[Taxacom] [EXT] More on camera/microscope

Sun May 23 11:15:49 CDT 2021

Thanks Buz, and other off list warning about the limitations of the
microscope-camera. It helps give me more confidence to stay with a
microscope. Understand that aobut more MP the better, but to factor in cost
I need to look at what I can get away with. I may end up getting a
trinocular microscope, but without the camera. First see if my hand held
camera (16 MP) over the eyepiece will work ok first.

Cheers, John Grehan

On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 11:35 AM Buz Wilson via Taxacom <
taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:

> The device mentioned will be fine if a quick, low magnification image
> for the web is desired, such as a live insect on a plant. It will be
> terrible if higher magnifications are wanted because the depth of field
> will be so shallow that most of the image will be out of focus and with
> the restriction that both the specimen and the camera must be absolutely
> still. One can take multiple images for focus stacking using Helicon
> Focus, Zerene Stacker or other software. Doing so means that the
> specimen and the camera cannot move at all so the setup has to be locked
> down somehow, thus making it no longer a hand held device.
>
> Megapixels matter and the more you have the better because it allows you
> to crop and refine the image for publication. For example, if you use
> your pixel editor (e.g., GIMP or commercial software) to sharpen the
> image, the results are much better in higher pixel count images.
>
> If the accurate shape of specimen images is required (e.g., for
> morphometric measurements) then one could ask whether the images are
> flat field. This is something I've struggled with on the old M5 scopes,
> which take great images but have aberration both in shape and in
> chromatic. Newer microscopes, Leica in my case, are flat field and their
> more expensive fluorite lenses are apochromatic (little chromatic
> aberration). The description doesn't mention flat field or lens type.
>
> If you already have a microscope but don't have the adapter, look on
> Ebay for a side mount adapter for your microscope and an attachment for
> whatever digital camera you already have. This won't be as cheap as the
> device mentioned so this depends on the aims of the project; this device
> doesn't look like anything that will produce professionally useful
> images. If the quick, low magnification image is the aim, most people
> already have one in their pocket: modern smart phones can take high
> pixel count images and can focus up to a few inches in good light. For
> professional results, however, having a fixed system is actually quicker
> to use since the specimen can be placed under the scope, even  live
> ones*, and a series of images can be taken that are easily sent to a pc
> for editing and arrangement.
>
> I personally don't like it being locked into the the commercial
> Apple/Win software ecosystem but I'm probably in the minority here. I
> worry that the device will only work with their software, which is
> likely to be buggy and hard to use. I, however, don't know anything
> about Q-focus.
>
> cheers
>
> Buz
>
> *many arthropods are reversibly anesthetized with clove oil - I study
> aquatic isopod crustaceans and it works nicely and the specimen recovers
> when I refresh the water. One of the isopod images (/Caecidotea/) on my
> website was taken of a live specimen.
>
> --
> George D.F. (Buz) Wilson, Ph.D.
> Saugatuck Natural History Laboratory, LLC
> website: https://www.snhlab.com/
> publications: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/George-Wilson-12
> email: gdfw at SNHLab.com
>
> On 5/23/21 10:15 AM, Mary Barkworth via Taxacom wrote:
> > John (or anyone else), if you purchase one, please share your comments
> either via Taxacom or, if you prefer, with anyone who asks. Consider this
> an ask!
> >
> > Mary
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> On Behalf Of John
> Grehan via Taxacom
> > Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2021 8:06 AM
> > To: taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> > Subject: [EXT] [Taxacom] More on camera/microscope
> >
> > Since my last posting on this I had some helpful feedback which led me
> to an option without a traditional microscope at all. Instead it's a
> microscope/camera all in one. See:
> >
> >
> https://www.amscope.com/cameras/digital-microscopes/q-scope-80200-p-8mp-200x-handheld-usb-microscope-with-polarizer.html
> >
> > Other than needing an electronic device to see the view (no problem with
> > that) it would seem to have the necessary capability  with 10x - 50 x
> (more than my current microscope) and a 200 x.
> >
> > Looking again on the web I found the following regarding camera
> megapixels:
> > "A general rule is that a print requires 300 pixels per inch (one
> megapixel equals 1 million pixels). So an 8 x 10 print would need 2,400
> pixels x
> > 3,000 pixels for a total area of 7.2 million pixels, or 7.2 megapixel
> camera"
> >
> > At present his particular camera is going for $189 which is within my
> budget and I could return it if it does not work out.
> >
> > In my case I am usually generating images that are not full page so I am
> guessing that 5-8 MP cameras would easily provide for my needs, although
> whether a 1.3 MP camera would be sufficient for smaller (relative to page
> > size) to meet my needs is still up in the air.
> >
> > The idea of dispensing with a microscope altogether is also a bit of a
> leap for me, but if a camera/microscope does the job then it would work for
> me.
> >
> > John Grehan
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> >
> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu The Taxacom email archive back to 1992
> can be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 34 years,
> 1987-2021.
> > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of USU. If this appears to
> be a USU employee, beware of impersonators. Do not click links, reply,
> download images, or open attachments unless you verify the sender’s
> identity and know the content is safe.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> >
> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 34 years,
> 1987-2021.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 34 years, 1987-2021.
>