noisy than others.

Any suggestions as to suitable models to look at gratefully received.

Robert