My Kit

[apochronaut]

Rod, if you have it that way, I would suggest using the apos for darkfield, then your achromats for oblique/brightfield. The achromats perform

better in that arrangement.

?????????

[zzffnn]

Sorry, I meant if Rod can get ortho illuminator and darkfield condenser on the 4 with apos, it will perform better than his current infinity achromat DF rig.

His infinity achromat DF rig can then be changed to oblique BF, by changing to a BF condenser, and it should perform better that way, since CA appears less obvious in BF than DF.

[rnabholz]

Rod,
If you get a Series 2 body, which does not have the built in illuminator, you can user your OrthoIlluminator.

That thought had occurred to me....

[rnabholz]

Edit: your current darkfield condenser may not fit on 4 though.

I still have the 214 DF Condenser, and I do believe it will fit on the 4, at least according to the Series 2/4 Catalog.

Does the 90x Apo work in darkfield without a funnel stop? Can it even take a funnel stop?

[Charles]

I have a spare Series 2 if you want it. You just pay postage and maybe some diatom samples!

[apochronaut]

One more

IMG_20161212_205243-800x600.jpg

That definitely looks like a modification, although the bulb and bulb proximity to the collector lens are about the same as with the original design. The cord goes to a variable 6.5v. power supply, though?

[rnabholz]

I have a spare Series 2 if you want it. You just pay postage and maybe some diatom samples!

Well that sounds like a pretty good deal to me. You want those with boulders or without? ;^)

[zzffnn]

Edit: your current darkfield condenser may not fit on 4 though.

I still have the 214 DF Condenser, and I do believe it will fit on the 4, at least according to the Series 2/4 Catalog.

Does the 90x Apo work in darkfield without a funnel stop? Can it even take a funnel stop?

If you 90x apo does not have iris, then it needs a funnel stop for sure. Apochronaut told me that AO made an DF funnel for the 90x apo.

You can have a machinist custom make one too, but it may be expensive to start from scratch (we modified a funnel and added a few restriction caps before). Not sure if it is worth it for you.

Does your 40x apo has NA of 0.85 or 0.95?
If it has NA of 0.95, which is too high for live mounts, then it will only work well for the thinnest and cleanest mounted diatoms. Otherwise halos will be distracting. It may be too much work to convert your Apostar to DF, if that is the case.

Yes, 214 works on AO4. Does the toric condenser's head lens fit into 214 body?

[apochronaut]

Edit: your current darkfield condenser may not fit on 4 though.

I still have the 214 DF Condenser, and I do believe it will fit on the 4, at least according to the Series 2/4 Catalog.

Does the 90x Apo work in darkfield without a funnel stop? Can it even take a funnel stop?

There was a funnel stop for the 90x apochromat and they also made a 1.30 N.A. version with an iris diaphragm. The 214F DF condenser should work fine.
The funnel shows up in DF condenser kits from time to time on ebay.

[rnabholz]

One more

IMG_20161212_205243-800x600.jpg

That definitely looks like a modification, although the bulb and bulb proximity to the collector lens are about the same as with the original design. The cord goes to a variable 6.5v. power supply, though?

The cord has been spliced and has the later two post small round connector. The transformer is the one pictured here

img_3050_std.jpg (63.11 KiB) Viewed 11643 times

Which I don't think to be the original, but I believe to be pretty similar in function to the original. 4.5 to 7.5v

Regarding bulbs. You mentioned the original was 18 watts. I did some looking around and found a recommendation on the XMission AO site for a 1594 bulb. I found this:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/131098807564

These are listed as 30 watt. Now having had the recent experience with the AO 20 with the cracked rear condenser, I am a bit skittish regarding heat. Will that 30 watt bulb pose a risk in that regard?

[gekko]

One more

IMG_20161212_205243-800x600.jpg

That definitely looks like a modification, although the bulb and bulb proximity to the collector lens are about the same as with the original design. The cord goes to a variable 6.5v. power supply, though?

The cord has been spliced and has the later two post small round connector. The transformer is the one pictured here

img_3050_std.jpg

Which I don't think to be the original, but I believe to be pretty similar in function to the original.

Regarding bulbs. You mentioned the original was 18 watts. I did some looking around and found a recommendation on the XMission AO site for a 1594 bulb. I found this:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/131098807564

These are listed as 30 watt. Now having had the recent experience with the AO 20 with the cracked rear condenser, I am a bit skittish regarding heat. Will that 30 watt bulb pose a risk in that regard?

My view, for what it's worth, is that it is never a good idea to arbitrarily use a bulb power higher than what the instrument (or light fixture) was designed for.

I may be trying to address the wrong question, but I have recently bought a proper replacement bulb for a different AO microscope for a very reasonable price at:
http://www.topbulb.com/
http://www.topbulb.com/specialty-bulbs/ ... microscope

[Charles]

I have a spare Series 2 if you want it. You just pay postage and maybe some diatom samples!

Well that sounds like a pretty good deal to me. You want those with boulders or without? ;^)

The boulders don't bother me. It actually makes it easy to clean my needle by rubbing on them! Besides, I pick out the diatoms. If you want it let me know. I think I still have your address.

[apochronaut]

One more

IMG_20161212_205243-800x600.jpg

That definitely looks like a modification, although the bulb and bulb proximity to the collector lens are about the same as with the original design. The cord goes to a variable 6.5v. power supply, though?

The cord has been spliced and has the later two post small round connector. The transformer is the one pictured here

img_3050_std.jpg

Which I don't think to be the original, but I believe to be pretty similar in function to the original. 4.5 to 7.5v

Regarding bulbs. You mentioned the original was 18 watts. I did some looking around and found a recommendation on the XMission AO site for a 1594 bulb. I found this:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/131098807564

These are listed as 30 watt. Now having had the recent experience with the AO 20 with the cracked rear condenser, I am a bit skittish regarding heat. Will that 30 watt bulb pose a risk in that regard?

Easy on the 30 watt from ebay as Gekko suggests, for now, until you know more about what is in there. The bulb you have in your illuminator looks a little weird, with it's conical filament compared to the recommended bulb, which has a short bridge filament mounted forward in the envelope . Are there no other markings on it , other than GE 6?
The reason for the question is that, since that GE bulb was made, there has been a wholesale takeover of the light bulb replacement supply by Chinese suppliers. In true Chinese style, there is a focus on price and less so on performance. The cheap bulbs run hot and the filament design is often not the same as the original. Most of the bulbs out there are " substitute" bulbs with the same voltage, wattage, envelope style, base but having a standardized C-6 type straight bridge type filament, usually longer than the original instead of the specialized filament intrinsic to the original bulb number. They usually carry the same # but aren't the same bulb. Sometimes, the filament is not the same distance from the base, which is a critical spec., when the filament needs to be aligned.
Sometimes the filament shape is designed to direct the illumination in a beam, whereas the bridge type filament can spread the illumination in a wider beam, losing focused luminosity . Your bulb has a very purposeful looking filament, obviously designed to concentrate the light forward.
Find out what it is and how many watts it is. Don't risk a cracked collector lens.
Also, many of these 6v. bulbs are 6.2v, 6.5v maximum. The original transformer was a 6.5v and you now have 7.5v. It would be very easy to overdrive the bulb and burn it out prematurely. 10% overvolt, results in a 70% drop in bulb life.

[rnabholz]

I have a spare Series 2 if you want it. You just pay postage and maybe some diatom samples!

Well that sounds like a pretty good deal to me. You want those with boulders or without? ;^)

The boulders don't bother me. It actually makes it easy to clean my needle by rubbing on them! Besides, I pick out the diatoms. If you want it let me know. I think I still have your address.

Well in that case, the boulders are no extra charge. ;^)

I'll PM you.

[rnabholz]

Thanks Gekko and Apo, I absolutely agree that I want the correct bulb.

No other markings on the bulb than the GE 6 designation.

I have not powered the bulb higher than 6.5, and now will not.

Edit

Page 9 of the Series 2/4 Catalog referred to a GE 88 as the bulb recommended for the base illuminator, a "6v, 15 candlepower" bulb.

[rnabholz]

This would seem to be a good match

http://www.bulbconnection.com/ViewSIMIt ... Au488P8HAQ

GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS

WATTS
13

VOLTS
6.8

BASE TYPE
BA15d (Double Contact Bayonet)

BULB TYPE
S-8

RATED AVERAGE LIFE
300 hrs

LUMENS
188

CANDLE POWER
15

FILAMENT
C-6

BULB FINISH
Clear
DIMENSIONS

MAXIMUM OVERALL LENGTH (MOL)
2.000 in (50.8 mm)

BULB DIAMETER
1.000 in (25.4 mm)

LIGHT CENTER LENGTH (LCL)
1.120 in (28.4 mm)
PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS

MANUFACTURER PRODUCT CODE
25772

ORDERING CODE(S)
88 Miniature


Any thoughts?


Thanks

Rod

[apochronaut]

1493( 18 watt) is what I am using for phase and it is enough. the older G.E. 1493 filament is not much more than 2mm in length and sits about 12mm from the top of the glass envelope. the coil is quite thick too; about 3/4mm. like this.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/GE-General-Elec ... Swe-FU-MTK
contrast that to this, likely Chinese made 1493.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1493-BULB-/2222 ... SwxKtYB9Jv it is more like a car tail light bulb. I am thinking that the light is going to disperse more and the filament seems to be farther down in the bulb envelope.
.

[apochronaut]

This would seem to be a good match

http://www.bulbconnection.com/ViewSIMIt ... Au488P8HAQ

GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS

WATTS
13

VOLTS
6.8

BASE TYPE
BA15d (Double Contact Bayonet)

BULB TYPE
S-8

RATED AVERAGE LIFE
300 hrs

LUMENS
188

initial lumens on the GE 1493 is 289.

[apochronaut]

I think the bulb you have in there is an 1130. all of the ones now made have a straight across c-6 filament but I found some pictures of older ones that had a peaked dome type filament like yours has. They are rated at 255 lumens but seem to be more forgiving of voltage being rated at 6-8. Structurally they are identical to the original GE 88 but they use about 4 more watts and yield about 65 more lumens.

[rnabholz]

Thanks Apo,

The pointer to the 1493 was really helpful. I have one on the way, and now I know for what I am looking.

I take it you are comfortable with the higher wattage of this vs the 88?

How about the 1130 you think I have now. Safe to use until the new one arrives?

Again, many thanks.

Rod

[rnabholz]

I spent some time this evening experimenting with connecting my DSLR to the AO 4.

The key component in the effort was a few parts from an AO Model 635 Photomicrography Camera. The original configuration was made up of a threaded trinoc adapter, a shock mount disk, a shutter mechanism, and a 35mm film body.

For my purposes, I am using the adapter and shock mount disk. Contained within the disk is a key piece, a projection lens.

After the seller was kind enough to provide some measurements from his complete 635, it looked like the flange to sensor distance of 45mm for Canon EOS DSLRs could be accommodated fairly easily.

So to give it a try, I just set the lensless body with a T mount attached to provide a bit of needed spacing centered over the projection lens.

DSLR Test Set Up.jpg (144.93 KiB) Viewed 11565 times

Surprisingly, the focus was very close. The adapter offers some adjustability to facilitate parfocality, and after a quick adjustment, it was quite close.

Nothing left to do but give it a try.

Here are a few test images

DSLR Test 4.JPG (131.08 KiB) Viewed 11565 times

DSLR Test 6.JPG (170.37 KiB) Viewed 11565 times

DSLR Test 5.JPG (217.83 KiB) Viewed 11565 times

DSLR Test 2.JPG (133.6 KiB) Viewed 11565 times

Very pleased so far. Obviously, I need to come up with a way to provide a bit more stable connection than simply setting the camera on the adapter, that's a disaster waiting to happen, but at least it seems that the spacing is gonna be easy to handle.

[gekko]

Looks very nice. Is the field of view captured by the camera acceptable without the lens?

[rnabholz]

Looks very nice. Is the field of view captured by the camera acceptable without the lens?

Thanks Gekko. If by the lens, you mean the projection lens, I can't comment yet, as the way it is configured, I am not sure I can remove the lens from the adapter. I will have to investigate that.

As configured, the system delivers about 2/3rds of the field visible in the 10x Compens eyepieces. Those eyepieces will never be confused with widefield eyepieces by any means, but the net effect is that a pretty nice sharp field is delivered to the camera.

Thanks for the interest

Rod

[apochronaut]

It turns out I have all three of those bulbs , here. the 88 , 1493 and 1130, in multiples. The 88 and 1493 are in my microscope bulb box and the 1130, out in the shop with the tractor parts. I did some tests with an incident light meter calibrated in foot candles. The 1130 turns out to be the brightest of the lot by about 25% at 6v 7v and 8v, metered right at the tip of the globe. It is a durable filament capable of handling vibration because it is an old 6v. taillight bulb and has an 8v. rating to handle voltage variance, sometimes encountered with generator/voltage regulator systems. Oddly, the 1493 had the weakest foot candle output.
However, when installed in the microscope and metered at the illuminator window, in the base, the 1130 and 1493 are almost dead equal at the three voltages, with the 88 lagging about 20% behind. The 1493 has a slight edge at 6v. but 6v. is only useful up to 20x with phase. The foot candle output doubles between 6 and 7v, then tapers to a further 30% increase again at 8v.

So, those shots are without the photo lens installed? I'm seeing chromatic aberration and edge flare that shouldn't be there with those apochromats.

[rnabholz]

Thanks for the bulb test. You may be the only person in North America able to run this trial with components and equipment on hand! Thank you.

The images below are WITH the photo lens in line. Your eye is more discerning than mine, this is my first experience with Apos. Where specifically are you seeing the issues?

Thanks

Rod

[gekko]

Thanks Gekko. If by the lens, you mean the projection lens, I can't comment yet, as the way it is configured, I am not sure I can remove the lens from the adapter. I will have to investigate that.

My fault, Rod: I thought that the adapter did not include a lens. Sorry about that. I certainly did not mean for you to test it without the lens.

[rnabholz]

Thanks Gekko. If by the lens, you mean the projection lens, I can't comment yet, as the way it is configured, I am not sure I can remove the lens from the adapter. I will have to investigate that.

My fault, Rod: I thought that the adapter did not include a lens. Sorry about that. I certainly did not mean for you to test it without the lens.

No worries gekko, rereading my clumsy description, I can see how you took it that way.

Rod

[apochronaut]

Thanks for the bulb test. You may be the only person in North America able to run this trial with components and equipment on hand! Thank you.

The images below are WITH the photo lens in line. Your eye is more discerning than mine, this is my first experience with Apos. Where specifically are you seeing the issues?

Thanks

Rod

Pictures two and three, being pretty solidly blue and then red, might be masking what are showing up in 1 and 4.
I'm wondering what is happening with the red and yellow colour banding around some of the cells. If you look at image 4 the band of cells down the left side seem affected by flare and chroma and the lower right corner of image 1 , as well.

[rnabholz]

Thanks for the bulb test. You may be the only person in North America able to run this trial with components and equipment on hand! Thank you.

The images below are WITH the photo lens in line. Your eye is more discerning than mine, this is my first experience with Apos. Where specifically are you seeing the issues?

Thanks

Rod

Pictures two and three, being pretty solidly blue and then red, might be masking what are showing up in 1 and 4.
I'm wondering what is happening with the red and yellow colour banding around some of the cells. If you look at image 4 the band of cells down the left side seem affected by flare and chroma and the lower right corner of image 1 , as well.

Thanks Apo.

I will do some more shooting and vary the subjects and see how they look.

Rod

[rnabholz]

I spent some time tonight experimenting to see if I could see under what conditions this color was showing up, and I think I have made a discovery.

It would seem that I need to pay more attention to condenser position, and adjusting it carefully after each change of objective. When I did that the spurious color was very greatly reduced and even eliminated in many situations. It seems that I will need to be much more deliberate with that aspect of operation with these objectives.

I did not do any serious photography tonight, but will as time permits. It did seem to me that the camera was seeing more color than I was visually. I will watch for that in the next session.

Rod