cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Figuring Out Canon EOS Rebel T6s Magnification Power

Mike8
Enthusiast

When recording microscope images it's customary to indicate the power setting used.  For instance,  assuming a 10X ocular and say 4X objective,  total magnification is achieved by multiplying one by the other,  thus 10X4 = 40X.  Since connecting the T6s to a microscope,  all that is out the window.  The 10X ocular was removed to make room for the 2X camera adapter taking its place,  however,  I don't think multiplying all my objectives by 2 will do the trick.  The camera itself must be magnification capable since the images I've been getting far exceed the maximum size I would get using my most powerful objective,  40X,  with the 2X adapter =  80X.  Some of the images,  because of their size and detail,  seem closer to 600X or more!  My former microscope camera was a Celestron 2MP with 30X.  Again,  figuring total power was easy, i.e., multiplying whatever objective I was using by 30.  However,  there's nothing,  as far as I know,  indicating the magnification power of the T6s.  Does anyone out there have a handle on this,  or where I might get a start solving this poser?  

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Like I said, the best way is with a calibration slide.

View solution in original post

8 REPLIES 8

kvbarkley
VIP
VIP

Without a lens magnification of a camera is meaningless.

 

You will need a calibration slide like these:

[Sorry, we had to excise it due to forum guidelines] 

 

(If the link gets excised, google microscope calibration slide. The link was to Thomas Scientific.)

The CMOS sensor has no bearing on magnification without a camera lens? 

No, no more than a piece of film does. It has an image size of about 22 x 15 mm. With my EF-S 60 mm Macro, I can have a focused image of things about the size of a quarter (1:1, or life size on the sensor) to Mount Everest.

 

A full frame sensor will let you see *more* but the *magnification* will be the same.

Thanks for your help.  I'll try to find another way.  All I need is ballpark.  

Like I said, the best way is with a calibration slide.

Thanks again!

Oh, and I think a scale bar (for example a bar representing 1 mm) is better than a magnification power notation like 10X or 1000x. You have to know the size of the reproduced image to properly calculate the magnification power. After all, what if someone takes your image and projects it on a screen? In that case any magnification power is meaningless, but the scale bar is still relevant.

Seems to be the consensus.

Announcements