Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Misc Forums > Digiscoping/Digital Photomicroscopy

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 27, 2004, 8:49 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 170
Default

In a situation like digiscoping when people might be interested in knowing not only what the EXIF can tell them but also what the

particulars of theshot were; How do you deal with that? I have gotten spoiled with the EXIF recording the data and now it seems

I may want to record the eyepiece zoom and the % of cropping and the estimated distance. Also if you post a photo for other people

they may want themodel of the scope and eyepiece. Are there any digiscoping photo-posting conventions?


Hi Dave,

There really are no conventions, but if you want to record this information in the EXIF file it's not that difficult to do if you have PhotoShop

or one of the other programs which let you annotate. It probably would be nice from the perspective of sharing information if this were

done, but most people don't really take the time to do this for each photo.



Best regards,



Lin
Pooperdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 2004, 10:18 AM   #12
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,139
Default

Hi Dave and Dave,

I replied within your original posts, which unfortunately defeats the automatic notification by email (if you requested it).

I made the mistake of posting the original images using the conventional tools here which placed them

side by side rather one under the other as I would have liked. This made the extremely wide

format whichprompted me to edit each post to make it more readable. Hopefully if I get a few minutes free

I can figure out how to modify to original HTML code and if so I'll write a brief "HOW TO" so other posters won't

have this problem in the future. On the old forum before Steve changed the software images could easily be

posted one under the other, but I've noticed here and in other threads outside the digiscoping forum that

this is an issue. I'll work on it.... Sorry....

Lin


Postcript: Done now - subsequent posts should be legible without modification. I've also posted a "How To" on placing multiple images without using the "insert image" icon which results in side-by-side images and the text scroll problems which result from this.

Lin
Lin Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2004, 10:22 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 170
Default

Lin Evans wrote:

"Swarovski actually makes two 35mm platfom adapters,one is 800mm
and the other 1100mm. Because of the Canon 10D 1.6x reduced field
of view, you get a 60 percent electronic focal length addition which
makes the 800mm adapter function at 1280mm (800x1.6=1280)
equivalency. With my 1DS it functions as 800mm and with my 1D,
1D Mark II and Kodak DCS-760 it's 1040mm (800x1.3=1040). "


Well I got my scope (Zeiss 85) and have taken some shaky hand-helds. I
can certainly see the attraction of using a dSLR for a faster shutter. Some
subjects just won't stand still. How many different ways can an SLR be
attached to a scope?
Pooperdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2004, 12:24 PM   #14
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,139
Default

In this case, essentially, two. If the camera maker provides a camera attachment device it usually consists of a "T" mount and lens combination. The SLR (dSLR) would use a standard "T" ring which is make for the specific camera so that it has the proper mounting configuration to attach to the camera like a lens would on one side and is threaded on the opposite side. The threaded side screws to the "T" mount on the adapter which attaches the camera via the "T" mount to the scope.

The second way would be to use one of the ScopeTronix eyepiece projection adapters which you can see here:

http://www.scopetronix.com/

This uses the existing scope eyepiece rather than replacing the eyepiece with the manufacturer's adapter. How well it may or may not work depends on several factors which are quite variable. Since I haven't tried it, I'm not able to comment on its suitability in your case.

Best regards,

Lin
Lin Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2004, 9:11 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 170
Default

Lin Evans wrote:
Quote:
The threaded side screws to the "T" mount on the adapter which attaches the camera via the "T" mount to the scope.

The second way would be to use one of the ScopeTronix eyepiece projection adapters

I still don't understand what the "T" mount really is. For "prime focus" you just have an emptytube between the scope and the camera, right? Then for "projection" you do use the eyepiece with some other sort of "T" mount tube, right?

I would miss the flexibility of some sort of zoom control, butI guess for you this is just a matter of switching camera bodies.
Pooperdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2004, 9:37 PM   #16
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,139
Default

The "T"adapter is a tube with a "T" mount which places the camera at the proper distance from the access port on the scope. The "T" ring is the ring which connects to an SLR or dSLR with a mount specific to the type mount used for lenses on the camera. The "T" ring then screws to the "T" mount.

Scopes with short native focal lengths like the Swarovaki (460mm), Pentax, Leica, etc., need some glass between themselves and the camera to provide more useable focal length and replace the eyepiece. These optica have a "T" mount on the end which connects to the camera via the "T" ring.

Longer focal length scopes like the Celestron C5, Meade ETX-90 (1250mm) have a mechanical tube called a "T" adapter whichhas a"T" mount on one end and threads which screw to the scope on the other."T" ring of thecamera screws to the "T" adapter via its "T" mount.

Those are simply the terms used by the camera and scope manufacturers.

Lin
Lin Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2004, 2:34 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 170
Default

So a "T" mount is associated with a particular scope and a "T" ring is associated with a particular camera?
Pooperdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2004, 2:39 PM   #18
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,139
Default

Yes, that's pretty much it. Each brand SLR has a different mount hardware, so manufacturers make "T" rings which fasten to the individual camera mounts. Though the camera side is different, the side which attaches to a "T" mount (or "T" adapter) is identical and standardized.

Best regards,

Lin


Lin Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 7, 2004, 9:22 AM   #19
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

Hi Lin

Consider this an addendum to my posts on this topic. I just took a look at some samples from the Canon Mark lll as compared to the Canon 1Ds.

Since with a crop factor of 1.3, both of these cameras have the same number of pixels on the target area, yet the 1Ds clearly resolves much more detail.

Hmm?

Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 7, 2004, 2:09 PM   #20
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,139
Default

Quote:
Consider this an addendum to my posts on this topic. I just took a look at some samples from the Canon Mark lll as compared to the Canon 1Ds. Since with a crop factor of 1.3, both of these cameras have the same number of pixels on the target area, yet the 1Ds clearly resolves much more detail.

Hi Dave,

I'm a bit confused here. Do you mean the Canon Mark II? (I'm not familiar with a Mark III).

If so, the Mark II has an eight megapixel sensor with a 1.3x reduced field of view. The Canon 1DS (is that the one you mean?) is a full frame sensor with no reduced field of view.

The 1DS will resolve more detail even with equalization of pixel count on the subject because it has a much weaker antialiasing filter. That is, if you adjust the camera to subject distance so that each has the same number of pixels describing a frame, the 1DS with the weaker AA filter will still resolve more detail. If neither had AA filters equal numbers of pixels would result in equal resolution assuming photo detector wells were equivalent in depth and S/N ratios.

Lin
Lin Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:06 AM.