The title says it all. Just messing around with the 10-17mm fisheye on the K3.

Comments, thoughts etc. welcome as usual.

1.



2.



Steve

Love it (him, her?) !

Steve

Not until the Q-S1 has been given a fair chance to show what it can do !! Might also try the original Q, which has an even smaller sensor.

The letters on the penny do seem to be 0.5mm (top to bottom). A quick on-screen measurement impies that the magnification ratio at the sensor is about 35:1. That won't, of course, change with the Q's as the lenses will be the same. But the crops due to the smaller sensors will give apparent increases in magnification by factors of 3.1 (Q-S1) and 3.8 (Q) relative to the K3. So apparent magnification (is that a real thing??) would (will??) be approx 108 (Q-S1) and 133 (Q).

The big surprise for me is how well the lenses are doing, particularly the tiny 01. Both lenses are being used in a way they were certainly not designed for, and it looks like a rather bizarre pairing, but they do seem to work well together. Whether they will hold their own or throw in the towel with the even more extreme challenge of the Q-S1 and Q remains to be seen.

Before getting the kit out again, though, there's the engineering challenges of modifying the penny support system and reducing the scope for tiny movements of camera and/or penny....

And then when it's all done, I'll get back to the original reason for getting the reversing, coupling. step up/down rings - bits of plants and flowers!

Steve

Sooo...

White paper disc designed, made and fitted to lens. Penny support system upgraded (i.e. no blutack now!) so lights on stalks can be properly angled. Paper and cooking foil snoot made for LED panel, to guide light into gap between penny and paper disc. Card protractor attached to DA300. K3 attached to DA300 attached to reversed Q01. Live view relayed (via HDMI output) to tablet as it's easier to check focus (for my eyes and varifocals, anyway). 29 very closely spaced shots taken (each one 1.3sec @ ISO800) and stacked. And the result is....




Not yet entirely satisfactory. Some tweaking of the penny support system is needed so lights can be better positioned to avoid the remaining blown highlights. But getting better .

Attaching the Q-S1 rather than K3 must wait for another evening!

Steve

I don't recall the leaflet advising against dealing with adverse symptoms by the internal application of alcohol. Might be worth trying - purely for medicinal purposes, of course .

Steve

Butterfly Conservation, Dorset branch, has reported small tortoiseshells out and about after hibernation. Yours is in good condition compared with the one in the e-mailed photo I received yesterday.

Steve

I do see what you mean. It's the "fixed somehow" that concerns me. The thought of mucking up a really nice little lens would give me sleepless nights...

I had tried making a 'Polo mint' diffusing ring from polystyrene packing to fit between penny and lens, the hole being the diameter of the front (rear?) element of the lens. The intention was to blast as much light into the outside edge and hope. Unfortunately, not enough light got into the edge to produce a decent level of illumination in the centre. Still, it was fun trying

Perhaps the next step is to build on your idea of a reflective ring between lens and coin by defacing the currency (shock, horror :shock. Drill some holes in the penny, shine light from back of penny through the holes, light reflects off white ring, illuminates letters on face of penny. Something for a rainy day...??

Steve

Here we go with the latest attempt...

A 40.5mm step-up ring has arrived, which means it's now possible to reverse the Q-01 prime (8.5mm FL) on the front of the DA300mm. First thing was to persuade the lens to keep it's aperture open by going against all instincts and habits and removing lens from camera with the camera on. Unexpectedly scary! The working distance was even smaller than I expected (a couple of mm), which made getting light onto the face of the penny very difficult. Edge lighting only at the moment, unless I (or you) have a bright idea that's cheap and practical.

And so to the pictures. First, the sharp end so you can see the practical problems. Second, a stack with K3 attached to the 300mm. Third, a stack with Q-S1 attached to the 300mm. Lots of sparkles, not a lot of sharpness. It wouldn't surprise me if diffraction is as much a limitation here as the resolution of the Q-01. Perhaps a bit more can be squeezed out if the lighting can be improved.

1. The sharp end



2. K3



3. Q-S1



Steve

Excellent. I like the 3-D effect from selective focus on the top surface of the letters.

What's the working distance between microscope lens and penny?

Steve

3.52am ???