MicrobeHunter.com Microscopy Forum

I recently completed nearly the same retrofit. Yours is a much more polished implementation, I must say! I used a Cree XHP-35 topping out at 12W, but the smaller die should be very close in size to the original filament. (More knowledgable people people than I suggest that is important to retain per...

It’s a testament to how rigid the Olympus stage is that you could get clean cuts with it held in the mill that way. I would have thought it would chatter like crazy cantilevered so far from the vice. How deep was each pass?

When I opened mine there was evidence of water intrusion. (I hope it was water!) I think that may have cause the silvering to oxidize from the edges in.

Galf wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 18, 2020 8:52 pm

Does parfocality matter here?
There are 37mm and 45mm parfocal objectives that all conform to RMS- or DIN spec.

(Just don't mix them or you're 'screwed' )

D.I.N. specifies 45mm parfocal distance. J.I.S. specifies 36mm distance. So to conform, yes, it matters.

Images captured through both ends of the bridge and then without the bridge clearly show that this is absolutely degrading the view. Quite a lot, actually. The most obvious effect is a severe vignetting, but no doubt it goes beyond that. It visible on both heads, though not equally. I guess I might ...

. Sorry, my misunderstanding ... I thought the black was the troublesome patch. There is a strange spot/smudge visible MichaelG. I don’t know enough to say if the central area is the optic’s original condition or degraded, so I left the interpretation open. The area is transparent, though, which is...

For what it's worth, I was leaning toward interpreting Zuul's photos the other way around -- the black batch being a relatively clear view through the splitter to a dark background and the surrounding cloudy brownish ring being an advanced stage of the same deterioration I am starting to see around...

Both heads have a completely formed image. I’ve only had the camera on the “far” head. Since I’ve been trialing different camera set-ups, I’ve been assuming any aberations are related to that. I’ll need to swap heads and see what there is to see.

I know photos can hide things, but I’d say that looks completely different than mine.

I’m continuing to clean up and fix my Microstar IV. There is a strange spot/smudge visible on the teaching bridge‘s 1st prism. I don’t know if this is some neuance of the optics or damage to a coating ... or if it harmless or detrimental to the image. This is where the pointer resides, so is there a...

Yes, that’s how it works. It stays in “outbox” until read.

One other resource you need to know about is P.S. Neeley’s AO “encyclopedia”. Have you seen it?

https://user.xmission.com/~psneeley/Per ... oscope.htm

All I know about this scope is that it is a Spencer AO 1036A Welcome! A bit of trivia perhaps, but as Apochronaut said, this is an AO Series 10. 1036A is actually the model of Illuminator. That's a decent condition older series 10. It dates from about 1970, likely earlier. Are you basing the age es...

Shouldn’t it be possible to raise the 3.3x very slightly and move the camera closer to it? That would be similar to how a 10x eyepiece is used as a projection lens. The adjustments would just be smaller.

Maybe he was hoping somebody would say “42” ??

That's from the fairly rare Plasterer's Microscope. It was only briefly catalogued. They mated a 150 head to a Cycloptic body in order to make it more compact and rugged because they knew that under working conditions it might just get chucked into a box with the trowels, floats and such. It had a ...

I agree that looks like a 150 style head. The finish on it has alarm bells screaming, though. That can’t possibly be a factory finish, can it? To me it looks like an old beat up grey head was refurbed to match the new color scheme. The masking is poor. The texture obscuring the diopter grip seems wr...

Element 56 wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 13, 2020 11:43 pm

Thanks Zuul!

What does the -118 and -8 mean?

Kirby

I wish I had a wise, well informed answer, but no. I’ve seen them referred to that way often enough to recognize the designation but no idea what it means. It’s not the catalog number.

Sorry I should have added, I have the following AO microscopes and my 214F condensers fit all of them. 2-1, 4-1, 10-8 and 10-118. I'm not real familiar with AO model numbers so I'm not sure if what I have is a model 110 or if their model 10's. I hope this helps! Kirby That is a series 2, a series 4...

Probably only about £1400 to start ha ha. I think they'll get fed up with me keep asking questions though it's their fault for not providing enough info in the first place. I just heard back from Euromex via Pepler Optics (UK retailer) (quick response) and they tell me that the Oxion has an 80-20 s...

A whole bunch of proprietary photo lenses are going to over correct in your system. Putting a # 181 or 145 about 180mm from the second telan lens should give good results. I thought the lens (Oly PE) might be the problem, too. I tried a 181 in its place (literally same location) and was surprised t...

Yeah, I removed the binocular from the second head and turned the new parts on my little Taig lathe. The nice thing is it gives good access to the camera controls, and you don’t need to switch between eyepieces and camera. The downside is 1-stop less light and lots of man-hours In the garage. I’ve g...

I’ve used it a little with a 20x on my series 10. You don’t get true Darkfield. They are good for higher mag objectives that won’t work with patch stops. On the flip side, for the 20x you should be able to get good results from well made patch stops.

I just finished my 410 camera tube this afternoon. Now I can generate photographic evidence that the rest of the scope still needs lots of work.

I just tried my 214f on my 410. It fits and can be centered, so it seems like it should work fine. Here are photos.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/303621442697 I messaged the seller asking if there were any lenses in the tube but it sold quickly, before I heard back. I guess, because of the small diameter at the top, it would be for video? It does get quite narrow. C-mount would be the typical video attachment, and th...

I was able to find information on the relationship between Elgeet and Olympus, thanks to information published by Yale. https://medicine.yale.edu/cellbio/about/Lentz_Microscopy_Collection_5%20_31_17_304923_284_5094_v1.pdf “ In 1956, Elgeet Optical in Rochester, New York, became the exclusive U.S. di...

DonSchaeffer wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:36 pm

What do you mean direct projection to the camera lens?

Direct to the sensor. No lens.

It appears nearly identical to microscopes marketed in the US as Elgeet. Sellers claim the Elgeet was made by Olympus, but I can’t find any credible source for that claim.

This is a pretty common design, broadly speaking. Any number of Japanese companies might have made it before China emerged as the budget microscope center of thr world. Carton and Kyowa are two of the bigger whitebox makers from that era but there are a lot of Japanese optical firms with fairly lim...