MicrobeHunter.com Microscopy Forum

Thank you, gekko, Rod and Charlie G. Charlie G, that sample in fact came from a two slide capture-transfer procedure. But the first slide was a dirty 1mm thick mount (without cover). It was a test of capture accuracy and aimed at an amoeba test (which was obtained successfully on the final slide). I...

Sorry no idea.
Very nice photo though. Did you try your 63x NA 1.4 DIC on them?

Here you can find printing template and how-to's: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28056&sid=84b142687cf6cb6bec5668fca3642cff Member "fonakta" at that forum took some nice photos with the filter. Click on his profile to see his posts and photos. I think off-set oblique + polariz...

Thank you very much, Josh. I think light scattering by polyploidy chromatin bodies theory makes lots of sense. I thought about that before (since nucleic acid/protein complex can get big and macronucleus is the only blue thing there), but I pushed that idea aside, as I have not seen it with other pr...

Wow! I love both!

Did Dalai Lama teach you some spells for coercing critters to pose for camera? Tell us more please...........

And I thought 100x objective has too thin a focus depth to focus well on Rotifers? Not in your hands!

Yes, please do, apo. I am interested.

apo, According to theory, NA 1.0 oil immersion can tolerate around 12-15 mm tube variation: https://www.google.com/search?site=webhp&tbm=isch&source=hp&ei=TPm9Vp3zGoef-wG8za2gAw&q=tube+length+na&oq=tube+length+na&gs_l=mobile-gws-hp.3...1164.3807.0.4034.15.15.0.0.0.0.183.1876.2j13.15.0..2..0...1.1j4....

Our nearby city Galveston does Mardi Gras every year. That is certainly possible

Thank you, gents. Bruce kindly refered me to a YouTube video by Bill Porter: https://youtu.be/KpUDXtQYazM In that video, you can see blue macronucleaus. And a previous forum thread: http://www.microbehunter.com/forum/photographs-and-videos/what-i-just-learned-about-that-large-pink-ciliate-video-i-po...

My apologizes, Rod. I forgot about flip top condensers. They are indeed less resistant to water (while lenses can get wet without problem, iris diaphragm should not be left soaked in water or oil for a long time). I would suggest using minimal amount (just enough) of water and take off condenser for...

Rod, Did you try condenser immersion. With that, you will get a light cone of NA 1.25. Your 40x objective back lens sees only NA 0.66 directly, but can still gather indirect oblique light reflected/refracted by subjects. So there would be a good amount of peripheral light coming from condenser, gath...

I am sorry, Paul. You took me wrong. We can answer your questions one by one, like this: 1) no, you should not mix 160TL with infinity optics; 2) no, you should not immerse dry objectives into water; 3) no, you should not use oil immersion objectives dry, in general. But you would learn a lot more b...

All very beautiful! Thank you for sharing.

Thank you, BillT and JimT.
Sorry the last fragment of the slender Euglenoid is so short and small. 40x NA 0.65 filming was difficult as the critter twisted a lot and it went into detritus quickly and hid there forever.

Thank you, JimT.
Sorry, I have no idea. I have been wondering about that too. Maybe an expert like Bruce or Josh can comment? I can only Google it.........

In general, 160mm or any finite tube length optics are not compatible with infinity optics. May I suggest reading online resources or library books to obtain basic microscopy knowledge: http://www.olympus-ims.com/en/microscope/terms/feature15/ http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/indexmag.html?http:/...

Euglenoids darkfield video https://youtu.be/5uHGUlFnknI Objectives used were a LOMO dry 40x 0.65 (for Phacus) and a 20x 0.4 (for the slender Euglenoid). Using objective NA above 0.85 produced too much out-of-focus halos. Recorded using afocal micro 4/3 camera with 30mm lens over 10x visual eyepiece....

Thank you 75RR. In this case, the Zeiss Jena is a short version and only slightly longer than the LOMOs. Eyepiece compensation is supposed to be the same, since LOMOs are copies of short Zeiss Jena. I used LOMO K10x/18 for both objectives. I would like to switch to a LOMO 20x 0.65 one day to get ful...

Frontonia darkfield video: https://youtu.be/OiEnCkOzcjI In the above video, you can clearly see Frontonia's beating cilia and mouth, blue macronucleus, contractile vacuole and food vacuoles containing algae. Objective used was a Zeiss dry 20x 0.65 (for the first fragment) and a LOMO water immersion ...

Yes, Rod. I meant take a photo down the eye tube, without eyepiece, with mask in place and good focus.

Rod,

Please take a photo of objective back lens at 40x NA 0.66, with the mask in optimal position and slightly off. It would be a good future reference, even if nobody can tell how to improve it now (but we can try).

Easier to experiment than to hypothesize though.

With Dry Abbé condensers, your outer most light cone maxes at around NA 0.8. With water immersion if condenser, it gets to around NA 1.25. With oil, it can to around 1.4 if condenser is capable. Condenser immersion lets in a lot more peripheral light in. I feel minimal additional complexity with wat...

Rod, that is a good start.

May I suggest using very slightly bigger mask? Darkfield and Rheinberg stop sizes were not exactly the same in my system.

And do try condenser immersion with oil or water. It WILL make a big difference, at least it did in my system.

Great job! Thank you for sharing!

That is a great start, Kurt!
I think the halos may indeed be related to mount thickness.

Thanks a lot, Kurt. I looked at a petri dish just now with reversed a 10x eyepiece. I think protozoologists would probably prefer 20x Belomo. Reversed 10x EP is about right for ostracods and water fleas, but a bit too low for big parameciums. For bigger insects, 10x loupe is probably better. But hey...

It looks quite good to my eyes. You may want to post a bigger photo with dimension up to 1024 per side. I could not see clearly, maybe try to focus microscope better? If you have a trinocular tube with 10x visual eyepiece, then try to make camera and eyepiece parfocal (when visual eyepiece is focuse...

KurtM wrote:......your comments caused me to spit beer on my monitor........

Examine that spit beer under phase microscope and you will find something interesting

-------------------------------------------------------

Nice work, JimT, as usual. Thank you!

I personally won't use eyepiece magnification over 15x and stick with 10x 90% of the time. That way, I get sharpest and brightest images. Most experienced microscopists don't go over 20x with eyepiece magnification (they only use 20x eyepieces for special applications, that need long working distanc...

Thank you very much, Kurt. Your comments are very helpful. I was basically asking if the Belomo loupe can project a good image cone that is wide and high enough for eyeglasses use. I wear strong prescription eyeglasses and they demand wide field high eye point eyepieces. I tried regular eyepieces li...