Better idea ...

After (re)reading the Leitz "160mm mechanical tubelength" memo my idea of
cutting off 1cm seems not so good.
If I understand it well I should cut off 2mm and use the original
(Orthoplan) eyepieces.
Does anyone have experience with this?



"Theo Griep" <griep@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:498f4107$0$7923$ba620dc5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I know that most 160mm objectives can be used on the (170mm) Orthoplan
without 'much' impact on the image quality, but if I want to get the best
results, would it be possible to cut off 1 cm of the binocular tubes?
Would that give me the desired 160mm? I could keep the remains of the
tubes for the use of 170mm objectives.

Theo







.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Better idea ...
    ... cutting off 1cm seems not so good. ... eyepieces. ... would it be possible to cut off 1 cm of the binocular tubes? ...
    (sci.techniques.microscopy)
  • 160mm objectives on Orthoplan: cut off the tube?
    ... I know that most 160mm objectives can be used on the Orthoplan ... without 'much' impact on the image quality, but if I want to get the best ... would it be possible to cut off 1 cm of the binocular tubes? ...
    (sci.techniques.microscopy)
  • Here is why; and confusing conclusions about tubelength
    ... that I have a set of 160mm DIC objectives that I want to use on a Orthoplan. ... - 152 mm distance between shoulder of objective and its intermediary image ...
    (sci.techniques.microscopy)
  • Re: Here is why; and confusing conclusions about tubelength
    ... I already found out (by trying some great Zeiss objectives on a good Nikon ... it is for the Dialux 20 150+10=160mm and for the Orthoplan ... - 152 mm distance between shoulder of objective and its intermediary image ...
    (sci.techniques.microscopy)