RFID

[Josh66]

The first two are at 4:1.

1

2

I tried to clean the dust off better before shooting, but it was almost impossible. The strands of wire you're seeing are only about .001" in diameter.


The set-up:
(Just noticed - only one of the lights is on in these.)

3

4

 

[Josh66]

Just noticed that #2 looks like a plank of wood from far away... Kinda cool.

 

[jv17]

nice shots.. love it..

 

[Mgw189]

very cool I love my reverse mount macro ring as well.

 

[Josh66]

Thanks guys.

It's actually a macro coupler, not a reverse mount. It's a 70-200mm f/4L and 50mm f/1.4 mounted face to face.



edit

I shot these at f/5.6. I should have stopped down more, a lot more. I didn't want them to be soft so I kept it at 5.6.
I was just looking at some older pictures with the same setup shot a f/32 - they're way sharper than these...
I'll try again tomorrow. Wasn't expecting the DOF to be so microscopic at f/5.6 (f/32 doesn't buy you much more either, but every little bits helps).

 

[timethief]

nice shots.
i like the contrasts in 3 and 4
post more.

 

[Josh66]

Thanks

post more.

I will - as soon as I see what's new on TPF (just got home from work) and finish my tea.

 

[Josh66]

Used a blank DVD as the background on these.

(5, 6, & 7 are 4:1)

5

6
(almost the same as 5 - exposed 3 stops longer)

7

These three are pretty similar to each other... I just couldn't decide which ones to post, so I'm posting the 3 best.

8
This one (even though it is a failure) was pretty cool, I think.
It's at 16.6:1. I didn't realize that the image would not fill the frame at that magnification...
Every aspect (even getting it in the frame) of this shot was insanely difficult.
I had it sitting on a stack of DVDs, adding or removing discs to focus. At this magnification, the thickness of one disc would throw it outside the focusing range - I had to shim the disc with sheets of paper to focus (getting it back in the frame after each sheet...). I do not have a focusing rail, now I understand how they could be a huge benefit.
Shifting your weight on the floor makes the camera shake...
Anyway, here it is... I guess I'm just posting it to prove that I tried...

Just for reference - this thing is about 1mm square, maybe 1.5mm square. You can see how small it is in #3 & 4.



EDIT
Just a quick reference shot:

 

[Josh66]

I might try to combine 5 & 6. The board is exposed better on 6, but the gold parts are blown out.