Microscope Photography

[SRJUK]

Do you have any guidelines on the minimum quality for microscope photography? What sort of quality/megapixels do you expect?

 

[spacecadet]

When you say "you" do you mean Alamy? This is the contributors' forum.

There are no special rules. The minimum is 6MP and images must be of good enough technical quality to pass QC.

[SRJUK]

I was hoping someone from Alamy might be aroudnto answer as I can't find any guidelines.  6Mp for a microscope camera is pretty high, not impossible, just rules out most of the more affordable models. 

 

[spacecadet]

10 minutes ago, SRJUK said:

I was hoping someone from Alamy might be aroudnto answer as I can't find any guidelines.  6Mp for a microscope camera is pretty high, not impossible, just rules out most of the more affordable models. 

 

 

Well, those are the rules.

https://www.alamy.com/contributor/how-to-sell-images/guidelines-for-submitting-images/

"File size of over 17MB (when uncompressed/open)
Your JPEG file is likely to have a compressed size of 3-5MB"

17MB corresponds to a little over 6MP. I usually regard the minimum as 3250x2163 when resizing.

 

As I said this is a contributor forum and Alamy as a company doesn't answer questions here.

 

 

Edited June 10, 2020 by spacecadet

[MizBrown]

There are connectors which will mate a DSLR/SLR camera to a microscope.  Google should come up with information on T-mounts for Canon and Nikon cameras.   If you already have either, the cost seems to be around $15 to $20 for the adapter per a quick search.   For Sony, probably T-mount to Canon or Nikon adapter to camera, but I haven't tried it.

 

[Phil Robinson]

This is a topic I've been wondering about for a while. Does anyone who does this have any recommendations for a suitable microscope - not hugely expensive - that can be attached to a Nikon? 

[Malcolm Park]

Hi Phil

 

I have two microscopes I use for photography. Both are binocular microscopes with a third (trinocular) head which takes either Nikon or Cannon cameras (the camera to microscope fitting is the same as with an astro telescope. The microscopes are:

 

Nikon Labophot ( with 5 rotating lens turret).

Carl Zeiss Universal Pol (fitted for polarised light photography).

 

Both are former research quality instruments, bought second hand about 10 yrs ago. The Zeiss is built like a tank. Photography with them is simple.

[MizBrown]

6 hours ago, Phil Robinson said:

This is a topic I've been wondering about for a while. Does anyone who does this have any recommendations for a suitable microscope - not hugely expensive - that can be attached to a Nikon? 

Years ago, I had an old professional grade microscope that I believe cost me around $150.  The older ones are often quite good optically and have removable eyepieces as well as removable objectives.  I never got around to getting the attachment for this microscope.   You'd probably want to read more on microscope photography.   I think for the most interesting things to photograph, 50X to 150X to somewhat higher.  This microscope only took two objectives, but I could have bought others and switched them out.  A good old microscope that can take the T mount attachment for Nikons would be the best way into this.  I wouldn't buy a microscope that didn't have coarse and fine focus.  I'd suggest looking at how to set up dark-field photography since so many small animals are translucent and show more details cross lit against a darker back ground.  Ideal would be a microscope with a mechanical stage (I've had one on loan in the past) and a proper substage light with an iris diaphragm, but you can use small LED flashes as a makeshift.   Don't bother with oil-immersion lenses for photographing bacteria.   For somewhat larger critters, 25X would be useful, but might be hard to find a 5x objective.   There's a point where you can get magification beyond 1 to 1 with lenses on the camera, but I found some of these painfully difficult to focus.

 

Usual warning about fungus and crud in an older microscope same as with older camera lenses.  Take a close look.   I got this one in Philadelphia at a store that specialized in new and used binoculars and mostly used microscopes.   I got spoiled by the mechanical stage microscope I had on loan when I lived in California.   Doctors may have good old ones that they're no longer using.  Binocular scopes are more common in clinics these days.  This would have probably been a MD student grade scope in the day.   There are a lot of older microscopes around.  The friend that loaned me the binocular scope with the mechanical stage had been given it by the hospital she worked for when she went down to Peru to do medical volunteeer work. 

 

My guess is that the price will vary depending on the condition.  I think I sold this one back to the shop in Philadelphia when I moved to the DC area.   Highly recommend getting a general microscopy book and view some YouTube how-tos. 

 

Most of the more recent microscopes seem to be 500 pounds UK and up based on a quick Google search, but you don't need a binocular scope.  Monoculars will be older and should be cheaper.    Low price on eBay for a brand I don't know anything about is around 160 US.

 

 

[Phil Robinson]

17 hours ago, MizBrown said:

Years ago, I had an old professional grade microscope that I believe cost me around $150.  The older ones are often quite good optically and have removable eyepieces as well as removable objectives.  I never got around to getting the attachment for this microscope.   You'd probably want to read more on microscope photography.   I think for the most interesting things to photograph, 50X to 150X to somewhat higher.  This microscope only took two objectives, but I could have bought others and switched them out......

 

 

 

Many thanks. I wasn't planning to get down to bacteria level but I've had enough of trying to stop a large collection of extension tubes wobbling. I'll do a bit or research.
Thanks again.

[giphotostock]

I'd spend time thinking about what microscopic images are in demand. The market. A microscope, like a camera, is a tool. It matters a lot what you point it to.

GI

[sooth]

you can check the AIM to see what "microscope" and "microscopic" images were searched for previously.

[MizBrown]

Fly faces, fleas, and the smaller garden pests are possibilities with 20x or 25x magnification.  Full life cycles of various small invertebrates would seem possibilities.  Also, very close details of flower parts.   Unicellular organisms, maybe not as much.  Illustrations for gardening and aquarium sites and magazines would be possibilities. 

[giphotostock]

20 hours ago, giphotostock said:

I'd spend time thinking about what microscopic images are in demand. The market. A microscope, like a camera, is a tool. It matters a lot what you point it to.

GI

The big market elephant in the room are textbooks and other science publications. They use a lot of LM (light microscopy) images. But then there are much better channels for distributing science images than Alamy.

GI