4 ms·
What amazes and delights this non scientist, is the relatively small magnifications required to examine life in such radically revealing ways. So many of the i
by Cullinet 6y ago
What amazes and delights this non scientist, is the relatively small magnifications required to examine life in such radically revealing ways.
So many of the images that are captivating me have been taken at between 50 and 100 times magnification.
This makes me think about how close human perception is to the ability to gain access to a vastly expanded understanding of our world, and yet we seem to have been made to live in a different scale of existence, one that maybe makes us the ideal scale for shaping the world around us with physics, but I am prompted by these images to wonder how much more sympathetic with our environment we might have been, had we ability to see even a little way into the micro scale.
As a former photographer and in advertising, but as a child you wouldn't have bet against me pursuing a career in the sciences and particularly biology and botany, I must particularly rue the relatively poor availability of photographic tools for micro photography. Macro and micro lenses almost disappeared from catalogues about the time when autofocus was introduced. Minolta sold the only 1-3 times magnification autofocus lens and I've never seen one. Only last month, Sony started selling the adapter that can enable Sony Alpha cameras to attach and correctly use old A mount lenses.
It's not quickly easy to find information about photomicography, but in case it's missed the Small World website links to this very good resource:
https://www.microscopyu.com/ https://www.microscopyu.com/
- shock 6y ago> So many of the images that are captivating me have been taken at between 50 and 100 times magnification. Without knowing which images you are referring to it's hard for me to say, but on many of the images I looked at that was only the objective lens magnification, so not the total magnification which includes the eyepiece magnification, typically 10x.
- dekhn 6y agoIf you're truly interested in this, don't both with micro and macro lenses. Instead, buy a scope (https://www.amazon.com/AmScope-B490B-Magnification-Illumination-High-Resolution/dp/B004UI5QT8/ref=sr_1_15 https://www.amazon.com/AmScope-B490B-Magnification-Illuminat...) and a DSLR adapter (https://www.amazon.com/AmScope-CA-CAN-SLR-Camera-Adapter-Microscopes/dp/B005OZ5NXU https://www.amazon.com/AmScope-CA-CAN-SLR-Camera-Adapter-Mic...). I've had many hours of enjoyment collecting moss and finding tardigrades, rotifers, and so many other experiments. Using a DSLR adapter and watching the results externally makes things much more comfortable (although you lose the stereo effect).
- seesaw 6y agoI couldn’t see tardigrades, but I have had a lot of fun with this [1] under $30 USB microscope. If you don’t want to invest a ton, then a cheap USB microscope is a good start. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Jiusion-Magnification-Endoscope-Microscope-Compatible/dp/B06WD843ZM/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=microscope+usb&qid=1602949833&sr=8-3 https://www.amazon.com/Jiusion-Magnification-Endoscope-Micro...
- drran 6y ago> So many of the images that are captivating me have been taken at between 50 and 100 times magnification. 300-600x magnification is much better. https://youtu.be/Ygty9HxhFK4?t=309 https://youtu.be/Ygty9HxhFK4?t=309