MicrobeHunter.com Microscopy Forum

Exactly! Nice drawing too!

If you rotate the polarizer in this setup would you see light diminution indicative of polarization.

I am very proud to present my second "non Zeiss" member in the microscope family: An Olympus BX60 microscope. This should be really my very very last scope:



Packing was taken seriously ... 114lb/52kg with wooden crate - air freight from oversea, has some costs but it safely and well arrived.

Congratulations! Very nice looking. Is that the DIC slider I see above the nosepiece?

As you say - well packed

This should be really my very very last scope

They do say never say never ...

Very cool! Is it new, sure looks like it. What lenses and filters does it come with?

Must be quite exciting at your place with such a beautiful array of different scopes

Hi 75RR,
thank you - yes it has DIK. Took quite long until I decided to buy this microscope - so hardly a day or night without dreaming about this microscope. Finally...dreams become true.

Dear Wes,
still an old scope, must be something like 20 or more years old I guess. But like new after fixing few smaller things & cleaning (re-greasing the noise piece and one eyepiece).
It has the older UIS objectives fitted UPLFL (10,20,40 + 100) and Fluorescense cubes for UV, Blue and Green erection are in the turret.

Main reason to get this nice scope was the possiblity to directly capture the full corrected intermediate image directly on the camera sensor (without okular/projective or camera objective).

A quick comparision of the Photo-Adaptions:

a) Olypus BX60 - UPlanFL40/0.75 PH2 - Canon EOS 600 (with flash)
Focus on Pleurosigma angulatum:


b) Zeiss IM35 - Plan Neofluar 40/0,90 Imm - SKpl W10/20 - YN35mm F2 - Canon EOS 650 (with flash)
Focus on Pleurosigma angulatum:


c) Olypus BX60 - UPlanFL40/0.75 PH2 - Canon EOS 600 (with flash)
Focus on Stauroneis phoenicenteron:


d) Zeiss IM35 - Plan Neofluar 40/0,90 Imm - SKpl W10/20 - YN35mm F2 - Canon EOS 650 (with flash)
Focus on Stauroneis phoenicenteron:

All being equal and calculated by thumb, is that a 50% difference in magnification between the photo adapters?

Be interesting if you increased the magnification of the UPlanFL40/0.75 PH2 by that amount to compare the objectives.

Hi 75RR,
think the important difference is the Field of View - the adaption with the Olympus allows to capture the full FOV 22+, while the Zeiss finite has less FOV and crops a rectangle out of the FOW of 20.
Direct image of the intermediate image to the sensor of the camera also mean that is is less sensible to dirt allocated in between.

Some corpped images:

Olympus:


Zeiss:


Obviously the Zeiss has some advantage due to higher n.A. and the water immersion. Also cover glass of the testplate has only thickness of 0.13, so the correction collar of the Zeiss Objective makes some difference to abopt the S.A.

ImperatorRex wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 25, 2019 10:54 am

Hi 75RR,
think the important difference is the Field of View - the adaption with the Olympus allows to capture the full FOV 22+, while the Zeiss finite has less FOV and crops a rectangle out of the FOW of 20.
Direct image of the intermediate image to the sensor of the camera also mean that is is less sensible to dirt allocated in between.

You are quite right of course. That was what you were showing us.

Thanks for the comparison (which I have placed side by side and reduced a bit, hope that is alright.) I think the Olympus holds up very well!


Note: So that both images would be bias positive I rotated the Zeiss image 180 - that might account for some perceived differences.

Well done 75RR, much better to compare. Also think the Olympus is doing quite well, also considering it is a phase contrast objective.

ImperatorRex wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 25, 2019 8:03 pm

Well done 75RR, much better to compare. Also think the Olympus is doing quite well, also considering it is a phase contrast objective.

Indeed. Phase and 0.75NA, doing very well!

Did you use oil or other immersion medium with the Neofluar objective?

You get very nice quality with both objective, it'd be interesting to see some images you take with your new microscope, it looks very promising

Hi Wes,
the Zeiss Plan Neofluar 40/0,90 is a multi-immersion objective, so the collar allows to use the immersion medium of your choice: oil, water or glycerin. Water is very convenient to use, its very easy to clean. I usually prefer the the dry objective Zeiss Planapo 40/0,95 but it has a bit a gradient in the DIC background, so I was using the Plan Neofluar instead to give the Zeiss a good chance against the Olympus

Yes, will do some first photos. The flash setup at the Olympus is a bit provisionally, but seems to be good enough to start with photos. I have not really good pond samples, so probabely will go for some Haematococcus pluvialis algae...they are quick to re-activate from dried aplanospores. Maybe some direct comparisons then between the DIC from Olympus against the old Zeiss. What I have seen is that the Olympus has a very nice & strong contour contrast, were the Zeiss is much softer. Lets see how this looks on the photos.

Hi,
did a comparison of my photo adaptions I use currently:

green rectangle: Olympus BX with Canon EOS600D (the intermediate image is directly projected to the camera sensor)
red rectangle: Zeiss Standard with large field optovar 0,8x - KPL SKPL 10x/20 (Ocular) - YN EF35mm (Camera objective) - Canon EOS650D
blue rectangle: Zeiss Standard - KPL SKPL 10x/20 (Ocular) - YN EF35mm (Camera objective) - Canon EOS650D



The BX photo adaption does even capture a bit more width of the FOV than is visible in the eyepieces (FOV22).

Below the single images taken with the 10x objectives:

Olympus BX UPlanFL 10x/0,30 PH1


Zeiss Standard PlanApo 10/0,32 (with Optovar 0,80)


Zeiss Standard PlanApo 10/0,32 (with Optovar 1,0)


Some other photos

Pleurosigma angulatum (in air):

Olympus BX UPlanFL 10x/0,30 PH1:


Zeiss Standard PlanApo 10/0,32 (with Optovar 0,80)


Olympus BX UPlanFL 40x/0,75 PH2


Zeiss Standard PlanApo 40/0,95 (with Optovar 0,80)


Zeiss Standard PlanApo 40/0,95 (with Optovar 1,0)


Olympus BX UPlanFL 10x/0,30 PH1:
(Scyllium young Shark)


Zeiss Standard PlanApo 10/0,32 (with Optovar 0,80)


Zeiss Standard PlanApo 10/0,32 (with Optovar 1,0)

Interesting comparison. What I personally take from it:

1. The S-KPL is a very good eyepiece for photography (as previously shown by others) - no wonder it is rare and very expensive
2. In spite of the 20-30 years age difference and the infinity optics of the BX, and of course the huge price difference, the Zeiss Standard yields about the same excellent performance as the BX (for brightfield !).

And a question please. Why a 35mm camera lens and not a 40mm lens ? considering the 10X eyepiece and APS-C sensor ?

Hi Hobbyst46,
definitely the Zeiss Standard still performes very well, respectively if equipped with Planapos - and yes it will cost only a fraction of the invinite systems.

From my experience I do not think that the SKPL 10x/20 makes a much better performance compared to a KPL 10x/20. So it is a nice to have but not really a must.
A cheap Photoadaption with good results is also a KPL 8x/18 with a 50mm Camera objective. Of coarse a slightly smaller FOV.

Would like to share some details for a very compact and simple photo adaption for the Olympus BX:

• Photo adapter length is just 60mm / 2,4 inches (distance from the trino flange to the Canon EOS Camera flange)

• The intermediate picture of the microscope is directly projected on the sensor of the Camera. No optic like photo ocular PE or camera objective is required

• The photo image is even a bit larger than the image visible in the eyepieces

The original Olympus solution is more complex, expensive and less compact (Phototubus BX with PE Photookular and Adapter L measures nearly 240mm / 10 inches).

Ideal solution for an infinity system.

Made to order phototube I suppose, is it adjustable?

What is the camera sensor size?

Hi 75RR,
you are right, the tube is not commerically availble, but there is a guy in the Austrian micro forum who fabricates such tubes. Anyway it is not rocket-science, one side connects to the tube head an the other side has the thread for the T2 adapter for Canon bajonet. The phototube itself is not adjustable, the parfocal setup is made by adjustable eyepieces. This works quite well, so I do not depend on life-view of the camera.

There are various different table inserts available for the vertical Zeiss IM35. Recently I had the chance to get another table insert, it is another variant of a holder for petri-dishes, the Zeiss item number is 47 17 38. The holder is adjustable, the claws of the holder allows the use of different Petri dish diameters.
I find it very handy because it is also possible to fit other slides, cover glasses and other carriers that I have in use.

Below some fotos that I would like to share:

Nice design features in that table insert - well made, well thought out.

Simple conversion of the 100W BX Lamp housing to a LED solution with option to fit a flash bulb. The BX lamp housing can be easily converted back into its original status if such is required. Similiar solution may be applicable also for other microscopes?

Reasons for the conversion:
So far I used a beam splitter (50/50) for the flash. Howerever with DIK and objectives 60x and 100x (ISO 200 at the camera) the flash power was reaching the limit.

A simple construction - but I have to admit it may look a bit strange:



















Costs are rather limited:

- Alu disc („ALU Ronde Ø60x1,5mm“ - 2,60 Euro).
- 3 metric screws M3x40mm with 6 washers.
- a bit cable to extent the flash bulb.
- 1x LED CREE XM-L2 U4 + Heattransfer and gluing pad (16,50 Euro).
- Flash - very cheap chinese clones for Canon flushs... etc.

Nice!

Is the LED sitting directly behind or just a bit above/below the flash tube?

75RR wrote: ↑

Sat May 16, 2020 9:26 pm

Is the LED sitting directly behind or just a bit above/below the flash tube?

The flash tube is as close as possible, just a little bit above the LED.

Flash is working very well
Something you may consider if you apply similiar solution:
I have been told that xenon tubes emit quite some portion of UV light:
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/features ... mtech3.jpg

I had some doubt if the short flash light duration may ever cause some issue? But seems such UV rays can even damage pol filters. Note that it was not a HBO lamp that damaged the pol-filter, damage was caused by a xenon flash: https://www.mikroskopie-forum.de/index. ... #msg201628

Therefore I now consider to mount a UV filter. Will install after the lamp collector where previously the heat filter glas was mounted (dia. 44mm).

ImperatorRex wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 1:55 pm

I had some doubt if the short flash light duration may ever cause some issue? But seems such UV rays can even damage pol filters. Note that it was not a HBO lamp that damaged the pol-filter, damage was caused by a xenon flash: https://www.mikroskopie-forum.de/index. ... #msg201628

Gives new meaning to the expression "blinded by the flash"

ImperatorRex wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 1:55 pm

Flash is working very well
Something you may consider if you apply similiar solution:
I have been told that xenon tubes emit quite some portion of UV light:
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/features ... mtech3.jpg

I had some doubt if the short flash light duration may ever cause some issue? But seems such UV rays can even damage pol filters. Note that it was not a HBO lamp that damaged the pol-filter, damage was caused by a xenon flash: https://www.mikroskopie-forum.de/index. ... #msg201628

Therefore I now consider to mount a UV filter. Will install after the lamp collector where previously the heat filter glas was mounted (dia. 44mm).

A very good safety measure. Xenon lamps do emit UV. Not only in microscope illuminators but in flash units as well.

Hobbyst46/75RR,
right...Polfilter may be replaced, but the eyelight not. Safety first!

Hi,
once more another simple DYI LED solution for the Olympus BX. This time it is intended to replace the HBO high pressure Hg 100W burner used for incident light fluorescence. Maybe you can apply a similiar solution also on other microscope stands?

My plan was to fit an UV LED toghether with a normal CREE LED, so no disassemble required to switch between UV or VIS LED.

Some photos first that explain the principal:

The LED lighting has a blue plastic collar to protect from stray light:


Two seperate connectors, one plug for the UV LED power supply and the other one for the "normal" LED




The UV LED is right in the center of the Alu-Disc:


...a small shift of the cover centers the other LED into center of the collector optic:


First testing and results:

UV-excitation filter:


Blue light excitation filter:


Green light excitation filter:


First I had a different plan: I installed the UV LED exactly in the center focal point of the collector lense. The other LED has some little offset. I just cutted off some off the LEDs cupper board since intention was to keep offset as small as possible. My expectation was that it will still provide sufficient beam power even if it remains de-centered.





However the result was disappointing, the beam power of the out of center LED was very low, not usable to achive blue or green fluoreszenz excitation! I should have tried before cutting the LEDs!

But there is always a plan "B"
Remove two of the stud screws to make the cover disc moveable - so it is not a big thing to quickly turn the disc a bit to center the other LED. Actually it is rather convinient to do, so finally mission acomplished
Ende gut, alles gut

FYI: I have installed the following, rather cheap LEDs:
- SSC VIOSYS UV 365nm CUN66A1B
- CREE XM-L2 U4