My subjects (seashells, dead insects and minerals) are not alive, so I am not sure trinocular function is necessary. I haven’t decided whether or not I would go for the afocal route for camera, or get “Tim’s” adapter for trinucular adaptation. So I bought a M450 with epizoom objective just now. M450 with fine focus seems exactly what I would need: a good compromise between viewing and photography: when I am lazy, I can close down that aperture iris for single shots when I am diligent, I can open it up for focus stacking, along with a WeMacro MicroMate. I tend to use my SZ7 at no more than 5x zoom. I am finding my SZ7 (without fine focus) lacking resolution for casual documentation and identification of micro seashells (I do understand that the GMO stereo design doesn’t perform well in focus stacking). That aperture iris is useful too, to trade for viewing depth and contrast. With the 2x lens, it has four times the resolution. So a Wild M450 without 2x ancillary lens has about twice the numerical aperture. I have a SZ7 and was comparing it, in my head, to a Wild M450 with Epizoom objective (with non-removable 2x ancillary lens). Thank you! I just Googled it and found it too, from eiman’s previous post (in reply to my inquiry, which I forgot!). Note that Leica's current top end greenough, the S Apo, tops out at exactly the same NA (though with allegedly apo optics and a wider FoV). Yes, it is 0.1 (reported as 300 lp/mm, up to 600 with the 2x) though that's only in the center of the FoV.
0 Comments
|