OLYMPUS BX40

[stjepo]

Any specific JIS objectives? I have no idea...

Regards

[stjepo]

What about this ones?


https://www.indiamart.com/proddetail/ji ... 68612.html


Regards

[PeteM]

The Olympus BX40, with both a trinocular head and a phase condenser, is a pretty good deal for 600 euros.

Getting plan phase lenses for it might cost another 600 euros.

[Hobbyst46]

@stjepo

To check whether your current set is of 45 or 36mm object distance, measure the length of the 100X objective (when it is fully screwed into the nosepiece) from the nosepiece to the tip.
In the indiamart.com link you posted, it says that the objectives are "Parfocal Length 45 mm". Besides they are semi-plan, IMO do not display any important advantage relative to the set you already have.

[desertrat]

Just a personal opinion, but I think used Olympus objectives would be much preferable to the new objectives shown above.

I bought a set of five objectives made in India from Surplus Shed for about 60 USD just to see how bad they were. They were bad, probably manufacturer rejects that Surplus Shed bought for pennies on the dollar. They formed images, and I guess they weren't really bad, but none of them gave really sharp images. The oil immersion objective was useless. The others probably would be acceptable to a young student whose previous experience had only been with department store toy microscopes.

None of these objectives performed as well as some century old antiques from Spencer and Bausch & Lomb in my colletion.

[75RR]

I think the whole point of a starter microscope is to introduce one into the world of microscopy.
As such the starter microscope can not only be basic but one could argue that it should be, as it will in time be replaced by one more suited to ones needs.
As this microscope is in working order, rather than going on an objective buying spree (objectives that in all likelihood will not be suitable for the next microscope) one should just start using it.
There is a lot to learn and a lot of fun to be had even with the most basic of microscopes.

[stjepo]

especificacionesjapan.jpg (225.89 KiB) Viewed 9342 times

especificacionesjapan.jpg (225.89 KiB) Viewed 9342 times

Thank for all your answers. My objective is to make crisp pictures as most of you do.

The japanese Seiwa Company has sent me the following information and I don't know how to check the objectives.

Which will be good objectives to buy for this microscope to start making sharp pictures?

I am looking to a BX41 (3.000€) and a BX51 (3.600€) Are good prices?.

Yes the Saiwa is nice to practice but pictures are not sharp.


Regards and thanks for your time

[Hobbyst46]

My objective is to make crisp pictures as most of you do...
The japanese Seiwa Company has sent me the following information and I don't know how to check the objectives.

If the question refers to the working distance, i would not worry about that. The WD values in the specification table are normal for the NAs of the objectives. Accurate measurement of small WDs is neither easy (IMO) nor necessary. Any lack of sharpness in the photos that annoy you has nothing to do with the WD.

Which will be good objectives to buy for this microscope to start making sharp pictures?

I am strongly with 75RR's opinion about the starter microscope. I would try to find the reason why the photos are not satisfactory - and it is not necessarily the objectives or any other optical part of the scope. For example: were your posted pictures taken with the original bino head or the trino head? which camera adapters? mechanical stabilization of the camera, color aberrations, etc. BTW - do the specimens, when viewed through the eyepieces, look sharp and crisp?

[stjepo]

"I am strongly with 75RR's opinion about the starter microscope. I would try to find the reason why the photos are not satisfactory - and it is not necessarily the objectives or any other optical part of the scope. For example: were your posted pictures taken with the original bino head or the trino head? which camera adapters? mechanical stabilization of the camera, color aberrations, etc. BTW - do the specimens, when viewed through the eyepieces, look sharp and crisp?"

"look sharp and crisp" yes.. but only a small part of it. (I use CombineZP to get a better image),
"pictures taken with the original bino head or the trino head?" Pictures taken with my second 'FRANKENSTEIN' head AO
"mechanical stabilization of the camera" is a D90
"color aberrations" my led light? I will change it with a 6000ºK 12V 7W lead light... I just bought it..
do the specimens, when viewed through the eyepieces, look sharp and crisp?" Yes
Which camera adapters? No idea!!! (photo included also the measure of the 100X objective)

[Hobbyst46]

"look sharp and crisp" yes.. but only a small part of it...

possibly these are not "plan" objectives.

Pictures taken with my second 'FRANKENSTEIN' head AO

Experts (not me, sorry) can explain how to utilize the trino AO head (possibly designed for infinity-corrected optics?)
for picture-taking on your finite optics scope.

"mechanical stabilization of the camera" is a D90

I was actually wondering whether the coupling of the camera to the scope could cause vibrations and lack of sharpness in the photos.

"color aberrations" my led light? I will change it with a 6000ºK 12V 7W lead light... I just bought it..

No, I thought more about the coupling of the AO head and the camera to the other optics here. Non-optimal couplings can cause color fringes due to chromatic aberrations.

do the specimens, when viewed through the eyepieces, look sharp and crisp?" Yes

So, probably there is nothing wrong with your objectives and eyepieces (the eyepieces are usually part of the color correction). Then the picture issues (as far as you define them) rest with the photomicrography setup, namely photo tube, camera adapter if any, camera lens etc.

Which camera adapters? No idea!!!

No idea either...

(photo included also the measure of the 100X objective)

So these are indeed JIS 36mm, AKA "short" objectives.
Again, IMO, 75RR's advice is the best.
However, if you decide anyway on objective upgrades to this microscope, then (with desertrat's post above on Olympus objectives) you may want to consult the alanwood articles about Olympus short objectives. I have used some in the past, and they were very good. BUT, that approach does not guarantee chromatic-maleffect-free pictures, since color correction of the Seiwa Correct parts might differ from that of the Olympus optical parts.

[75RR]

There are many reasons why the images taken with a camera through a microscope are not as sharp as one would want. One common reason is camera vibration.

My camera, an Olympus E-P2 has this problem. The solution was to isolate it from the microscope i.e. no direct contact that will transmit the vibrations.

I did this by using Afocal imaging, see link: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=15607

I do not say that your camera has this drawback, only that it might. Can you see any vibration when you are looking through the eyepieces and activate the camera shutter?


Also have a look at this link by Charles Krebs on setting up a camera on a microscope: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=882

[stjepo]

Thank you again. Your advice is of incalculable value to me.

I keep you posted in the possible problem of the camera vibration.


Regards

[stjepo]

Found a problem. The head never fitted properly.


Regards

[stjepo]

New quick picture.


Regards

[Hobbyst46]

Great!
I think that we should be happy and proud when solving such issues with fine old microscopes. In professional and academic labs they pay prime prices for yearly maintenance contracts for their microscopes (or toss them to surplus, which in turn make them available to amateurs... ).
Your picture looks nice, nearly no chromatic aberrations, and quite sharp. You are certainly going to benefit and have pleasure from this hobby.
What is the specimen - an insect's wing?

[stjepo]

You are a very good team and very patient with impatient people like me. Thank you all.

Your comment is correct and very timely.

Is an spider.


Regards

[stjepo]

Sorry the leg of an spider...


Regards

[stjepo]

Anyone could you tell me why I getting this light if take the picture from the trinocular port and not if I take it from one of the eyepieces.

Regards

[stjepo]

I need more help:

1. Which one is better?
2. How much should I pay for it?

Thank you

Regards

[PeteM]

Kind of like comparing apples and oranges.

10x difference in power and incompatible optical systems (Nikon infinity vs. finite 160mm tube length).

You'll want to stay within a "system" to get good pictures.

For the older 170mm and the somewhat newer 160mm finite systems you generally want matched objectives and eyepieces.

Some of the infinite systems allow swaps between brands and still OK results; but the older AO infinite systems had corrections in the head.

But to answer your question, if you offered me a choice of a Nikon 4x lens or a no-name 40x finite lens, I'd take the Nikon. You shouldn't buy either until you decide on a coherent path to assemble a matched system.

Your picture of the spider is very good. If you show the complete setup you used to take it, members could suggest what other lenses etc. might work well with it.

[PeteM]

Going back to page one of the thread, it looks like you took the pictures with a Seiwa finite microscope and an American Optical infinity head.

This combination might get you good images at lower power, but it's unlikely to be parfocal as you switch lenses and likely to have aberrations at higher power.

[75RR]

Re: Bright Spot in image

When you say you took a photo through the eyepieces - did you use the same setup as you do on the trinocular port?
Did you use this adapter on both?



The photo looks cropped, is the bright spot in the middle of the original image?
When you look down through the trinocular tube with the unaided eye, does the image have a bright spot?

Can you take a photo of the same subject through the eyepiece and the trinocular (do not crop them - upload the complete image).

About objectives:

There are basically two types of microscope systems: finite and infinity.
They are not interchangeable nor compatible.

Infinity objectives have an infinity symbol on the casing ∞
Finite objective normally have the tube length written on them, either 160 or 170 or 215.

You have a finite system
You can not use infinity objectives on a finite system

If you are going to use stacking software there is little to recommend Plan objectives - Plan objectives were designed to see and photograph large flat areas.
I would not spend any money on objectives just yet. Wait a while. See where your interest lies. Explore.

Have you looked into a drop of water yet?

[stjepo]

1. Sorry about "comparing apples and oranges." thanks to that I know for sure my "system" and yes I want to "matched objectives and eyepieces" reason I am asking for help. I have measured the parfocal distance. "You have a finite system You can not use infinity objectives on a finite system" True.


2. "When you look down through the trinocular tube with the unaided eye, does the image have a bright spot?" No it doesn't


3. "Your picture of the spider is very good. If you show the complete setup you used to take it," I will do it again and register the setup... I did not write them down in the previous one.

4. Yes I tried a drop of rain water. The paramecia are not good models, they do not stay still for the photo. I will keep trying.

5. I have made new no cropped pictures for you to see.

6. My interest is only to take sharp pictures. My interest in the protozoa for me is only to get some nice pictures.

Thanks to all for you time.

[Hobbyst46]

4. Yes I tried a drop of rain water. The paramecia are not good models, they do not stay still for the photo. I will keep trying

One can add a drop of thickener (a very dilute solution of aqueous glue, for example) under the coverslip to slow the protists motion or even freeze it.
Better still - instead of clear rainwater, collect liquid "mud", an algae sample, flower pot standing water, or a bunch of moss. The ciliates will "rest" in the solid cavities among the plant fractures or other debris, or they wander between fixed locations.

[Hobbyst46]

(My mistake - duplicate of previous post)

[stjepo]

" hot spot in the last picture"...Yes it look like an halo... Is it possible to fix it?

Regards

[stjepo]

I forgot to say that the objective 10X was used.

Regards

[Hobbyst46]

" hot spot in the last picture"...Yes it look like an halo... Is it possible to fix it?

Sorry, I do not know.

[stjepo]

Thank you very much anyway!

Regards

[ImperatorRex]

" hot spot in the last picture"...Yes it look like an halo... Is it possible to fix it? Regards

You might want to try the following:
- all the adapter inernal surfaces shall be "black" and not metal to reduce reflections
- I have not seen your foto adaption, but maybe try to vary/change the distance for example between ocular and objective of the camera.