Opinions on these objectives please?

[Gasman]

Hi guys
Just started watching Charles`s excellent `Beyond Macro` series so maybe its a bit premature posting this but I`d be interested in the groups opinions of the objectives that came with my mic.
Its a Leitz Laborlux S scope which I`m very pleased with but Charles`s youtubes are making me look a bit closer at my gear.
These are the objectives which I have at the moment, all Leitz !.
I know the x4,x10x25x40 and x100 are the mags and the 0.12,0.25,0.50,0.65 and 1.35 refer to the numerical aperture and they are all finite objectives but what is the NPL Fluotar lens at the end and also the numbers at the top?.
I`d eventually like to rig up something similar to Charles`s setup where he has the copy stand and bellows unit for his DSLR mounted above his scope, would these objectives suffice for now or what others would I need please?. Do all scope objectives have the same thread size? Any other info on these would be most helpful.
many thanks
Steve

[kit1980]

Hi guys
Just started watching Charles`s excellent `Beyond Macro` series so maybe its a bit premature posting this but I`d be interested in the groups opinions of the objectives that came with my mic.
Its a Leitz Laborlux S scope which I`m very pleased with but Charles`s youtubes are making me look a bit closer at my gear.
These are the objectives which I have at the moment, all Leitz !.
I know the x4,x10x25x40 and x100 are the mags and the 0.12,0.25,0.50,0.65 and 1.35 refer to the numerical aperture and they are all finite objectives but what is the NPL Fluotar lens at the end and also the numbers at the top?.
I`d eventually like to rig up something similar to Charles`s setup where he has the copy stand and bellows unit for his DSLR mounted above his scope, would these objectives suffice for now or what others would I need please?. Do all scope objectives have the same thread size? Any other info on these would be most helpful.
many thanks
Steve

160 in 160/0.17 and 160/- means microscope light path length in mm (so it's a 160mm finite microscope).
0.17 - expected thickness of the cover glass, "-" means differences in cover glass thickness can be tolerated.
NPL Fluotar means "normal field of view plan" and "fluorite aberration correction" (better than achromat but worse than apochromat) - see http://www.microscopyu.com/microscopy-basics/microscope-objective-specifications for a nice abbreviation table.

[zzffnn]

The 100x NPL Fluotar is a very good objective. The EF 20x and 40x objectives have good NA (aperture) for their magnification too.

They should work well for you for a while. Though you would want to use their compensating eyepieces.

Your objectives have RMS (standard) thread size. But not all objectives use that standard.

[Gasman]

Excellent thanks for the info guys, very helpful. I have a Leica birdwatching scope with superb apo optics, so it looks like apo is the way to go regarding microscope objectives, same as astro refractors too!.
regards
Steve

[c-krebs]

I`d eventually like to rig up something similar to Charles`s setup where he has the copy stand and bellows unit for his DSLR mounted above his scope, would these objectives suffice for now or what others would I need please?. Do all scope objectives have the same thread size? Any other info on these would be most helpful.

I'm not exactly sure what you are referring to. Initially I had my DSLR mounted on a heavy copy stand above the trinocular tube (on a bellows) with no hard contact with the microscope. This was done solely to avoid vibration. At that time there were no DSLRs that had electronic first shutter curtains so even with mirror "lock-up", shutter vibration was a problem for photomicrography. It worked very well, but was cumbersome. Today I use cameras that have electronic first shutter curtains and attach the camera directly to the scope.

I know next to nothing about Leica microscope gear... other than as a manufacturer the are top rate. Others may be familiar with your objectives, and can comment more.

All the "big 4" manufacturers offer objectives in several different "tiers", from basic achromats up to the Plan Apos (and myriad specialized optics as well). As might be expected, as they go up in price the quality usually gets better. For the vast majority of uses a good plan achromat will give great viewing meet most needs. If you've got the bucks and can realistically justify it to yourself (and possibly other family members ) there's no doubt, a Plan Apo is nice!

[vasselle]

bonjour
J'ai moi même un microscope Leitz Laborlux K et deux objectifs Leitz EF 10 X et le EF 40 X et je doit dire qui sont très bons optiquement,meilleure que le plan 10 x et 40 X plan que j'avais avant.
Cordialement seb

[Gasman]

Hi Charles
Its the setup shown on your web site here http://www.krebsmicro.com/microsetup2/index.html
I use a Nikon D5500 dslr and I don`t think it has the first shutter curtain you refer to so maybe vibration would still be a problem?.
My scope is a trinocular type and has a x10 projection lens in the adaptor before the dslr which seems to work ok but I`d like to get the hang of the depth of field stacking to get better images. I`ve been mainly using the dof tool in Toupview with a little 5mb Toupcam microscope camera (without the x10 projection lens) up to now but would like to use the dslr more!.
best
Steve

[apochronaut]

A distinct differentiation needs to be made between Leitz and Leica. They are really two separate companies with two very different directions. An assumption is made that, due to the fact that the company is now called Leica and E.Leitz made Leica cameras, that they are one and the same. Leica microsystems, is wholly separate from Leica camera, is in fact owned by a venture capital group out of Washington D.C. and optically, has more of a relationship to American Optical/Reichert, than to E.Leitz.
So, your E. Leitz 160mm tube length objectives have very little to do with the modern Leica and are entirely incompatible. Your objectives, nevertheless, for their era, and even today, are very good and were derived from the Wild Heerbrugg pattern. The NPL Fluotar particularly, is a keeper. Leitz, clung to their unique, yet excellent , 170mm tube far too long . Everyone else were either 160mm or infinity and customers started to get suspicious that they would get left with a dinosaur. By the time insolvency was looming, Wild Heerbrugg had obtained a major share of the company in 1974 and steered it towards their established 160mm D.I.N. system by 1976. Wild obtained complete ownership in 1986 and then the company merged with Cambridge Instruments in 1990, and with that merger came a ready made infinity corrected system.
You will probably find, that Wild objectives work well on your scope,although I have not tried them, so don't know for sure. If you choose to change up. looking around for more Leitz fluotars, might be your best avenue of improvement, although they seem to be pretty much the same as the Wild fluotars. I think Leitz, might be more common in N.A. Does anyone know for sure , if the WILD and Leitz are perfectly compatible? Leitz frequently references that their objectives are on the WIld pattern.
EF means extended field, kind of beating around the bush about the fact that they aren't plan but somehow have a better field than normal. NPL means normal plan, which is the same as semi-plan, offering a plan image across a normal field , which is about 15-16mm. Plan should have a flat field for 20mm but some don't. Both Wild and Leitz had plan fluotars as well and they aren't too expensive.