What Should I Use for Close Up Photos of Small Electronic Components?

s162216

s162216

Messages
2,105
Name
Samuel
Edit My Images
Yes
Yes, thats the way to go, I used to have the same camera with similar tubes ( probably have them still somewhere, but no idea where!)
You will do better mounting the camera on a really firm tripod, and use a cable release or self timer, and, of course, good diffused light.
Allan
 
What are you trying to photograph? I have used a scanner to photograph ICs and smaller components to good effect.
 
I have started writing a book to help people new to electronics learn about it through the use of increasingly harder circuits to explain the role and function of different components. I will need to photograph pretty much every sort of component. I have tried using my standard and wide angle lenses as well as my pocket digital camera, but non of them can focus on the components.

I know a DSLR would be the best way to do this, but I don't have the money for one. Plus theres that fun I always feel with 35mm, you know, adjusting the light, the shutter speed, the aparature and then just when you focus it and you go to take it, you remember you have forgotten to wind it on.
 
Maybe there is a reversing ring for that 55.
Its an adapter that mounts to the camera on one side, with a male thread the same size as the filter thread on the 55, it allows you to mount the lens backwards.
Tubes would do it but I think you'd lose more light using them..
 
Would reversing it only reverse the ratio? I.e 1:2.8 =2.8:1
Would that not overdo it a bit?
Not quite sure what the ratio of the 55mm is as it only has 2/58 written on it.
 
1:2.8 is the maximum aperture, not a ratio of magnification.

I think you can get close to 1-1, that is the subject life size in the frame with a reversed lens on a crop sensor, I dunno how that would be effected on full frame 35mm.
You could actually do it with 2 lenses, mount the 55 and then hold another lens up to it, front element to front element *gaffer tape required*.


With a reversed lens you might need to stop down a bit to get sufficient depth of focus.


Here's a thread on it..
 
I think I will just go with the extention tube , as it is simple and proven. I could reverse the lens, but I would not be able to do the 2 lens version as the only other lens I have is my 28mm wideangle.

Has anyone else used an extention tube and had any problems with not enough light entering?

EDIT: Read on internet that you can get quite an effective macro by reversing the lens and having the tube, what do you think?
 
how small are the components...

this was done with a $9 (from dealextreme) set of extension tubes and a old Yashica Lens with EOS adaptor.



diameter of the blue PCB was 15mm

M42 extension tubes here
 
Sounds like extension tubes are the easiest option, as you say. You will need a lot of light as you lose 2 stops with the full set of tubes on at 1:1, and you need to stop down further to get decent depth of field. Camera shake is a big problem at high magnifications also, so you need to keep the shutter speed well up. Use fast film, but you probably need a tripod unless you can get some flash in there.

What lens do you have? As I recall (it was a very long time ago) the Zenith EM came with a 58mm f/2 Helios, which considering the very modest cost was passably good. After you've remembered to wind the film on, don't forget to stop the lens down manually, too ;)
 
Most good quality tubes have linkage thru the tubes to auto stop down the lens. My Canon FD lens tubes have.
 
You could also consider a cheap stereo microscope from ebay?

All the resolving power you'd need. :)
 
The components will range from about small resistors/diodes/transistors, IC's all the way to larger ones such as transformers and maybe valves (vacuum tubes to you Americans) but proberly not as I know little about them.
Those are the exact m42 tubes I found.

The lens is 58mm, I thought it was 55mm. I will use a tripod and a shutter cable or the cameras timer. The fastest film that is availiable to me as a consumer is 400 ISO, but I can get proffessional film as well.
I can get a flash of my dad as it used to be his camera, but it requires a sync lead, so you have to shoot on 125.

Those tubes have the auto stop down as well.

I have never thought of doing it with a microscope, how would that work?

What dou you all think about having the tubes and reversing the lens as that is susposedly quite a good way of doing it?
 
Thinking back, yes I think the Zenith EM got auto-stop-down aperture, and so do those tubes have it, so that's okay.

I shouldn't worry about reversing the lens yet - see how you get on with the tubes as they are. Reversing is sometimes better for mega close ups, but then you'll get stop-down hassle again.

On the flash sync, pretty sure it's not 1/125sec which will give you only half an image. Could be as low as 1/30sec on that camera, but my memory's not that good. It's the speed with X next to it on the dial.
 
Your right it is 1/30 sec.

What actually is auto stop down aparature? Looking around I think its something to do with TTL metering, my cameras got a selenium light meter.
 
joxby said:
1-1, that is the subject life size in the frame with a reversed lens on a crop sensor, I dunno how that would be effected on full frame 35mm.
Click to expand...

1:1 is the subject full size on the film or sensor regardless of the film or sensor size.


Steve.
 
s162216 said:
I have never thought of doing it with a microscope, how would that work?
Click to expand...

It's quite simple really some microscopes come with what is called a trinocular head so there is essentially a port to attach a camera. Then you can take pics of whatever you see down the microscope.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/XTL3T101-TOP-QUALITY-STEREO-ZOOM-TRINOCULAR-MICROSCOPE_W0QQitemZ120445131731QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_BOI_Medical_Lab_Equipment_Lab_Equipment_ET?hash=item1c0b16dbd3&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A12%7C66%3A2%7C39%3A1%7C72%3A1688%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A0%7C293%3A3%7C294%3A50


Or you can get eyepiece adaptors like these http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Microscope-Camera-Adapter-Photo-Mount-for-Microscopy_W0QQitemZ250457175350QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item3a50693536&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A12%7C66%3A2%7C39%3A1%7C72%3A1688%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A0%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50


And then there are these http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/USB-DIGITAL-MICROSCOPE-x-200-FAST-UK-SELLER-LOW-P-P_W0QQitemZ200351937995QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_BOI_Medical_Lab_Equipment_Lab_Equipment_ET?hash=item2ea5e7f5cb&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A12%7C66%3A2%7C39%3A1%7C72%3A1688%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A0%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50

For electronic components you would need a microscope with the illumination from above rather than below (that's biological stuff)

The one that you can plug into the PC does not look too shabby for the money either. At 200x that's going to get you close!
 
s162216 said:
Your right it is 1/30 sec.

What actually is auto stop down aparature? Looking around I think its something to do with TTL metering, my cameras got a selenium light meter.
Click to expand...

Not really related to metering.

With an SLR, you view and focus etc at full aperture (lowest f/number) for a bright image. Obviously the diaphragm has to close down to the correct f/number for exposure, and auto-stop-down does that for you, via that little pin on the back of the lens.

Previous models to the EM had manual stop-down, by turning a ring on the lens. I forgot to do it almost every time :eek:

Stop-down metering means the camera needs to close down the diaphragm to the taking aperture for exposure adjustments to be made. Full-aperture or open-aperture metering does everything with the lens wide open, and it knows what f/number you have set, via an extra coupling. But you have neither of these high tech features :lol: The meter you have might be built in, but it's not coupled in any way, and it doesn't look through the lens. You have to take the reading from it in just the same way as you would with a separate hand meter, and transfer the settings to the camera. Main problem is that the built in meter is not very good.

You are going to have fun setting the exposure on that camera, especially with tubes on (you have to factor in compensation for magnification) and the selenium meter on there is hopelessly insensitive. It barely moves in bright sun, let alone artificial light. It might just give you a clue, but you'll need to experiment a lot and carefully note all the settings. Then when you've got some good negatives back, replicate the set up. If you use something like a table lamp up close for illumination, then if you put it back just a few inches differently, the exposure will be out. A separate meter will be extremely useful.

That takes me back. Fond memories, but a heck of a lot of head scratching along the way. Technology has moved on since the 1970s, and that was an old fashioned camera even then, in true Russian style.
 
My Dad was given that camera for his 18th Birthday in 1978 by his parents, as his brother (my uncle) had the 'E' and he reccommended the 'EM'. My dad got a Pentax ME Super a few years afterwards and when I was about 10 about 8 years ago I was interested in photography quite a bit, so he gave me his EM. I had some great fun with it until I got a somewhat inferior digital. About 6 months ago though, I rediscovered it and have been having great fun taking pictures with it. Its way better IMO than my current pocket digital, a Sony Cybershot W-170, which takes great pictures for that sort of camera, but nowhere near the quality of film. The EM is truely robust though, the only parts that are not quite complete as brought are part of the plastic covering on the windon lever has broken off and part of the plastic front of the protective carry case has cracked away.

My dad has a light meter in the loft from his the camera he had before he got the EM, but that is selenium as well.

Are light meters very expensive as I am trying to spend as little as possible? I have not yet found one.

Those microscopes look just too expensive to justify.

One thing, the book will have black and white photos in it so it is not too expensive to buy, should I use a black and white film like a Kodak T-Max or colour and digitally convert them to greyscale?
 
Steve Smith said:
1:1 is the subject full size on the film or sensor regardless of the film or sensor size.


Steve.
Click to expand...


That's true, but my point is if for arguments sake if a 50 reversed on a 1.5 crop sensor records a dice at 1-1, what is the mag of a 50 on 35mm film....I dunno...:lol:

*waits for Bob to smash it wide open with maths*
 
Steve Smith said:
1:1 is the subject full size on the film or sensor regardless of the film or sensor size.


Steve.
Click to expand...
1:1 is taken for the full 36*24. So naturally on a cropped sensor, the size will be the same, but cropped.
 
Do you think I shoud use a diffused flash as my dad has a flash, I will just need to get a sync cable?
 
Do you think I shoud use a diffused flash as my dad has a flash, I will just need to get a sync cable?
 
Flash will be handy and it ought to be diffused but you're messing about with bits and bats, nobody knows how good it will be because its a lash up.
If you say you're going to use a Nikon 60mm micro and a ringflash, peeps will have accurate advice on the best way to approach the shot and be consistent about what the result will be.
As it is with tubes and backerds lenses, its very much an experimentational exercise on your part.
For the component shots I would think a reverse lens would provide enough magnification, but working distance will be tight, you will be quite close to the component(s) and getting flash in there at a sympathetic angle might be tricky, the tubes could be the same.
On top of this you are shooting film, exposure will need to be calculated to give the best opportunity of the resulting image being usable, since you can't make comparisons or experiment until the film is developed.
A macro lens on film would give much more predictable results, tubes and backerds lenses are best kept for digital, but if you're intent on having a go with film, more power to your elbow I say...:thumbs:
 
Theres a little table on the side of the flash for aparature settings. I will have to shoot with a 200 or below ISO film as my lens only goes to 16, at 1.8m (6') it says to use 22 for 400 and 16 for 160 to 200. That seems quite far away to me.

Film is the only way I can take these as I don't have the money for a DSLR and my Sony pocket digital is useless for this.
 
Obviously you will probably require a tripod as well. You don't want to retake if you are on film?
If you are producing a book, surely digital first would be useful anyway? Perhaps a cheap point and shoot.

Watch out for buzzing components too... don't touch them!

 
I have tried using my Sony Cybershot W-170 for this, but the autofocus never focuses on the component when I zoom in, so they always come out blury.
I am going to try to do this is cheaply as possible, I have been able to use some free images, but specific pictures of what I want are few and far.

I will get the pictures developed and put on CD as most pictures will not be very big so the standard 150 DPI size is not a worry. I am still not sure whether to use colour or black and white as the book will be black and white to keep the retail price down, but I may publish a colour edition. What sort of film ISO would you reccommend?

I have a tripod so theres no problems there.
 
Tripod...lots of light - you're shooting film so check the reciprocity error tables for the correct exposures (ooo this takes me back)...
You can even use an electronic flash and by using a manual setting, multi-flash around the subject to give a shadowless images - takes a bit of practice that one...
 
I found these exposure tables for when using extension tubes or bellows. How are you meant to use them?

http://www.macrobellows.com/technique.php

Obviously as these are for a 50mm lens and mine is 58mm I will have to add on an extra 10mm. I am not going to use a flash, I will ise a diffused halogen lamp.
 
s162216 said:
I found these exposure tables for when using extension tubes or bellows. How are you meant to use them?

http://www.macrobellows.com/technique.php

Obviously as these are for a 50mm lens and mine is 58mm I will have to add on an extra 10mm. I am not going to use a flash, I will ise a diffused halogen lamp.
Click to expand...

I don't find those tables helpful. In the overall scheme of exposure measurement and setting, there are a lot of variables and being realistic if you get within half a stop you're doing well. Your lens only has half-stop settings anyway.

Bearing in mind that the exposure compensation is directly related to magnification, regardless of focal length, eg half life size 1:2 is one stop extra, and life size 1:1 is two stops, then I would just work with that.

For eaxmple, you have a film SLR and the image size is 36mm wide. Frame up a ruler and see what you get when using the various tubes and combinations.

Look through the viewfinder. If you can see 72mm of ruler, then you are half life size at 1:2, and need to add one stop of exposure. If you are really close and only seeing 36mm on the ruler, that's 1:1 life size and add two stops. Just guestimate for settings inbetween.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top