Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11
    illegitimum non carborundum Utopian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Rochester, MN
    Posts
    11,544
    Thanked: 3795
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I've seen you produce fantastic edge photos in your threads about honing film. What are you using to produce those images?

  2. #12
    < Banned User >
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,763
    Thanked: 735

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Utopian View Post
    I've seen you produce fantastic edge photos in your threads about honing film. What are you using to produce those images?

    I have a multi-thousand dollar Olympus scope here at my lab. Not really intended for personal use!

  3. #13
    illegitimum non carborundum Utopian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Rochester, MN
    Posts
    11,544
    Thanked: 3795
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seraphim View Post
    I have a multi-thousand dollar Olympus scope here at my lab. Not really intended for personal use!
    Ha! Been there, done that. I routinely do cytogenetic analyses in my lab using 1000X magnification. I've occasionally wondered what that would that would look like for razors, though I'm pretty sure I'm better off with my stereomicroscope that goes from 8X to 60X.

  4. #14
    < Banned User >
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,763
    Thanked: 735

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Utopian View Post
    Ha! Been there, done that. I routinely do cytogenetic analyses in my lab using 1000X magnification. I've occasionally wondered what that would that would look like for razors, though I'm pretty sure I'm better off with my stereomicroscope that goes from 8X to 60X.
    Nah...stereo scopes are certainly nice, but what's going on at 200x is where the action is!

  5. #15
    < Banned User >
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,763
    Thanked: 735

    Default

    Got the USB camera for $35

  6. #16
    illegitimum non carborundum Utopian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Rochester, MN
    Posts
    11,544
    Thanked: 3795
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I tried out a 1.3 megapixel eyepiece camera for my stereomicroscope and I was extremely disappointed. The resolution was just plain too inadequate to be of any use so I'm returning it. I'm assuming that I'd need to get up to the 3 to 5 megapixel range to get an image I'd be happy with. I'll be interested to know how your USB camera works.

  7. #17
    ---
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,230
    Thanked: 278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Utopian View Post
    I tried out a 1.3 megapixel eyepiece camera for my stereomicroscope and I was extremely disappointed. The resolution was just plain too inadequate to be of any use so I'm returning it. I'm assuming that I'd need to get up to the 3 to 5 megapixel range to get an image I'd be happy with. I'll be interested to know how your USB camera works.
    Were the images razor-sharp? (No pun intended.)
    If not, then megapixels will not compensate for shallow depth of field, cheap plastic lenses, poor lighting, camera shake, etc, etc, etc.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •