Re: Leitz infinity objectives, with or without a *
- From: "Kevin Cunningham" <smskjd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 20:41:35 GMT
"Trond Kvitvik" <trond.kvitvik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:442810ae$0$7482$9b536df3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Kevin Cunningham wrote:
Thanks Kevin,
Is older Leitz infinity objectives with RMS thread (and 45 mm parfocal
distance) compatible with Zeiss ICS objectives (can they be used on the
same Zeiss ICS microscope without greatly reducing image quality)? I
assume the reference focal length is not the same as for Leica
objectives (200 mm), but shorter?
Trond, Any infinity objective can't be used on a 160mm stand. Although
there are some that physically fit they just don't work, the back focal
distance is all wrong along with the design. Plus objectives and
eyepeices should not be mixed and matched. In your case stick to your
manufacturer.
The * is a bit confusing. It means, if I remember correctly, that it
objective will accept the Smith T system. Its similar to Nomarski.
It is still a mystery for me what Leitz did use for reference focal
length, Zeiss use 160 mm (the shortest) according to the page
"http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/anatomy/infinityintro.html";
I built my own "tube lens" for the cost of two +3 Diopter Eyepieces for a
Nikon F3 camera (20 euro) to test it out.
Two times +3 diopter gives you +6 diopter and the center of the "tube
objective" is in this case between these two identical lenses. The focal
length is then 1000mm/6= 166 mm.
See images at "http://home.no.net/tkvitvik/Tube_lens/"; to get a picture on
how I fitted the lenses into the tube (I was easy, but I had to remove
some metal on one of the eyepieces to fit it in above the revolver).
The Leitz NPL 20x/0,40 oo/- is relatively parfocal, but not very NPL any
longer, a disappointment, but the objective is not very good in the first
place either.
The Zeiss ICS lenses I had to test was 63x/1,4 oo/0,17- 1,25x/0,035 oo/- -
2,5x/0,075 oo/1,17. The low power lenses performs rather well, flat field
is kept as well as parfocality. The 63x seems to perform very well, using
my Reichert Korr 8x Eyepieces 6-10 mm higher than normal distance.
Perhaps I should get 10x and 25x Zeiss objectives to get a more useful
range of objectives :-)
As well as to try different (Zeiss) oculars, of course.
--
Trond
Trond, The difference will blow you away. There are over 12 things you have
to correct for, some correct in the eypiece and some in the objective so its
really important to have the right correction type.
Kevin Cunningham
SMS
.
- References:
- Leitz infinity objectives, with or without a *
- From: Trond Kvitvik
- Re: Leitz infinity objectives, with or without a *
- From: Kevin Cunningham
- Re: Leitz infinity objectives, with or without a *
- From: Trond Kvitvik
- Leitz infinity objectives, with or without a *
- Prev by Date: Re: Leitz infinity objectives, with or without a *
- Next by Date: Re: What is there to see?
- Previous by thread: Re: Leitz infinity objectives, with or without a *
- Next by thread: Wiggling Helicosporidia
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
