Archive for the ‘Raynox DCR-250’ Category

Alice in Telecentricity Land (plus Post Update)

August 4, 2023

In a recent blog post, I wrote …

The best advantage of a truly telecentric lens is there should be little or no “focus breathing” as the camera moves closer to/farther from the subject. Essentially that means the apparent size of the subject should remain the same. That should enable better focus stacking because the outline of the subject is constant. Source Credit: Experimenting with a telecentric lens rig (plus Post Update).

Using my clone of Rik Littlefield’s 0.8x magnification telecentric lens rig, there was little or no “focus breathing” in the test focus bracket that I created from 63 JPGs, as shown in the following slideshow.

First, a brief explanation of what is shown in the slideshow. The first frame is Photo No. 1 of 63 from the focus bracket, edited to make it black and white. The last frame in the slideshow is Photo No. 63 of 63, shown in full color.

I loaded the two photos as a stack in Photoshop. Next I changed the opacity of the last image in the slideshow to 0%, meaning the first image, now black and white, is shown completely. Then I flattened the layers and saved the output. I repeated the process, changing the opacity of the last image to 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%. At an opacity of 100% the last image is shown completely and the first image cannot be seen.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Look closely at the slideshow and you might notice the subject shifts slightly to the right (from first to last slide), but nothing like the “focus breathing” that typically occurs when a non-telecentric lens is used to do focus bracketing. This means the photo composition that I saw in the first photograph is essentially the same in the last photo.

The following photo gallery features full-size versions of the same images used to create the slideshow, in order of increasing opacity.

Let’s pause to review. We know the subject should appear to be larger when the camera moves closer to the subject. But in this case, the subject appears to be the same size in both the first and last shots of the focus bracket. Why? Well, this is the point where I might be beyond the limit of my expertise but based upon my understanding of telecentricity I’d say it’s because most of the light rays that pass through the lens rig are parallel.

Things are getting curiouser and curiouser

If my [educated?] guess is true, then parallel lines in a subject should remain parallel from foreground to background.

Let’s start with a thought experiment. Think about a pair of parallel railroad tracks. Many, if not most people have noticed that railroad tracks appear to converge toward a vanishing point in the distance. The same thing happens when you photograph parallel lines. Or does it? Not when a truly telecentric lens is used to shoot the photograph! Let’s look at an example.

I didn’t have time to shoot and post process an entire focus bracket of a small plastic ruler, so I shot two quick and dirty photos near the end points of the ruler. The first photo shows the foreground; the last photo shows the background.

I could have used Photoshop to edit the images so that the vertical blue lines are aligned, but I didn’t because I decided it’s more important to show another example that illustrates lack of “focus breathing.” Plus I think it’s easy to see at a glance the lines are in fact parallel, not convergent.

Yeah, yeah — I could have and should have done a better job of posing the ruler but like I said, the photos are quick and dirty. Expediency trumps perfectionism.

Post Update

Consistent with the “quick and dirty” theme for this post, I used Apple Preview to edit the preceding photos of a small plastic ruler.

I started with the first photo. I drew a horizontal red line between two vertical blue lines on the ruler. Next, I selected and copied a small area from the bottom of the photo.

Finally, I pasted the selected/copied area from the first photo onto the second photo. As you can see the vertical blues lines are virtually the same distance apart at both ends of the ruler. Therefore my Rube Goldberg lens rig is almost perfectly telecentric.

Related Resources

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Telecentric lens rig revisited

August 1, 2023

The following composite images show the results of my first test using a new telecentric lens rig, cloned from a similar rig designed by Rik Littlefield.

Helicon Focus was used to focus stack 63 “as is” JPGs from my Fujifilm X-T3 mirrorless digital camera (focused on the head only). “As is” is a descriptor that I use often in my photoblog, but that doesn’t mean the images weren’t edited — rather it means the JPGs were edited in camera using one of the Fujifilm film simulations (PROVIA / STANDARD).

63 JPGs | Helicon Focus | Rendering Method B

In my limited experience using Helicon Focus, rendering Method C seems to work better than Method B. (For what it’s worth, rendering Method A never produces good results for me.) In this case, I can’t see a clear difference in the quality of the output. Do you think one version looks better than the other?

63 JPGs | Helicon Focus | Rendering Method C

Look closely at the full-size versions of the preceding composite images and I think you will agree with me that the image quality is excellent!

Tech Tips

In a recent blog post, I wrote …

Rik [Littlefield] developed another telecentric lens rig that results in lower magnification (0.8x versus 1.69x) but better image quality. I need to order some inexpensive parts before I can build and test that rig. Source Credit: Experimenting with a telecentric lens rig (plus Post Update).

The last part I needed was delivered a few days ago, and much to my amazement all of the parts fit together! (See parts list, below.)

I used my Apple iPad mini 6 to shoot the following quick-and-dirty photos of the new telecentric lens rig.

Here’s a parts list (shown from left-to-right in the preceding photos).

  • Fujifilm X-T3 (APS-C) mirrorless digital camera [not shown]
  • Fringer EF-FX Pro II
  • [1] Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro lens
  • [2] 67mm to 52mm step-down ring
  • [3] M52-M42 step-down ring
  • [4] Fotasy M42-M42 helicoid [15-26 mm long (11 mm travel).]
  • [5] M42 tube (7 mm long) [WeMacro 42mm tube set: 7, 14, 28 mm long.]
  • [6] 42mm to 52mm step-up ring
  • [7] 52mm-43mm step-down ring
  • [8] Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter (43mm thread)

Notice the focus ring on my Canon Macro lens is set for infinity [highlighted by a green rectangle]. The distance between the front of the Canon lens and front of the Raynox close-up filter is ~54 mm, based upon guidance from Rik Littlefield.

With the Canon Macro lens set for infinity, the parts in front of the Canon lens work together with the lens to make it telecentric. Adding the Fringer adapter has no effect on the telecentricity of the Canon lens — it’s only used to enable my Canon lens to work with the Fujifilm X-T3 camera.

Safe step size

I used Rik Littlefield’s excellent DOF Calculator plus personal guidance from Rik to determine the safe step size to use for focus bracketing with the new telecentric lens rig.

My input is highlighted by a red rectangle; the calculator output is highlighted in green.

Notice I input a 20% step overlap (0.2) to be sure there was no “focus banding.” The calculator suggested a step size of 0.17589 mm. That’s equivalent to 175.89 µm (micrometers).

Since the smallest increment on my NiSi NM-200 manual focus rail is 10 µm, I divided 175.89 by 10 in order to determine the number of increments to turn the larger adjustment knob on the NM-200. The answer is 17.589 increments. For simplicity and safety, I turned the knob 15 increments between shots.

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Experimenting with a telecentric lens rig (plus Post Update)

July 11, 2023

I’ve been experimenting with a telecentric lens rig. My rig is cloned from a similar one created by Rik Littlefield, using gear I already own.

I’m guessing you’re thinking “What is a telecentric lens?” The honest answer is “I don’t know.” I’m not sure I’ll ever understand what telecentric lenses are and how they work. I’m hoping practical experience will result in better understanding of the theoretical.

So why have I written a blog post about a topic I don’t really understand? Good question! The simple answer is because I have learned enough, mostly from Rik Littlefield, to know there are practical advantages to using a telecentric lens for macro photography.

The best advantage of a truly telecentric lens is there should be little or no “focus breathing” as the camera moves closer to/farther from the subject. Essentially that means the apparent size of the subject should remain the same. That should enable better focus stacking because the outline of the subject is constant.

My Rube Goldberg telecentric lens rig

Rik Littlefield’s telecentric lens rig features the same gear as mine (described in the next paragraph) minus the Canon-to-Fujifilm lens adapter because he uses a Canon EOS Rebel T1i DSLR camera body with his rig.

My Rube Goldberg telecentric lens rig is cobbled together using a Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter attached to my Canon EF 100mm macro lens using the plastic clip-on adapter supplied by Raynox. The lens assembly is mounted on my Fujifilm X-T3 APS-C digital camera using a Fringer EF-FX Pro II adapter.

Rik developed another telecentric lens rig that results in lower magnification (0.8x versus 1.69x) but better image quality. I need to order some inexpensive parts before I can build and test that rig.

Testing 1, 2, 3.

The following closely-cropped composite image shows the result of my first test of the telecentric lens rig.

I shot 57 images of a toy plastic lizard using my NiSi NM-200 manual focus rail. I used an aperture of f/8 and a step-size of 100 microns, as recommended by Rik Littlefield.

Helcion Focus Method B was used to focus stack the “as is” JPGs from my camera. The resulting TIF file was cropped using Apple “Preview” — that’s about as quick and dirty as cropping gets!

Post Update

The first time I heard about telecentric lenses is when Allan Walls teased the topic during one of his YouTube live-streams. During a subsequent live-stream, Allan demonstrated how to make a lens telecentric using a rig similar to one that Rik Littlefield created.

Telecentric Lenses – Macro Talk Too – from Allan Walls Photography, June 29, 2023 (1:12:10)

Allan’s YouTube live-streams are one hour in duration, but there’s usually a lot of chit-chat during a typical live-stream that might not interest readers of my blog.

In this case, I recommend that you watch the segment from 11:22 to 30:21. A lot of what I have learned about telecentric lenses from Rik Littlefield and Allan Walls is covered during that part of the video. (If you continue watching the video beyond the 30:21 mark, then you will hear my name mentioned twice.)

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Jumping spider

March 15, 2022

The following photo shows a tiny spider carcass (~3/16″ long) that was inside an exuvia (~1 3/4” long) from a Common Green Darner dragonfly (Anax junius). The exuvia was collected on 17 June 2021 from a small pond in Prince William County, Virginia USA. I discovered the spider long afterward — too late to save its life.

17 JUN 2021 | PNC. Wm. County, VA | Jumping spider

Thanks to Eva Weiderman and Joseph Girgente — members of the “Odonate Larvae and Exuviae” Facebook group — for their help in identifying the specimen as a jumping spider, Family Saticidae.

Salticidae is one of several families of spiders with eight (8) eyes. My take-away from reading the reference on BugGuide entitled “Spider Eye Arrangements” is identification of this specimen to the genus and species level is challenging at best and impossible at worst.

In contrast, it’s well known that spiders use odonate exuviae for shelter. I wish the jumping spider had come out of its most excellent hidey-hole sooner!

17 JUN 2021 | PNC. Wm. County, VA | Anax junius exuvia

Related Resources

Tech Tips

The tiny jumping spider was photographed using a Panasonic Lumix FZ-300, Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter, Godox X2To/p flash trigger, and Godox TT685F plus Altura flash modifier. Camera settings: ISO 100 | f/7.1 | 1/60 s | 56.9mm (316mm, 35mm equivalent).

Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter” is a blog post in which I provide more information about how I use the Raynox with my Panasonic Lumix superzoom bridge cameras.

Copyright © 2022 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Dark and moody

November 19, 2021

I spotted an emergent Uhler’s Sundragon (Helocordulia uhleri) during a photowalk along a mid-size stream at an undisclosed location in Prince William County, Virginia USA. The following photograph shows the exuvia from which the teneral adult emerged.

13 APR 2021 | PNC. Wm. County, VA | Uhler’s Sundragon | exuvia (ventral)

In the opinion of the author, larvae (nymphs)/exuviae from Family Corduliidae (Emeralds) and Family Libellulidae (Skimmers) can be challenging to differentiate and identify to the family level.

One way to differentiate Emerald from Skimmer larvae/exuvia is to look for a “ventromedial groove” in the prementum: it’s probably Corduliidae (Emeralds) if there is a ventromedial groove; it’s probably Libellulidae if there isn’t.

Look closely at a version of the preceding photo that was reformatted, rotated, and cropped to show an enlarged view of the prementum. You should notice a ventromedial groove on the basal half of the prementum, indicating this specimen is a member of Family Corduliidae (Emeralds).

13 APR 2021 | PNC. Wm. County, VA | Uhler’s Sundragon | exuvia (ventral)

Three raised structures on the underside of the prementum remind me of the hood ornament on a 1949 Lincoln automobile. (No, I wasn’t alive in 1949!)

Related Resources

Tech Tips

One reason I underexposed the photo is to add definition to the ventromedial groove and avoid overexposing the black background.

I prefer a white background for photographing odonate exuviae. Using a black background proved to be more challenging than I expected. More later in a follow-up blog post.

Copyright © 2021 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Post update: What is it?

September 7, 2021

Since I started exploring ways to provide continuous power for my digital cameras, I have been guided by two questions. 1. Will it work? 2. Is it safe? I watched a YouTube video recently that reminded me of the latter question.

External Power for Cameras, the Safest Options by Graham Houghton (14:53) inspired me to search online for an inline voltage meter with USB connectors.

Drok USB Tester

After watching several more YouTube videos, I decided to buy a Digital Meter USB Tester Multifunction Digital Voltmeter/Ammeter/Power Meter/Capacity Tester/Charger 5in1 USB Panel Meter, available from a company in the United States called “Drok.” The MSRP for the Drok USB Tester is $15.99. The one I ordered from the Drok Store on Amazon cost $9.99.

The device features one male USB connector for input, and two female USB connectors for output.

GyroVu continuous power adapter

The next photo shows a GyroVu USB TO PANASONIC DMC-GH2 (DMW-BLC12) BATTERY 40″ CABLE w/ 3.1A USB POWER SUPPLY. The device can be used to provide continuous power for my Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 superzoom bridge camera.

The “USB Charger” — a small white power brick — was plugged into a 120V AC electrical outlet. Look closely at the full-size version of the following image. Notice the USB Charger output is 5V=3.1A. (3.1A = 3100mA.)

Testing the GyroVu continuous power adapter

The Drok USB Tester was connected to the 3100mA USB connector on the GyroVu USB Charger, shown above.

The USB cable for the GyroVu dummy battery was connected to “Output 1” of the Drok USB Tester; the dummy battery was inserted into the battery compartment of my Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300.

The last photo — the same one featured in my last blog post — shows the LED display on the front of the Drok USB Tester after my camera was powered on, indicating the output voltage of the USB Charger was 5V and the camera was drawing a current of 0.45A.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 (121mm) plus Raynox DCR-250.

The output voltage of the GyroVu dummy battery is 8.0V so the “dummy” battery must contain a DC-to-DC step-up converter.

I plan to use a multimeter to test the actual voltage output of the GyroVu dummy battery, that is, as soon as I can find my RadioShack mulitimeter. (Someday I’ll get organized so I know where everything is!)

Sidebar: Deep Dive into Tech Specs

The Web page for the GyroVu continuous power adapter shown above says the product is for the Panasonic DMC-GH2 camera. How could I be sure the device would work with my Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 digital camera?

The Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 uses a Panasonic DMW-BLC12 Rechargeable Lithium-Ion Battery (7.2V, 1200mAh). Turns out that’s the same battery used by the Panasonic DMC-GH2. I know this thanks to Wasabi Power for providing a list of Panasonic cameras that use the DMW-BLC12 battery. (See the Web page for the PANASONIC DMW-BLC12 AC POWER ADAPTER KIT WITH DC COUPLER FOR PANASONIC DMW-DCC8, DMW-AC8 BY WASABI POWER, a product similar to the GyroVu continuous power adapter.)

Editor’s Note: The MSRP for the Wasabi Power continuous power adapter is $23.99 — nearly $10 less than the MSRP of $33.95 for the GyroVu USB Power Supply. You might be wondering why I didn’t buy the Wasabi Power device.

Notice the Wasabi Power device uses round connectors rather than USB connectors. I prefer the GyroVu devices because the USB connectors on their dummy batteries give me the flexibility to use them with my Anker PowerCore+ 26800 PD 45W battery as a power source for select Canon, Fujifilm, and Panasonic digital cameras that I own.

Related Resources

This blog post is one in a series of posts related to continuous AC power and long-lasting battery power for select Canon, Fujifilm, and Panasonic digital cameras.

Copyright © 2021 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Follow-up: Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter

August 20, 2021

In my last blog post, I mentioned that minor vignetting can be a problem when the Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter is mounted on some macro- and non-macro camera lenses.

Canon 100mm macro lens

In case you’re wondering whether vignetting is a problem when using two step-down rings with the Canon 100mm macro lens, it isn’t. As it turns out, the front lens element is recessed quite a bit from the lens barrel so the step-down rings cover little if any glass. Source Credit: Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter, by Walter Sanford.

The first photo shows the front lens element of the Canon 100mm macro lens is in fact recessed quite a bit from the lens barrel.

Lens barrel without nested step-down rings.

The next photo shows the nested 67-52mm and 52-43mm step-down rings that I use to mount the Raynox DCR-250 on my Canon 100mm macro lens. Look closely at the full-size version of this image and you should see the step-down rings don’t cover any of the camera lens.

Lens barrel with nested step-down rings.

Disclaimer: This might or might not be true for other makes and models of 100mm macro lenses.

Panasonic Lumix superzoom bridge cameras

The camera lens will need to be adjusted for at least some slight telephoto zoom in order to eliminate the vignetting caused by mounting a 43mm filter on a lens with a 52mm filter size. Source Credit: Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter, by Walter Sanford.

A Guide To Using Raynox Close Up Lenses on the FZ200 Camera, by Graham Houghton is the second item listed under “Related Resources” in my last blog post. Page 6 of Graham’s excellent guide describes a simple way to set-up both my Panasonic Lumix DCR-150 and DCR-300 superzoom bridge cameras so that vignetting isn’t a problem.

For the DMC-FZ300, press the “Menu/Set” button on the back of the camera, then select the camera icon in the left side-bar. Navigate to page 7/7 and select “Conversion”; select the icon for close-up lens. When the camera is powered-on, it will zoom to 4x (121 mm) automatically and the aperture will be limited to f/4 or smaller (f/4 to f/8).

For my older DMC-FZ150, the set-up process is the same except “Conversion” appears on page 5/5. Zoom is set to 4x and the aperture is limited to f/3.6 or smaller (f/3.6 to f/8).

Using either camera, the lens can be adjusted for greater than 4x zoom, resulting in more magnification.

Post Update

You know, sometimes I wonder “What was I thinking?”

Although I like Graham Houghton’s trick for using one of the “Conversion” settings to quickly solve the vignetting problem on the Panasonic superzoom bridge cameras, I dislike the fact that aperture is limited by that setting. That’s a bad trade-off, in my strong opinion.

Another strike against using the “Conversion” setting: flash is disabled, including both the built-in flash and the flash hot-shoe. I like to use flash for macro photography, so this is a deal-breaker for me.

Copyright © 2021 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter

August 17, 2021

I watched a video by Micael Widell recently that reminded me the Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter is a good value given its versatility.

Before I bought the Raynox close-up filter many years ago, I was skeptical that it would work. I still can’t explain why it works with many lenses I own including both macro- and non-macro lenses, but I can tell you with certainty it does work and works well!

Canon 100mm macro lens

The Canon 100mm macro lens has a maximum magnification of 1:1. Micael Widell says adding the Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter to the lens increases the magnification from 1x to 2x. According the B&H Photo Specs page for the Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter, its magification is 2.5x.

Calculating magnification is tricky and not as straightforward as one might think. In this case it doesn’t matter whether Mr. Widell or B&H Photo is correct, the fact of the matter is adding a Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter to your lens should at least double the magnification.

The first photograph shows the following equipment, couterclockwise from the upper-left: “snap-on universal adapter” for Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter; Raynox close-up filter mounted on a 52-43mm step-down ring; and a 67-52mm step-down ring.

Several mounting adapters for Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter.

The Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter comes with a “snap-on universal adapter” for mounting the filter on lenses with a filter size from 52-67mm. The universal adapter clips on the front of a lens the same as a lens cap. That’s OK for use in a photo studio but less than ideal for use in the field. In my opinion, it’s better to use inexpensive step-down rings to mount the close-up filter more securely.

Canon EOS 5D Mark II macro photography kit.

The Rube Goldberg rig shown above has a lot of parts, but for the purpose of this blog post focus on the Canon 100mm macro lens and Raynox DCR-250 mounted on the lens using nested 67-52mm and 52-43mm step-down rings.

In case you’re wondering whether vignetting is a problem when using two step-down rings with the Canon 100mm macro lens, it isn’t. As it turns out, the front lens element is recessed quite a bit from the lens barrel so the step-down rings cover little if any glass.

Panasonic Lumix superzoom bridge cameras

Both my Panasonic Lumix DCR-150 and DCR-300 superzoom bridge cameras feature a 52mm filter thread size. So it’s simple to use a 52-43mm step-down ring to mount the Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter on either camera lens.

Raynox DCR-250 not mounted on the camera lens.

The camera lens will need to be adjusted for at least some slight telephoto zoom in order to eliminate the vignetting caused by mounting a 43mm filter on a lens with a 52mm filter size.

Both cameras feature a 24x zoom lens, so when the Raynox DCR-250 is added to the kit the actual magnification will vary depending upon the focal length for which the camera lens is set.

Raynox DCR-250 shown mounted on the camera lens.

Related Resources

Copyright © 2021 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Common Green Darner dragonfly (external female reproductive anatomy)

June 5, 2020

For some species of odonate exuviae, sex is indicated by a form of remnant reproductive anatomy. These external structures don’t look exactly the same for all species of dragonflies and damselflies, but their function is identical.

As far as I know, this is true for all species in the Family Aeshnidae (Darners) such as Common Green Darner dragonfly (Anax junius).

The following photograph shows a ventral view of a female Common Green Darner dragonfly. Notice the external reproductive anatomical structure on abdominal segment nine (S9) is virtually identical to the remnant anatomical structure on S9 of the exuvia, shown above.

Original photo used with permission from Louisa C. Craven.

The Backstory

My dear friend Louisa Craven discovered the lifeless adult dragonfly while on vacation with her family in Nags Head, North Carolina USA. Louisa is an accomplished wildlife photographer who developed an interest in odonates as a result of many photowalks with me.

Related Resources

Copyright © 2020 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

MYN – Pantala hymenaea exuvia

December 16, 2019

An odonate exuvia was photographed against a pure white background using the “Meet Your Neighbours” (MYN) technique.

This specimen is a Spot-winged Glider dragonfly (Pantala hymenaea) exuvia. Spot-winged Glider is a member of Family Libellulidae (Skimmers).

Genus Pantala

The genus Pantala includes two species in North America: Spot-winged Glider (Pantala hymenaea); and Wandering Glider (Pantala flavescens).

Spot-winged Glider and Wandering Glider larvae/exuviae look similar. The lateral spines on abdominal segment nine (S9) are noticeably shorter for P. hymenaea (shown left) than P. flavescens (shown right) — a key field mark that can be used to differentiate the two species.

The Backstory

Both specimens featured in this blog post were collected (near Richmond, Virginia USA) and identified by Andy Davidson. Andy is a graduate student at Virginia Commonwealth University working on a research project entitled “Predator-Prey Interactions in a Changing World.”

Related Resources

Copyright © 2019 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.