Jump to content
UltravioletPhotography

Nikon bodies good for UV/insect-vision macro z-stacking?


Daniel Geiger

Recommended Posts

Daniel Geiger

Just took the plunge and ordered a Coastal Optics 105 UV, which has a Nikon F-mount only. I mainly shoot Canon, and use a 5DII full spectrum for my UV - insect vision - IR imaging. To avoid all the adapter wrangling, I am thinking of getting a dedicated Nikon body, and wonder which one may be suitable, as not all sensors are created equally. I mainly do macro-z-stacking in 1:1 to 5:1 range (ordered a Nikon PB-6), so FF sensor may be advantageous (I think). No need for any fancy functions, as long as I can connect it to a Cognysis rail system, have live view, and sync a PCB Whitelite 1600. I shoot flowers with Baader U and the Bug U3/5 filters off ebay for insect vision shots (250-550 nm).

The goal is a FF body with good UV sensitivity after conversion to full spectrum at lowest cost. I may consider a second hand model, or getting a demo model from one of the conversion companies. I am in the USA.

 

Thanks for pointers and suggestions.

Link to comment
The Nikon D600/610 range comes to mind. They have 24 MPix sensors and deliver excellent image quality for UV as well (I have a modified D600).
Link to comment
Daniel Geiger
Thanks for that. Saw it as one option. another current one is the 750, about the same price, have not compared them yet. Good to know that you are happy with the 600/610.
Link to comment

In order the best full frame Nikon sensors are D850 (superb), D810(superb), and the excellent group which are D800/800E, D610/600 and D750. Some of these bodies are not convertible because they have an internal Infrared shutter monitor which will contaminate photos in a converted camera in which the internal UV/IR blocking filter has been removed.

[Note: I have owned/used D850, D810, D750, D610 and D600. And I have given a D800 a test run.]

 

I need to go look up a list of non-convertible bodies and get back here with it. Off the top of my head I know the D750 is not convertible because of that IR shutter monitor.

 

We have members here who have converted the D800 and the D800E. And of course Birna and I have both used a full spec D600. I am currently using a full spec D610 and like it very much. Interestingly, the D610 has one of those shutter monitors but it does not contaminate.

 

There is little difference between the top Nikon DSLRs in terms of image quality other than what might be gained by more pixels or slightly higher dynamic range or a little less high ISO noise. (One exception: The D850 colour is the most amazing colour I've ever seen!!) So I think any good used body you can find amongst the DSLRs listed above will perform well with the CO60 for UV/IR work.

 

One thing about Nikons -- if you are accustomed to using an in-camera white balance preset for UV, please understand that the Nikons cannot do that successfully. However, a UV white balance preset can be made which is better for UV while shooting than using Daylight or Auto. (Somewhere here there is a small tutorial about that.) And you can properly set a UV white balance (for broadband filtration) in a good converter.

Link to comment

This is the list I have been able to put together from various sites.

Unfortunately I cannot guarantee that all cameras with contaminating IR shutter monitors are listed.

  • Nikon D700, D3, D3S, D3X, D4, D4S, Df and D750
  • Sony a7-II, a7R-II, a7S-II and a7-III, a7R-III and a9
  • Panasonic GH3, GH4, GH5 and GX7, GX8 and G85, GX85 and GX9, GM1

Link to comment
Daniel Geiger

Thanks for the info. D850 is a bit much for my purposes, and I will run into diffraction limitations with those small pixels. I have a Canon 5DsR (50 MP) and above 4:1 @ f/2.8 I only get empty magnification in visible light, no further image detail. The Coastal Optics 105 is f/4.5, so diffraction limitation sets in earlier. In pure UV I may gain a bit due to shorter wavelength, but for insect vision I go up to 500-550 nm so ball park visible. Color: as this is all false color various processed and altered, I'm not too concerned about that.

 

- 600/610 is one option, 800 at about the same price and with 36 MP sensor a second.

- Thanks for the pointer re IR shutter monitor, so 750 is off the table.

 

Re white balance, you refer to

http://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php/topic/1457-sticky-white-balance-in-uvir-photography/

Read it, but don't understand what the problem is. I guess I just have to jump in and see for myself. So far I take image of white plastic with filter in place, tell 5D2 that this is the white target, and it takes it. I guess the Nikons will refuse the calibration image, and I have to set color temp to lowest possible. But that is meaningless in RAW anyway.

 

Currently use DxO Optics pro for RAW conversion and to eliminate color artifacts with premium color noise reduction, otherwise I get color streaks and swirls after stacking. I hope it can do the proper color temp adjustments as part of the batch processing to tif to feed that into Zerene. Usually, I have black background, and set it to R=B=G so neutral gray, rest is linear. Takes a long time to convert 50-200 frames; looking forward to an updated MacPro in 2019.

Link to comment

Read it, but don't understand what the problem is.

 

With a dark UV-pass filter on a lens, a full spectrum converted Nikon cannot measure white balance for an in-camera preset.

 

And even though WB may be "meaningless" in a raw file, it is still very very useful to have a meaningful WB setting while shooting a reflected UV photograph because it is very helpful in getting the best exposure. Using an Auto WB or Daylight WB for UV in a Nikon causes the red channels to greatly overload which makes you think you might have overexposed when actually you have not. And if you underexpose in a UV photo you generate lots of noise (true, of course, for any camera). Nikons have a lot of "headroom" in which to pull back one or two overloaded channels, but the wrong WB can obscure what is going on while you are in the field or studio. So amongst other settings for a full spec Nikon when shooting UV, I recommend obtaining a near Uni-WB and using a Neutral Picture Control with the center 0 Saturation and 0 Contrast. We figured out all this through long experience with many converted Nikons over the years. So passing along this knowledge might make someone else's Nikon life easier. :)

Link to comment
Daniel Geiger

"obtaining a near Uni-WB and using a Neutral Picture Control with the center 0 Saturation and 0 Contrast"

= near UV-WB? So manual color temperature setting to highest available setting in camera (10,000K) ? Or how do you get that in practice? Then further adjustment in RAW converter?

 

Hmm, seems to get quite convoluted, so wonder whether it will actually be easier to go with lens adapter to Canon body, being able to do reasonably close WB in camera, get decent preview on LCD, and meaningful histogram. Automatic aperture is not anything critical for me, will likely shoot all open most of the time.

 

Thanks for pointing out those issues with Nikon bodies in UV.

Link to comment

(((I'm not explaining this well at all!!)))

 

It is not convoluted. Really, it is not. It is just a simple WB setting to make and selecting one menu item. That's all. Just two small settings which make it easier to judge the exposure settings in a UV photo. Just as on your Canon, it is easy to make these two settings. When/if the time comes, I'll show you the menu item and give you the link to the WB setting instructions.

Link to comment

Daniel, Here are few things.

1) full spectrum converted camera.

2) for UV, you want a lens that transmits strong and deep UV. Nothing fancy, but you will need to research that, here...ask...

3) filters.

4) white balance, depending (but especially with Nikons it seems), you should probably shoot in raw, and white balance on your computer with software (ask). You will get the best white balance that way,

and UV and IR are all about white balance.

 

Hope that helps.

Just start with getting camera converted, you will figure it out from there.

Link to comment
......uh, if you look in Daniel's first post you'll see that he has purchased a Coastal Optics 105 and already has a full spec 5DII along with a BaaderU and BugU3/5 filters. This topic is about which Nikon to buy for the F-mount lens.
Link to comment
Daniel. Why the aversion to an adapter for the CO lens on the Canon body? I use a Rayfact 105mm on my Eos 5DSR multispectral and monochrome bodies with no issues at all.
Link to comment
Daniel Geiger

JMC: I try to keep the number of connections and inherent play to a minimum, that reduces issues with vibration and image blur. That was the idea. I am using solid tripod, settling time on Cogisys, mirror-lockup, and mostly do flash exposure.

I have used other lenses with adapters on my canon bodies, one on my F-Distagon 16 mm IR converted, and also M-39/42 adapters. The russian bellows I currently have is a POS, so that made me a bit paranoid about play. Was good to check whether I get an image, but not good enough for ease of work. The Nikon PB-6 gets very good reviews, so looks better.

Link to comment

JMC: I try to keep the number of connections and inherent play to a minimum, that reduces issues with vibration and image blur. That was the idea. I am using solid tripod, settling time on Cogisys, mirror-lockup, and mostly do flash exposure.

I have used other lenses with adapters on my canon bodies, one on my F-Distagon 16 mm IR converted, and also M-39/42 adapters. The russian bellows I currently have is a POS, so that made me a bit paranoid about play. Was good to check whether I get an image, but not good enough for ease of work. The Nikon PB-6 gets very good reviews, so looks better.

Ok Daniel. Seems a shame to get new camera because of that, to me anyway. Some of the adapters which aren't "$20 eBay" specials, are pretty good though. One thing you will find, the Nikon's will be less noisy than the Canons at high ISO.

Link to comment

I have some experience with high magnification photo stacking where vibrations can be critical.

 

There should not be a problem with vibrations as long as you are using flash exposure.

Then the weak point is how well coupled the optics and the motive are.

At least that is true for big magnifications where vibrations are even more fatal.

The focus stacking I did ten years ago with microscope lenses resulted in some pictures.

The ones below are reduced to ca 1/3 to fit the forum image size rules.

 

I stabilised the camera + extension tubes + lens + photo object platform well by coupling them firmly together.

I think that can be done if needed with a lens adapter too.

 

I apologise for posting non UV-IR images, but hope they still are relevant for this thread about stacking.

 

The fly, overview and compound eye, was found already dead and the strand of hair with root came from my hairbrush.

 

Fly mounted with melt glue

post-150-0-59457900-1528829011.jpg

 

Part of the compound eye of the fly

post-150-0-10580000-1528829332.jpg

 

Strand of hair with root

post-150-0-18405400-1528829050.jpg

 

All stacked with Zerene Stacker

Link to comment

It may be good to try a simple Nikon to canon adapter while you work out which alternative camera to use. Then after a while see if you still need that camera.

I have 2 nikon to canon adapters. The first was an expensive fotodiox pro adapter with aperture sliders and the second is a cheap Chinese one off ebay. The reason for the second is the first tolerance was too wide and it would stick in the mount. I needed to grind down some metal to get it to work correctly. The cheap ebay Chinese one is much better.

I should have learned though, every fotodiox adapter I have used has not worked. I have 3 pentacon six adapters all will not focus to infinity. It was cheaper for them to send me one than mail back in forth. That should have told me about their quality.

But other experience maybe different. I would recommend just getting a cheap eBay one.

Link to comment
Daniel Geiger

JMC: Rethinking a Nikon body again. Having multiple camera systems gets annoying. Already have 4x5", Zeiss Axiocam microscope camera, and SLR. A Nikon to Canon adaptor is certainly cheaper than a new body. High ISO performance is of no interest to me. I shoot mainly ISO 100 and got a 680 WS UV studio flash for that particular purpose.

 

Ulf: coupling is difficult with live plants (or at least flowers, I try not to blast the parent plants with UV). Tried to upload some comparison shot, but a 500 pixel wide jpeg was not accepted ?!??? Not sure whether the PB-6 permits rotation of camera body against bellows. That would be nice for framing, but will make stabilizing camera-adapter-bellows more difficult. Will have to play with that.

 

I looked at UV transmission of microscope lenses, but most are cemented and have very poor UV transmission. I have stacked on stereomicroscope (Zeiss Discovery V20) and with on compound (Zeiss Axioskop 2plus with Cognisys stepping motor on fine focus of microscope stage). For higher mag (cell surface sculpture), I use CPD/VP-SEM.

Link to comment

....a 500 pixel wide jpeg was not accepted ?!???

 

That is strange. Can you tell me what error message you got? Thanks.

Link to comment

 

Ulf: coupling is difficult with live plants (or at least flowers, I try not to blast the parent plants with UV). Tried to upload some comparison shot, but a 500 pixel wide jpeg was not accepted ?!??? Not sure whether the PB-6 permits rotation of camera body against bellows. That would be nice for framing, but will make stabilizing camera-adapter-bellows more difficult. Will have to play with that.

 

I looked at UV transmission of microscope lenses, but most are cemented and have very poor UV transmission. I have stacked on stereomicroscope (Zeiss Discovery V20) and with on compound (Zeiss Axioskop 2plus with Cognisys stepping motor on fine focus of microscope stage). For higher mag (cell surface sculpture), I use CPD/VP-SEM.

 

I wrote coupling to the object platform not the object itself. Bellows can be a source of bad mechanical connection too.

Any single point mounting with a mass placed far away is potentially working like a spring mounted pendulum.

I used a heavy X-Y tooling vice to support both the camera and the end of the extension tubes. The vice moved the camera/lens in a similar way as the Cognysys Stack Shot toward the object platform. Both well bolted together.

The full setup was mounted on Sorbothane vibration absorbing feet.

I assume the Stack Shot is good enough, but I have never tried it.

 

Mitutoyo has UV microscope lenses. https://www.edmundoptics.com/microscopy/infinity-corrected-objectives/Mitutoyo-NIR-NUV-and-UV-Infinity-Corrected-Objectives/

Link to comment
Daniel Geiger

Andrea: Error You aren't permitted to upload this kind of file

 

198 kb jpeg from AffinityPhoto in 8bit/channel RBG.

Link to comment
Daniel Geiger

Ulf: thanks for the Mitutoyo link. The ICS lens is then mounted in front of the 105 as a relay lens. At $3-12K a pretty significant investment!

Stackshot is pretty stable and with programmed settling time I can eliminate vibration issues. The chief source of vibration is human movement in room, so I leave the room during acquisition (also due to the UV blasts from the studio flash). For manual rail I use a Hejnar focusing rail. Has a variety of options including micrometer screw systems.

Link to comment
Daniel: It is the jpeg extension. Change it to a jpg extension.
Link to comment

With a well chosen program time and flash exposure I do not think any issues with an adapter could be a problem.

 

If you are looking for micro lenses with less magnification in the range around 5X perhaps the old Canon bellows lens 20mm/3.5 could work.

I have no idea how far into UV it works, if at all. I think I have seen that it might work.

 

When my lens eventually is found, I will measure the transmission, but I have no idea where to search.

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...