Yes, you are spot on when you highlight the inadequate solutions that are on the market. I guess the market share is too small for the manufacturer to address but a perfect opportunity for a small, agile forward thinking person . Thanks for all the great information
I use something similar made from different adapter tubes (30 mm - M42 adapter, M42 macro extension tube and M42 - EOS M adapter. Indeed image quality is leagues better than using an adapter with low quality optics. I do sometimes have issues with reflections and vignetting especially using bright field but for 4K video my camera uses only center part of the sensor so then it's not an issue.
Have you tried flocking the inside of the tubes? Alan Walls has a simple method using cardstock and velvet that he uses for macro photography with microscope objectives.
Hi, I think it's not 'static', but instead a earthing-fault in the power-supply of your microscope. Every time you touch its body, a capacitive loop is completed between this leakage and your collar-microphone, that brings about the noise. A battery-operated mic or a better earthing on the microscope would mitigate this issue, IMO.
If I may add another simple solution for those who don't have a 3D printer .... , instead of a solid piece of plastic, use one large, or two medium size helicoid adapters mated together with an M42 male to male, ... This will allow you to correct for parfocality.
Hi. I don't have a 3D printer , I like your idea . when you say large or medium size helicoid adapters , are you talking about how much does it extend ??? can you give us the adapter description ???. Thanks.
Does anything like this exist for the Sony a6 such as the a6100, a6400, or even the a5100 (which has same sensor and E mount)? I've been looking everywhere and I can't seem to find anything close. I want something solid like this that doesn't move around.
So, I'm somewhat at a loss. I received the adapter that supposedly doesn't work very well and it works fine. I think the only improvement I could make to how it connects to my AmScope M150C is if I could somehow buy a shorter barrel that goes from the prism to the eyepiece? That might zoom the image that is projected onto the sensor? I played around with just shoving the lensless and adaptorless camera against the hole the barrel scres into(pretty much right where the prism is, and I got some decent results. So If I could just find a way to have a very short adapter that screwed into the microscope in place of the barrel, and also had a mount for my camera, that would maybe be best. But all in all, I'd say I'm happy with my generic adapter.
And I wish I knew this before I tried the 'regular' solution (C-mount to MFT adapter and 0,5x C-mount optics between trinotube and camera). This setup produced absolutely terrible images. I suspected the optics first, as I know the GH5 takes fine pictures and I know that the microscope itself (NexiusZoom by Euromex) also works fine. Bought a Euromex VC.3031 yesterday and tried it with the 0,5x optics as I was curious, to find out that it's the combinatie that produces the horrible result. The image quality is still not completely what I expect (the focus seems to be off-center and there's quite some chromatic abberation still) but the image quality was already sooo much better. I know actually got very usable results instead of the shitty, blurry blue-hazed fuzz with the GH5. Than just tried goofing around by removing the trinotube in whole and put my GH5 without a lens over it and was surprised about the results, though I definitely need to upgrade the lighting that way.
Hi would it be possible to adapt this for Olympus microscopes to avoid the need for that rare and expensive 1.67x projection eyepiece for most cameras?
Amazing video demonstration. I want to do exactly the same with mine. I have a good Canon and my trinocular head tube is 37 mm diameter, do you think something like that will work?
Great work Oliver, just a thought when I was using newton style telescopes I lined the inside of the main tube with a self adhesive black mat fine knapp felt to reduce internal reflections. I noticed that the inside of the 3d printed tube looked quite shiny? Do you think this could cause reflection problems and reduce sharpness of the dslr image?
Yes, reflections can be a problem. Because the tube is quite wide, I did not see major problems here. Narrow tubes can cause quite a bit of reflection (otherwise add baffles to block light).
For a si.ilar project i did at first sand the inner parts lightly, then primed and at the end sprayed it with matt black rubber spray paint. It worked fantastic. But i do put emphasis on sanding and priminig at first to enable ABS plastic to hold on tight to the paint :)
So, you're taking away the eye-piece that's usually 10x in order to get more light, but since it's a DSLR, you make up for the lack of optical magnification with the fact that the digital image will be so large?
Wonderfuly done. Respect. I am at the same path, but i am an ophthalmologist and trying to do the same thing with slitlamp. You have one good advantage that the microscope does provide a bealt on beam splitter. I am too trying to avoid an optic in the midway of the adapter. Any tips and tricks are welcome😅
Hello, very nice video! I have a question: are you able with your adaptor to avoid black borders in the picture? I mean, are you able to obtain a rectangular field of view?
Yes, the images are just like I showed them at the end of the video. The tube of the microscope is luckily wide enough to fill the full frame of the camera. The only thing that is a pity is that the microscope does not seem to be available anymore.
I Will try this for my Nikon DSLR, Any database for how far the image is projected? I'm using sw350t and the manual said the tube came pre adjusted to be correct but I have adjusted it and it may no longer be correct
I have a top-notch zeiss scope with the old time camera attachment. I am thinking of adding a dsl usb cammera so I can see the slide on the computer. Finding an adaptor has been impossiable. But if i use the original adaptor with a new usb camera, it could work out.
this video has me sooo excited!!! i def need to find someone with a 3D printer, lol - but did I miss something? how do I determine the correct length of the tube? i imagine it will be different depending on the scope and the camera that I use
Your suspicion is correct. This was his response lower in the comments to someone else: "Put a paper over the tube to catch the image (which should be in focus) and estimate the distance. This is where the sensor should be. Estimation work. If a bit off, it's ok, need to re-focus then. Having a tube that can be extended and adjusted (eg by turning or telescope-mechanism) would be better."
Quick question: I have an old Canon Powershot is S5 that I'm hoping to get some use out of - do you think it might be possible to use it in a similar configuration for my SM745TP Simul-focal Microscope?
Very interesting video and I agree with Oliver who asked why third party manufacturers didn't come up with this first. My experience with using my 24 megapixel Nikon D5500 with the appropriate adapter was an unsatisfactory image. I discovered a few years ago that I could get an image without using intermideate optics but it, too, was somewhat unsatifactory. I had more success using a third party microscope camera of 6 megapixels which gave me a better image than my 24 MP. I cant eplain why.
I thought that the objective and eyepiece lenses work together to produce an image. A 40 times objective with a 10 times eyepiece producing a 400 time magnification. Without the 10 times eyepiece you only get 40 times image. Correct?
Being that you are not using the ocular magnification, does the use of the dslr adapter on the photo tube then only produce the magnification of the objective? Also, is there a way to do this if you don't have a trinocular - using the eyepieces?
Depends on your microscope. I had a very cheap one lying around, it's sold under many names by many brands, I have the Bresser one, "Biolux NV" they call it. You can disconnect the whole upper part with the mirror and eyepiece tube and shimmy together an adapter for your dslr by drilling a hole through the middle of a spare body lid and attaching a short tube to it that fits into your microscope. Works flawlessly if you carefully center everything.
If this produces "pretty good" image quality, what then would give the best possible image quality (vignetting, chromatic aberrations, overall/corner sharpness, color reproduction)? What about dedicated cameras based on something like Sony IMX485 sensor? Also, full frame vs. crop sensor?
I guess this is as goood as you can get. Straight from the objective onto the sensor. Good point on the sensor size as that matters a lot for the adapter design.
Thank you for sharing this. I wanted to buy a lens adapter for my sony a7 but I didnt found any good adaper. I hope it works to connect the camera directly to the optical path. But my concerns are that the image circle is to smal for the full frame sensor and that the full resolution of the objective cant be captured due to the fact that the sensor has a pixel size of 5.97µm.
If you use e.g. a 40x objective and a 10x eyepiece I will see a 400x image. Will my camera connected to the trinocular head with this solution also see 400x?? I mean: how would my camera know if I'm using the 10x or the 25x eyepiece (^_^)
Eventually... I will make my own microscope with my 3D printer. I will buy infinity optic and put a mirrorless camera (APS-C sensor) on top of it. No need to pay for prism/mirror and no eyepiece either. Seriously, it's just a tube and few fittings (sorta!). The slightly harder part would be the z axis up-down (micro + macro) and the x-y slide position adjustment. And probably the condenser, and led and led control, but this is it, isn't? Sure, if you count all the hours, it's a 3300$ project. 300$ in parts, the rest is my personal time. I was about making my own mirror for astronomy... but I think microscopy is more fun and cheaper/easier to upgrade!
Hi there.wonderful videos! I do microsoldeing and wonder if you have any advice for cameras for long working distance. Looking to capture output from HDMI in 4k resolution 60 frames per second. Camera and c mount only no eye pieces. I have a led ring light. Willing to pay for a consultation. Thank you.
8:05 Well... Microscope companie want to make money. If they sell empty tube (no optic) that you can quickly/easy adapt the camera that you already own (no camera to sell either), they are not making enough money. And they don't have anything bad to say about your simple system.
Without a camera adapter lens, you should be getting vignetting. The camera sensor's diagonal, for a Canon DSLR, is about 27 - 28 mm, and the projected image has a diameter of about 18 mm, for microscopes using RMS objectives. So the only way this could work, is if the tube lens (specific to infinity optics) works, together with your device, as a camera adapter lens. Have you tried your device on DIN160 microscopes too?
This was a very helpful video! Ive been looking for information on this topic for a while. This comment also addresses the exact concern I’ve had for the pros and cons of a camera adapter lens. If I’m going through the trouble of putting on a dslr camera with a big sensor I want to utilize its size. I would imagine if a camera adapter lens does a decent job at not introducing a lot of aberration but it allows the projection of the image to cover a greater area of the dslr sensor then I think it might be a worth while trade off compared to not having an adapter lens and the image only covering a smaller portion of the camera sensor. Assuming I’m understanding all of that correctly. I might be wrong? 🤷
@@Midnightmicroscope The DSLR adapter that I have is magnifying by a factor of 2x. I also have two microscope camera adaptors, the fixed one magnifies 0.5x, and the adjustable one magnifies 0.75x - 1x. Those are appropriate for microscope cameras with (much) smaller sensors than a DSLR. The problem I have with the DSLR adaptor, is that the projected image diameter is too large, 18 mm x 2 = 36 mm. And 28 mm / 36 mm is about 0.78. So this results in a loss of FOV area of about 0.44, or 44%. I would like to see an adjustable DSLR adapter, with a magnification between 1.2x and 1.6x. At 1.6x it would just avoid vignetting, because 18 x 1.6 = 28.8. And if I would like to accept vignetting, in order to achieve a larger FOV, I could use the 1.2x, and then crop the resulting image, to get rid of vignetting. Of course, the above applies to microscopes with RMS objectives, and 18 mm diameter of the projected image. There are M26 objectives, with a diameter of the projected image of 22 mm, or even 24 mm, and the calculations would need to be adjusted.
@@mutzunake4761 oh I guess i didn’t think about the opposite problem of having too large of a projection for the DSLR sensor but that makes sense. I agree an ajustable magnification would be nice. I struggle to find any adapters let alone the correct one.(but im also still trying to learn exactly what i need ). But your breakdown is very helpful and makes the problem a lot more tangible to deal with. I would like to some day add a full frame camera so maybe a 2X for a 36mm would be just about right but currently a 27-28 mm sensor is what I have. You make a good point Im not using RMS im using M25 objectives so I will need to calculate the projected image diameter for the objectives I have.
How did you actually determine the overall length of your 'printed' adapter? I know you had to add a small adjustment ring to get "perfect image focus" - so that additional ring was presumably by trial and error - but did you initially measure the distance from the image location in the phototube to the sensor plane in your camera or did you start with some predetermined distance first? I note you have a Canon 600D which has a sensor with a Crop Factor of X1.6. I have the Canon 90D [which has a similar size sensor and same Crop Factor of X1.6 but 32MP]. My Meiji Stereo Zoom microscope has standard phototube so would greatly appreciate any comments you may wish to provide regarding what length your printed "lens-less" adapter would be required for my microscope. Cheers,
Put a paper over the tube to catch the image (which should be in focus) and estimated the distance. This is where the sensor should be. Estimation work. If a bit off, it's ok, need to re-focus then. Having a tube that can be extended and adjusted (eg by turning or telescope-mechanism) would be better.
Hi your DSLR phototube adapter is brilliant! I've tried to find where to download your DSLR1&2.stl files but keep going round in circles and can't get to where you can download them - I must be dumb???? Can you please advise how to do this from your sight or from the video as there is no actual link for doing this in either as far as I can see. Keep up the really great mic videos. Cheers, Ian
So does this only work on that specific microscope? I enjoy the videos but I feel that point could have been covered in the almost 18 minute video. Thanks.
The principle (projection of the image on the sensor) works in all microscopes, but the advantage on this one is that it is easy to connect the adapter to the microscope. So for other microscopes one would have to check if it is possible to remove the phototube and to replace it with a DIY adapter. In short, it was easy to connect a 3D printed adapter to this microscope and the tube was wide enough to fill the full sensor with the image.
Hey.. um. Random. But what about going the opposite way? Hear me out: 41mp microscope cameras are available for like $200. Is it possible to make a form factor lens that turns it to a standard for? idk what I'm talking about so don't roast me too hard
Tre utila solvo, Oliver. Antaux kelkaj jaroj mi kun kelkaj amikoj ekspirimentis tiamaniere kaj tiam mi povis acxeti senoptikan adaptilon per Ibej (ebay) kaj ni trovis ke ambaux manierojn funkcias. Cxar la senoptika solvo fakte estis improvizon, ni pensis ke eble estis ia malaventagxo kiun ni ne rimarkis flanke de nia monko de sperto. Do mi gxojas vidi ke vi eltrivis la saman
I have been watching your videos now for some time and enjoy them greatly. You impart a great deal of useful and often fun information I have a BS in Biology, and have been getting into some microscopy for fun and something interesting and fun to do I am writing you as I have been give a very nice but older microscope. It needs cleaning and some minor repair. I have been looking for on arts on eBay (objectives that needed replacing, and dine other minor parts). I don't dare disassemble the instrument as when I watched you tube videos on repair and maintained, I found that there were some very tiny parts with high tolerances, such as ball bearings, fears used in adjusting focus, specialized tools and,specialized materials. I have called several microscope repair places and they say it is an older obsolete model that Nikon no longer makes parts for. (I have been purchasing what I know from sellers on eBay). It is clear that the lubricant s have become sticky as I had to clean some thumb screws that were for adjustments. Do you have a suggestion if where or how I can get some kind of assistance? It was at one time a very expensive microscope and was told it would cost something in the $4500.00 range. One problem I had was obtaining a new objective, because of it's focal length. It isn't an infinity focus, or the standard 160mm focus, but rather a 210. I now have the objective but am concerned about the cleaning if the old lubricants and the application of new. Any ideas??
Yes, you are spot on when you highlight the inadequate solutions that are on the market. I guess the market share is too small for the manufacturer to address but a perfect opportunity for a small, agile forward thinking person . Thanks for all the great information
Absolutely grate tutorial ! Very clear explanation of theoretical part.
Thank you so much for sharing the 3D files.
Love the photo in the background Oliver
They make direct mounts to telescopes and some of them are very similar in size. I wonder if any would also directly fit into a microscope.
Nice idea!!!!! Thanks Oliver!!!
I use something similar made from different adapter tubes (30 mm - M42 adapter, M42 macro extension tube and M42 - EOS M adapter. Indeed image quality is leagues better than using an adapter with low quality optics. I do sometimes have issues with reflections and vignetting especially using bright field but for 4K video my camera uses only center part of the sensor so then it's not an issue.
for larger sensor cameras vignetting might be an issue. Actually I think micro 4/3 would be the perfect sensor size for this application
Have you tried flocking the inside of the tubes? Alan Walls has a simple method using cardstock and velvet that he uses for macro photography with microscope objectives.
Wow, such an important video,
thank you very much! I wanted to find this info on Internet, and voila!
Congratulations Oliver. Are you now taking orders? lol. The tube length dimensions you quote will also be microscope model specific, will they not?
Y could make an adjustable one and make us all happy with the 3d model 😉
Hi, I think it's not 'static', but instead a earthing-fault in the power-supply of your microscope. Every time you touch its body, a capacitive loop is completed between this leakage and your collar-microphone, that brings about the noise. A battery-operated mic or a better earthing on the microscope would mitigate this issue, IMO.
If I may add another simple solution for those who don't have a 3D printer ....
, instead of a solid piece of plastic, use one large, or two medium size helicoid adapters mated together with an M42 male to male, ... This will allow you to correct for parfocality.
Hi.
I don't have a 3D printer , I like your idea .
when you say large or medium size helicoid adapters , are you talking about how much does it extend ???
can you give us the adapter description ???.
Thanks.
Could this solution also be reached with extension rings, which are available for Nikon, Canon and Fuji?
Does anything like this exist for the Sony a6 such as the a6100, a6400, or even the a5100 (which has same sensor and E mount)? I've been looking everywhere and I can't seem to find anything close. I want something solid like this that doesn't move around.
So, I'm somewhat at a loss. I received the adapter that supposedly doesn't work very well and it works fine. I think the only improvement I could make to how it connects to my AmScope M150C is if I could somehow buy a shorter barrel that goes from the prism to the eyepiece? That might zoom the image that is projected onto the sensor?
I played around with just shoving the lensless and adaptorless camera against the hole the barrel scres into(pretty much right where the prism is, and I got some decent results. So If I could just find a way to have a very short adapter that screwed into the microscope in place of the barrel, and also had a mount for my camera, that would maybe be best.
But all in all, I'd say I'm happy with my generic adapter.
love you as always. Very helpful information. Thank you....
Great video as usual it’s what I’ve been doing on my scopes fitting them for use with my micro 4/3rds cameras
And I wish I knew this before I tried the 'regular' solution (C-mount to MFT adapter and 0,5x C-mount optics between trinotube and camera). This setup produced absolutely terrible images. I suspected the optics first, as I know the GH5 takes fine pictures and I know that the microscope itself (NexiusZoom by Euromex) also works fine.
Bought a Euromex VC.3031 yesterday and tried it with the 0,5x optics as I was curious, to find out that it's the combinatie that produces the horrible result. The image quality is still not completely what I expect (the focus seems to be off-center and there's quite some chromatic abberation still) but the image quality was already sooo much better. I know actually got very usable results instead of the shitty, blurry blue-hazed fuzz with the GH5.
Than just tried goofing around by removing the trinotube in whole and put my GH5 without a lens over it and was surprised about the results, though I definitely need to upgrade the lighting that way.
Hi would it be possible to adapt this for Olympus microscopes to avoid the need for that rare and expensive 1.67x projection eyepiece for most cameras?
Amazing video demonstration. I want to do exactly the same with mine. I have a good Canon and my trinocular head tube is 37 mm diameter, do you think something like that will work?
Excellent! well done.
Great work Oliver, just a thought when I was using newton style telescopes I lined the inside of the main tube with a self adhesive black mat fine knapp felt to reduce internal reflections. I noticed that the inside of the 3d printed tube looked quite shiny? Do you think this could cause reflection problems and reduce sharpness of the dslr image?
Yes, reflections can be a problem. Because the tube is quite wide, I did not see major problems here. Narrow tubes can cause quite a bit of reflection (otherwise add baffles to block light).
For a si.ilar project i did at first sand the inner parts lightly, then primed and at the end sprayed it with matt black rubber spray paint. It worked fantastic. But i do put emphasis on sanding and priminig at first to enable ABS plastic to hold on tight to the paint :)
Great video
good job!
So, you're taking away the eye-piece that's usually 10x in order to get more light, but since it's a DSLR, you make up for the lack of optical magnification with the fact that the digital image will be so large?
Wonderfuly done. Respect.
I am at the same path, but i am an ophthalmologist and trying to do the same thing with slitlamp.
You have one good advantage that the microscope does provide a bealt on beam splitter. I am too trying to avoid an optic in the midway of the adapter.
Any tips and tricks are welcome😅
Hello, very nice video! I have a question: are you able with your adaptor to avoid black borders in the picture? I mean, are you able to obtain a rectangular field of view?
Yes, the images are just like I showed them at the end of the video. The tube of the microscope is luckily wide enough to fill the full frame of the camera. The only thing that is a pity is that the microscope does not seem to be available anymore.
Would this one work for canon RF lenses?
Good work!
I made one piece fusion360 model of it, search ""microscope adapter for dslr" on Prusa 3d models page
I Will try this for my Nikon DSLR,
Any database for how far the image is projected? I'm using sw350t and the manual said the tube came pre adjusted to be correct but I have adjusted it and it may no longer be correct
I have a top-notch zeiss scope with the old time camera attachment. I am thinking of adding a dsl usb cammera so I can see the slide on the computer. Finding an adaptor has been impossiable. But if i use the original adaptor with a new usb camera, it could work out.
Is the Swift 380T also modular so I could connect such an adapter between the microscope and my Fuji XT-3?
this video has me sooo excited!!! i def need to find someone with a 3D printer, lol - but did I miss something? how do I determine the correct length of the tube? i imagine it will be different depending on the scope and the camera that I use
Your suspicion is correct. This was his response lower in the comments to someone else:
"Put a paper over the tube to catch the image (which should be in focus) and estimate the distance. This is where the sensor should be. Estimation work. If a bit off, it's ok, need to re-focus then. Having a tube that can be extended and adjusted (eg by turning or telescope-mechanism) would be better."
Quick question: I have an old Canon Powershot is S5 that I'm hoping to get some use out of - do you think it might be possible to use it in a similar configuration for my SM745TP Simul-focal Microscope?
Very interesting video and I agree with Oliver who asked why third party manufacturers didn't come up with this first. My experience with using my 24 megapixel Nikon D5500 with the appropriate adapter was an unsatisfactory image. I discovered a few years ago that I could get an image without using intermideate optics but it, too, was somewhat unsatifactory. I had more success using a third party microscope camera of 6 megapixels which gave me a better image than my 24 MP. I cant eplain why.
Guess it was mounted out of focus
I thought that the objective and eyepiece lenses work together to produce an image. A 40 times objective with a 10 times eyepiece producing a 400 time magnification. Without the 10 times eyepiece you only get 40 times image. Correct?
Being that you are not using the ocular magnification, does the use of the dslr adapter on the photo tube then only produce the magnification of the objective? Also, is there a way to do this if you don't have a trinocular - using the eyepieces?
Depends on your microscope. I had a very cheap one lying around, it's sold under many names by many brands, I have the Bresser one, "Biolux NV" they call it. You can disconnect the whole upper part with the mirror and eyepiece tube and shimmy together an adapter for your dslr by drilling a hole through the middle of a spare body lid and attaching a short tube to it that fits into your microscope. Works flawlessly if you carefully center everything.
If this produces "pretty good" image quality, what then would give the best possible image quality (vignetting, chromatic aberrations, overall/corner sharpness, color reproduction)? What about dedicated cameras based on something like Sony IMX485 sensor? Also, full frame vs. crop sensor?
I guess this is as goood as you can get. Straight from the objective onto the sensor. Good point on the sensor size as that matters a lot for the adapter design.
Very good I need this
Thank you for sharing this. I wanted to buy a lens adapter for my sony a7 but I didnt found any good adaper. I hope it works to connect the camera directly to the optical path. But my concerns are that the image circle is to smal for the full frame sensor and that the full resolution of the objective cant be captured due to the fact that the sensor has a pixel size of 5.97µm.
If you use e.g. a 40x objective and a 10x eyepiece I will see a 400x image. Will my camera connected to the trinocular head with this solution also see 400x?? I mean: how would my camera know if I'm using the 10x or the 25x eyepiece (^_^)
solche Rohre gibts im Baumarkt und dann muss man halt etwas feilen und mit Heisskleber oder Harz und Fieberglas arbeiten
I ordered one of the ones that don't work as and I think it comes with a T2 adapter for my mount. Maybe I can get away with some cheap PVC pipe.
Do you think the same adapter would work with 380T ???
Eventually... I will make my own microscope with my 3D printer.
I will buy infinity optic and put a mirrorless camera (APS-C sensor) on top of it. No need to pay for prism/mirror and no eyepiece either.
Seriously, it's just a tube and few fittings (sorta!).
The slightly harder part would be the z axis up-down (micro + macro) and the x-y slide position adjustment. And probably the condenser, and led and led control, but this is it, isn't?
Sure, if you count all the hours, it's a 3300$ project. 300$ in parts, the rest is my personal time.
I was about making my own mirror for astronomy... but I think microscopy is more fun and cheaper/easier to upgrade!
Hi there.wonderful videos! I do microsoldeing and wonder if you have any advice for cameras for long working distance. Looking to capture output from HDMI in 4k resolution 60 frames per second. Camera and c mount only no eye pieces. I have a led ring light. Willing to pay for a consultation. Thank you.
Hmm would something like this work with a smartphone camera? Of course I don't want to remove the lens. Not sure if that makes this impossible
i dont understand zou. With an ocular in place the image is sharp in every distance
8:05 Well... Microscope companie want to make money.
If they sell empty tube (no optic) that you can quickly/easy adapt the camera that you already own (no camera to sell either), they are not making enough money.
And they don't have anything bad to say about your simple system.
Do you know an good adapter for Swift SW380T?
Without a camera adapter lens, you should be getting vignetting. The camera sensor's diagonal, for a Canon DSLR, is about 27 - 28 mm, and the projected image has a diameter of about 18 mm, for microscopes using RMS objectives. So the only way this could work, is if the tube lens (specific to infinity optics) works, together with your device, as a camera adapter lens. Have you tried your device on DIN160 microscopes too?
This was a very helpful video! Ive been looking for information on this topic for a while. This comment also addresses the exact concern I’ve had for the pros and cons of a camera adapter lens. If I’m going through the trouble of putting on a dslr camera with a big sensor I want to utilize its size. I would imagine if a camera adapter lens does a decent job at not introducing a lot of aberration but it allows the projection of the image to cover a greater area of the dslr sensor then I think it might be a worth while trade off compared to not having an adapter lens and the image only covering a smaller portion of the camera sensor.
Assuming I’m understanding all of that correctly. I might be wrong? 🤷
@@Midnightmicroscope The DSLR adapter that I have is magnifying by a factor of 2x. I also have two microscope camera adaptors, the fixed one magnifies 0.5x, and the adjustable one magnifies 0.75x - 1x. Those are appropriate for microscope cameras with (much) smaller sensors than a DSLR. The problem I have with the DSLR adaptor, is that the projected image diameter is too large, 18 mm x 2 = 36 mm. And 28 mm / 36 mm is about 0.78. So this results in a loss of FOV area of about 0.44, or 44%. I would like to see an adjustable DSLR adapter, with a magnification between 1.2x and 1.6x. At 1.6x it would just avoid vignetting, because 18 x 1.6 = 28.8. And if I would like to accept vignetting, in order to achieve a larger FOV, I could use the 1.2x, and then crop the resulting image, to get rid of vignetting. Of course, the above applies to microscopes with RMS objectives, and 18 mm diameter of the projected image. There are M26 objectives, with a diameter of the projected image of 22 mm, or even 24 mm, and the calculations would need to be adjusted.
@@mutzunake4761 oh I guess i didn’t think about the opposite problem of having too large of a projection for the DSLR sensor but that makes sense. I agree an ajustable magnification would be nice. I struggle to find any adapters let alone the correct one.(but im also still trying to learn exactly what i need ). But your breakdown is very helpful and makes the problem a lot more tangible to deal with. I would like to some day add a full frame camera so maybe a 2X for a 36mm would be just about right but currently a 27-28 mm sensor is what I have. You make a good point Im not using RMS im using M25 objectives so I will need to calculate the projected image diameter for the objectives I have.
Is it possible for me to buy one of these from you? I don’t have a 3D printer.
Love
How did you actually determine the overall length of your 'printed' adapter? I know you had to add a small adjustment ring to get "perfect image focus" - so that additional ring was presumably by trial and error - but did you initially measure the distance from the image location in the phototube to the sensor plane in your camera or did you start with some predetermined distance first? I note you have a Canon 600D which has a sensor with a Crop Factor of X1.6. I have the Canon 90D [which has a similar size sensor and same Crop Factor of X1.6 but 32MP]. My Meiji Stereo Zoom microscope has standard phototube so would greatly appreciate any comments you may wish to provide regarding what length your printed "lens-less" adapter would be required for my microscope. Cheers,
Put a paper over the tube to catch the image (which should be in focus) and estimated the distance. This is where the sensor should be. Estimation work. If a bit off, it's ok, need to re-focus then. Having a tube that can be extended and adjusted (eg by turning or telescope-mechanism) would be better.
Would this 3D printed tube be considered a 1x photo tube?
Yes, because there are no optics in it, which change the magnification.
The footage you sow with this adapter - do you crop it or it is full screen?
Full. Not cropped.
Hi your DSLR phototube adapter is brilliant! I've tried to find where to download your DSLR1&2.stl files but keep going round in circles and can't get to where you can download them - I must be dumb???? Can you please advise how to do this from your sight or from the video as there is no actual link for doing this in either as far as I can see. Keep up the really great mic videos.
Cheers, Ian
Links are in description. They are saved into your downloads folder when you click on them.
@@MicrobehunterMicroscopy Thanks mate, much appreciated. Cheers
So does this only work on that specific microscope? I enjoy the videos but I feel that point could have been covered in the almost 18 minute video.
Thanks.
The principle (projection of the image on the sensor) works in all microscopes, but the advantage on this one is that it is easy to connect the adapter to the microscope. So for other microscopes one would have to check if it is possible to remove the phototube and to replace it with a DIY adapter. In short, it was easy to connect a 3D printed adapter to this microscope and the tube was wide enough to fill the full sensor with the image.
Hey.. um. Random. But what about going the opposite way?
Hear me out: 41mp microscope cameras are available for like $200. Is it possible to make a form factor lens that turns it to a standard for?
idk what I'm talking about so don't roast me too hard
Tre utila solvo, Oliver. Antaux kelkaj jaroj mi kun kelkaj amikoj ekspirimentis tiamaniere kaj tiam mi povis acxeti senoptikan adaptilon per Ibej (ebay) kaj ni trovis ke ambaux manierojn funkcias. Cxar la senoptika solvo fakte estis improvizon, ni pensis ke eble estis ia malaventagxo kiun ni ne rimarkis flanke de nia monko de sperto. Do mi gxojas vidi ke vi eltrivis la saman
Nice
I don't have a 3D printer. I guess I could just buy a 4x4 at the hardware store or something.
Have you seen the prices of lumber these days? A 3D printer might be cheaper in the long term
Jaaaa mannn
I have been watching your videos now for some time and enjoy them greatly. You impart a great deal of useful and often fun information
I have a BS in Biology, and have been getting into some microscopy for fun and something interesting and fun to do
I am writing you as I have been give a very nice but older microscope. It needs cleaning and some minor repair. I have been looking for on arts on eBay (objectives that needed replacing, and dine other minor parts). I don't dare disassemble the instrument as when I watched you tube videos on repair and maintained, I found that there were some very tiny parts with high tolerances, such as ball bearings, fears used in adjusting focus, specialized tools and,specialized materials.
I have called several microscope repair places and they say it is an older obsolete model that Nikon no longer makes parts for. (I have been purchasing what I know from sellers on eBay). It is clear that the lubricant s have become sticky as I had to clean some thumb screws that were for adjustments. Do you have a suggestion if where or how I can get some kind of assistance? It was at one time a very expensive microscope and was told it would cost something in the $4500.00 range. One problem I had was obtaining a new objective, because of it's focal length. It isn't an infinity focus, or the standard 160mm focus, but rather a 210. I now have the objective but am concerned about the cleaning if the old lubricants and the application of new. Any ideas??
Ask a camera repair shop, the very least they will do is advise on proper cleaning