Sub-stage condenser and relay lens help, please.

A forum to ask questions, post setups, and generally discuss anything having to do with photomacrography and photomicroscopy.

Moderators: MacroMike, nzmacro, Ken Ramos, twebster, S. Alden

User avatar
Mike
Posts: 217
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Northeast Ohio, USA

Post by Mike »

Hello Rene,

Let me add my congratulations to the others re your new position in the Netherlands. It sure sounds as though you will be getting paid to play!

All the best,
Mike

Planapo
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:11 pm

Post by Planapo »

All this is going way off topic (whatever that was) but I'm enjoying it... anyway,
Yeah, I guess we're often looking too much at the image instead of the specimen, if you get my meaning.
My primary interest is the image rather than the specimen... I know it's the wrong way round, but that's how it started with me... now I have interests in various microscopical subjects but the image formation and recording, as well as the aesthetics of the final image, are what turn me on. And I bet there are others out there like me in that. At least I hope so...
Concerning the Lomo quality, the Lomo medium power waterimmersion is able to give some remarkable results, like perfect imaging at the bottom of a cavity slide (like with a hanging drop). You try that with the average dry 40x... Peter might regret in some time parting with such a lens, who knows.
No regrets, Rene, about parting with the Lomo WI. What that obj did for me was to switch me on to WI in general, which IMO is under-used, and under-appreciated. Some people have never even heard of it outside in vivo micromanipulation. I use WI a lot both dipping and through coverslips, and yes the contrast is great. I could write a whole article on why WI is great and why everyone should try it but not here perhaps. I have since the Lomo "graduated" to better WI optics, I wouldn't want to live without WI I must say.
Oh yes, the lomo 40xWI is a Zeiss design from around 1890. That deserves some respect, whatever it's worth.
That's not really fair. I do have an actual Zeiss D objective which is about a 40x WI (NA unknown) from 1891, and the Lomo performs a lot better.

Peter

Guest

Post by Guest »

No regrets, Rene, about parting with the Lomo WI. What that obj did for me was to switch me on to WI in general, which IMO is under-used, and under-appreciated
I do have an actual Zeiss D objective which is about a 40x WI (NA unknown) from 1891, and the Lomo performs a lot better.

Peter
Oh ******, a real specialist. My apologies, it appears I have underestimated you... Can't get out of this with a quick halftruth then, yes, you're right, the design has been considerably improved. I'm stunned such objectives are still around in working order, and I am quite envious as I doubt I can ever get my hands on this kind of legendary pieces.

The original D* design was from 1890, with the remark: 'Bei diesem System ist in Folge seiner eigenartigen Konstruktion die volle Bildschärfe nur auf einen mittlerenTeil des Sehfeldes beschränkt' or: because of its strange construction, sharpness is only limited to the middle part of the field. As far as I can make out, corrections have been added to the original design in 1902 and 1924, but even Wimmer from the Zeiss archives couldn't get me more information on this. If you have any, I would really appreciate it if you could contact me.

Rene.

Planapo
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:11 pm

Post by Planapo »

Rene,
I'm stunned such objectives are still around in working order, and I am quite envious as I doubt I can ever get my hands on this kind of legendary pieces.
I've had this for years, was bought as part of a fully-equipped Ia pol outfit that Wimmer dated 1891 for me. As for condition, all the 5 objectives attached to the outfit are as new, this is either a tribute to the original construction or a condemnation of the 1960s and 1970s Zeiss objs which have programmed self-destruct. I did see one D* on ebay a good long time ago. But the trouble with ebay is that you have to waste so much time watching it if you are to pick up specific things.

Yes the field curvature on the D* is ghastly! When I first looked through it I thought something was wrong with my setup, but no... I did not know about the dates of the improvements, so I am edified, but I believe the Lomos are based on Zeiss pre WW2 designs, pinched after the Soviets took effective control of the Jena factory in 1945. All the 19thC Zeiss objectives are a bit eigenartig, that's part of their charm, but not I think for serious work today. Where did you find the catalogue entry for the D*? Perhaps you have catalogue descriptions of my others which are A, F, 1/12 HI NA1.20 and a* (the original zoom objective)?

Still, the Zeisses which do it for me these days are the incredible 1980s multi-immersions, shame about the natural fluorite content which affects pol and DIC work but you can't have everything... or can you?

Peter

Guest

Post by Guest »

Planapo wrote:Perhaps you have catalogue descriptions of my others which are A, F, 1/12 HI NA1.20 and a* (the original zoom objective)?
Go to the Zeiss archives-pre WWII, check all the listings for new objectives. A lot of info is the same, but at least it gives dates of new constructions and improvements.
Still, the Zeisses which do it for me these days are the incredible 1980s multi-immersions, shame about the natural fluorite content which affects pol and DIC work but you can't have everything... or can you?
I suppose so. Can't afford them :(

Rene.

Planapo
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:11 pm

Post by Planapo »

Rene,

Could you give me a URL for the Zeiss archives?

I got my multi-immersions on ebay and also on the relatively under-used LabX... paid just $190, $250 and $160 for the 16, 25 and 40, of which the 16 was and is slightly delaminated, which I must accept. I agree they can sometimes go expensive but not always, depends who's watching ebay at the time. I, too, have to watch the pennies, though my priorities mean that I'd rather buy nice optics than upgrade my car (if I had a car which I don't... can't afford it :cry: ).

But those objectives are incredible.. and give a lot of pleasure.

Peter

Guest

Post by Guest »

Planapo wrote:Rene,

Could you give me a URL for the Zeiss archives?
www.zeiss.de/archiv, go to Virtuelles Museum, Gerateliste, Mikroskopie

You can choose then for mono and bino(=stereo) microscopes, objectives+oculars etc. Site is in German, and only until 1945.
Unfortunately, you will have to browse all the catalogues to see if new designs of older objectives have been added.
I got my multi-immersions on ebay and also on the relatively under-used LabX... paid just $190, $250 and $160 for the 16, 25 and 40
That's certainly good pricing, unfortunately, my line of objectives is 33 mm (old Zeiss) and by now Wild, and some little odds and ends. You can see my reluctance to pay a lot of money for an objective that is not in line with the rest of the outfit. Besides, I promised myself to stick with one microscope only (a Jena Ng, I do have by now 3 sliding objective turrets though). I've moved around too much in the last 10 years to take home whatever comes up in my path. :?
Needless to say, I'm still envious of your objectives!

Rene.

Planapo
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:11 pm

Post by Planapo »

Thanks very much, Rene, for the archive link. I shall have a good look through as soon as I can... the virtual museum site seems to be down at the moment. Have to polish up mein Scheissdeutsch.

So you're on 33mm... the Lomo WIs are just the job then! If you can get the 70x/1.23 apo with collar I'd recommend that over the 40x, as long as the curvature isn't too bothersome. Despite my scathing remarks about Lomo, that obj was pretty nice as I remember it. Well, come to think of it now, they were all three ok, I'm just too critical sometimes, I apologise for that.

Whatever you use, WI rules, I'm with you there mate...

Peter

Guest

Post by Guest »

Planapo wrote: they were all three ok, I'm just too critical sometimes, I apologise for that.
Peter
With the third I think you mean the achro 85/1.0? The 70x is a great lens no doubt, but not great contrast. I think the 85x is the best allrounder of those two. There's the problem: what lens do you choose when you have a 70x apo and a 85x achro. Instinctively the 70 wins, but in fact the 85 is often the better of the two in the real world...
Rene.

Locked