MicrobeHunter.com Microscopy Forum

Thanks gekko, a similar chart also appears in my previous link: http://olympus.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/anatomy/coverslipcorrection.html Like the comparison photo - makes the message very clear. I think we should start a thread on cover slip thickness - something people can find. Under Microscopes and ...

Enjoyed that video, had not seen one before. Thanks

Hi tbarnes,

I am afraid I and it would seem others here have no experience with that camera.
I believe it is a CCTV security Camera? Other than finding the manual on the web using the model number I can only suggest you try and contact a firm that sells or installs them. Good luck

Interesting blue effect. A comparison would be useful. 20x is a good size, my 25x is my favorite. 10x to 40x is too big a jump.

An attempt at imaging Closterium in darkfield ...

Successful attempt!
That worked out really well. Single image?

Both your phase contrast and DIC are really excellent.

Thanks gekko. I blame my tools!

Many thanks KurtM

But your scale bars are way dim.

Forgot to say - they are only visible with 3D glasses. ;)

Are we talking past each other?

Probably.

If my memory serves, I have sent you a long time ago a table of cover glass thickness tolerance values for various objective NAs

Had a quick look - no luck, will try later.

Thank JimT

Do you live in a warm climate where you can get micro organisms and algae year round?

I do. They say the best climate in the world is in the tropics at 1000 meters above sea level.
I am not going to argue with them!

Many thanks mrsonchus and gekko.
Attempted to photograph one yesterday without much success, today went better.

Very nice. Agree that # 3 is especially nice and clear

Thanks zzffnn and JimT, very kind of you both.

63x/1.4 Oil, 60µm, DIC, 10, 11 and 13 image stacks in Photoshop

NIce video & nice Darkfield!

Manual says 0.17, Ichthyophthirius says 0.17 and Charles Krebs says 0.17 http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=29987 Charles Krebs PostPosted: Mon Feb 15, 2016 2:57 pm Agree that ideally you want the cover slip in contact with the subject (or at least really, really, REALLY close! Wi...

The important thing in my view, whether the steps are 2µm or 5µm, is that each step have areas that are clearly in focus and that you make sure to capture the salient points of the subject.

Sometimes I put the water drop on the cover glass and wait 5 to 10 minutes for stuff that wants to settle to do so, then I apply the slide to the cover glass and invert, and hope that what settled would remain in touch with the cover glass. But I don't know to what extent, if any, this helps: I jus...

Assuming it will fit and by that I mean fit well (do not forget you do need room to lower the stage) Given that these things are best when they are part of the original design of the microscope, I would give it a qualified yes. If you will you see $150 worth of improvement is another matter. Hard to...

The scale bars are so BIG and BRIGHT and BOLD that I am sure some people are asking themselves why you felt the need to add a Diatom to them when they so successfully dominate the space on their own. ;)

Wow that was fast! Many thanks

Those are great. Especially like the first one.

Have a question as I do not have any compensators - could you photograph the same diatom both with and without a 1st order red compensator? I would be nice to see what it actually does. Thanks

Very nice video. Like the Brightfield, lots of detail. Agree that the Haematococcus does add to the Darkfield segment. Did you try adding a blue filter to help the camera cope with the blue tinge?

Can't help with the ID either, just wanted to mention that it is possible to edit a post - you can swop that 7 for a ? if you want.

Found what I think is the correct link - although it does not matter much if it is another - still interesting!

http://olympus.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/an ... ction.html

Check out the tenth post in the link that the paragraph is from.
It is by Ichthyophthirius

charlie g and gekko - looks like you both skimmed through this paragraph! This is a quote from this thread: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22425 Quote: The correct cover glass thickness should be No 1.5 (0.16-0.19 mm), not No 1 (0.13-0.16 mm). 0.17 mm is the reference cover gl...

I also came across that article looking for the famous disappearing Taylor Microcompressor, Mark II.
One would think there would be a trace of it somewhere!

Thanks Charlie g, full text on the objective reads: Planapo 63/1.4 Oel 160/- No correction collar This is a quote from this thread: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22425 The correct cover glass thickness should be No 1.5 (0.16-0.19 mm), not No 1 (0.13-0.16 mm). 0.17 mm is the r...

It would be highly unusual , if you purchased a microscope of the type you have and not have kohler type illumination ... Given how the sellers and manufacturers of these microscopes regularly trumpet 2000x, though in this case it is 1600x, the fact that they have not mentioned Köhler is almost a g...

This is qawine's microscope: http://www.amscope.com/phase-contrast-t ... 1600x.html linked from her first post.
It does not seem to have a Field Diaphragm.