WEB camera and microscope
640x480 in the limit should be enough, but how such devices accurately reproduce these images?
And most importantly - as much as possible to combine every mezhfokusnym distances, depth of field and other optical crap?
Since I myself am no one to hand the camera has not got, I would like to receive the Old firsthand
1. Manufacturers of cameras and scanners as often lie their XXX XXX X points.
2. Did you know that inexpensive WEB - cameras, one and all, capture the infrared part of the spectrum? ? ? There is always a blue filter, designed to cut it. He is very fragile. Do not break.
seen. All this nonsense, to be honest. Our microscopes and with a huge desk with a sea of interchangeable lenses, eyepieces and accessories. How can I compare it?
And tips on models can give?
A look at the image that it produces, where the thread is possible?
The fact is that we need a simple inexpensive microscope for examining aquatic organisms - shoes, small Cyclops, rotifers, and so on. D.
I understand that, Intel not only increases and makes shots, but video sausage?
One thread yuzal is a miracle? What are your impressions?
What do you think, for the above objectives, FTsentrovsky (Intel ) approach?
Sorry for offtopic.
Apparently he intended to do and, as seems to work on the translucence of the sample. But if there is an opportunity to change the lens / eyepiece? After all, surely not. Every
metallographic microscope (what I should) works well only in reflected light, and there is only an external digital camera can do something to help.
And it towards Mustek G350? (I think so spelled)
I, apparently, quite offtopic torment you, but as a "soul mate" (with respect to a microscope) on the horizon, do not watch
interchangeable lenses and eyepieces there really is no
I really buy it. I need an instrument with which I could count the mass of microorganisms in water samples from the reservoir, and to identify the species composition. But breaks - the manufacturer of its positions as a toy for children (!!!)
How-to test it so that not to go to Moscow
All clambered, no there is nothing. And Intel's viewed. Pop ads with pictures only 120 * 120 Real sample saw.
Money is - buy Zeiss, no - LOMO both have to be with a prism to exit the camera, carved pipe to length in order to catch the focus prisobachit her camera and shoot. We personally stands an old Zeiss-ovsky tinyscope with a prism on top of CDD camera (now ancient) SONY XC-711P (any CDD camera goes) on any PCI or AGP card with video input (we deshёvenkaya FlyVideo)
To calculate the cyclops about the best dream of it makes no sense to CDD-Juha. I dream about digital.
CDD read CCD
http: // home. clara. net / microscope / dmc. html
http: // www. kodak. com. ru / country / US / en / digital / scientific / products / mds290 / faq. shtml
http: // home. clara. net / microscope /
http: // www. zdnet. com / products / stories / reviews / 0, 4161, 2338361, 00. html
1) Over $ 120 buy Intel Play QX3 with 200 magnification frame 512h384h24
2) If there is $ 3000, then a SCSI Polaroid or USB- shny Kodak
3) Given that all heaped chamber under the microscope there are the usual system with nozzles, lenses and software settings, then serious, but simple enough project to tear any camera, "brook" nozzle, make it and the existing microscope adapter and work ! Under
simple project I understand this, which does not require constant change shooting modes. Configure it once, and I was just material.
I would like to know someone was able to tie a digital camera (preferably with USB) to a simple optical microscope. What are your impressions from work?
C-Mount - what is eaten?
answer 12 years later, that is. A. Was busy .