Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;SuperDave, post: 2402012, member: 1892&quot;]Note the size of the Componon relative to the camera. These duplicating lenses are only a couple inches in diameter and an inch and a half long or so. You can fit a lot of them into a small space. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>18&quot;x30&quot; is enough room for everything I need to shoot, including elbow room for the lighting and lens storage.</p><p><br /></p><p>You don&#039;t really get the scale of the image sizes these rigs shoot at until you (try to) look at them on your screen. Only the very highest-resolution monitor currently available - Dell&#039;s 5k at 5120x2880 - can show a 12MP image fullsize. A duplicating lens optimized for 2x will take the smallest Lepton and turn it into a screen-filling monster you have to downsize by two-thirds just to post here. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>So, two or three - at most, I don&#039;t know if a 75mm could be made to image larger medals; Ray would have the math off the top of his head - lenses, plus an objective for when you really want to fall off the cliff ( <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> ), and you&#039;re in business. </p><p><br /></p><p>Contemplate the effect sensor megapixels have on &quot;magnification.&quot; The bigger the sensor, the larger in pixels the final image is (assuming you&#039;re getting 1:1 on the sensor, which is the goal), and the greater the apparent magnification because you&#039;re looking at it on a monitor. The 2592 vertical pixels of my XS becomes 3456 vertical pixels with the exact same optical magnification, and if you go nuts on a 24MP 750D that becomes 4000 vertical pixels. That approaches &quot;who cares if you fill the sensor, it&#039;ll still be <b>huge</b>&quot; territory. </p><p><br /></p><p>So, you can increase the system&#039;s ability greatly by acquiring a newer camera with higher megapixel count; that&#039;s the first way to increase the budget. Such sensors are less forgiving of optical and lighting imperfections, though, and have an effect on the aperture at which diffraction begins taking away sharpness (as does magnification, but that&#039;s all for a later lesson <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> ). So you need more exacting technique and optics, possibly including focus stacking, therefore more learning. This Componon is up to a big-megapixel camera; I don&#039;t think the El Omegar is. </p><p><br /></p><p>Past a certain investment level, it becomes worthwhile to just consider a bespoke 100mm-ish macro lens enabling you to autofocus (none of the 4 Canon 100mm&#039;s I owned ever failed me with autofocus, even through a slab, and boy does that make the process easier) and dispense with the bellows completely, maybe adding an extension for a little more magnification. The whole point of all of this is to keep the investment level fairly low.</p><p><br /></p><p>You could always have Ray build a rig for you, which means it&#039;ll be finely-tuned for your needs and working perfectly right out of the box, with no legwork regarding component acquisition. If I was in the mood to increase the budget somewhat, that&#039;s the way I&#039;d go.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in