AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

Everything relating to microscopy hardware: Objectives, eyepieces, lamps and more.
Post Reply
Message
Author
hans
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#1 Post by hans » Tue Jul 07, 2020 8:30 am

In the process of buying Reichert 410 parts I ended up with a Reichert-Jung 150 in nice condition with 34 mm parfocal plan acho objectives but no head. I was originally thinking it looked identical to the older two-tone gray AO and white/gray Reichert model 150s except for the white/blue paint scheme, but now looking more carefully for a head on eBay I see at least one significant difference. On the AO/Reichert versions the head is held on with two vertical screws parallel to the optical axis on the left and right side and can only be mounted facing directly forward or backward. On the Reichert-Jung version the head can be rotated arbitrarily and mounts with a circular dovetail that is apparently mechanically compatible with the series 400. (I say apparently because the 150 I bought had a series 400 trinocular head installed and as best I can tell it does center correctly over the objective.) The top of my R-J 150 looks like this:
RJ150-head-interface.jpg
RJ150-head-interface.jpg (158.42 KiB) Viewed 1310 times
I have seen some of the older two-screw AO/R heads for sale separately at reasonable prices, and quite a few complete R-J 150s, but so far no separate R-J dovetail heads. In my introduction thread PeteM said the series 10 heads are optically but not mechanically compatible, and looking at listings on eBay I can see why -- there is short but large-diameter cylindrical projection sticking down below the lower face of the dovetail which would not fit into the central hole in the R-J 150 stand. To summarize what I understand so far:
  • Older AO/Reichert branded 150 heads have a completely different mechanical interface.
  • Series 10 heads are optically, but not quite mechanically, compatible.
  • Series 400 heads are mechanically, but not optically, compatible.
Now I wonder if a 110/120 head could work? From what I understand they should have the appropriate optical corrections for the 34 mm parfocal objectives but with a dovetail similar to series 400. Photos of the dovetail in eBay listings look promising. Has anyone tried this combination?

apochronaut
Posts: 3827
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#2 Post by apochronaut » Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:56 pm

The depression below the dovetail is designed to take an extension on the head of the original 150/160, that carries the telan lens. I don't know the Reichert-Jung version of that scope well but I see threads down in that well. Has the telan lens been removed from the head on those and installed above the nosepiece, permanently?

That detail determines how you go about using any other head but the original one,

Zuul
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 9:01 pm
Location: California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#3 Post by Zuul » Tue Jul 07, 2020 2:11 pm

You could also consider abandoning the older objectives, instead using some spare 45mm parfocal objectives and 410 head it came with. (depending, of course, on how much extra clearance there is under the stage) Given the price of nice series 10 stands right now, it seems hard to justify putting too much effort into the 150.

hans
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#4 Post by hans » Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:09 pm

apochronaut wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:56 pm
The depression below the dovetail is designed to take an extension on the head of the original 150/160, that carries the telan lens.
I see the extension you are referring to in photos of AO/Reichert heads on eBay. Unfortunately I have not yet come across any photos of the underside of the Reichert-Jung head.
apochronaut wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:56 pm
I don't know the Reichert-Jung version of that scope well but I see threads down in that well.
What looks like threads going out of view at the bottom is actually a spring that, as far as I can tell, is there to limit how much force can be applied to the nosepiece and prevent accidental damage.
apochronaut wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:56 pm
Has the telan lens been removed from the head on those and installed above the nosepiece, permanently?
There is nothing above the top of the objectives and I don't see any obvious signs that anything was removed. The trinocular head it came with looks the same as my other 400-series binocular heads with the telan lens recessed slightly relative to the lower face of the dovetail.
Zuul wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 2:11 pm
... (depending, of course, on how much extra clearance there is under the stage)
I just checked and there is no dovetail where the stage mounts -- it screws directly to the stand with no easy way to adjust height that I can see.
Zuul wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 2:11 pm
Given the price of nice series 10 stands right now, it seems hard to justify putting too much effort into the 150.
I have not been watching series 10 stuff, but that makes sense. Of course, it is also the dangerous type of reasoning that already has me owning more microscopes than I logically need...

The only reason I bought the 150 was to get the trinocular head for my 410s but it turned out to be in such nice condition (very few signs of use and all the mechanisms are smooth with no backlash) that now I am tempted to find a head.

Zuul
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 9:01 pm
Location: California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#5 Post by Zuul » Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:25 pm

hans wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:09 pm
I have not been watching series 10 stuff, but that makes sense. Of course, it is also the dangerous type of reasoning that already has me owning more microscopes than I logically need...

The only reason I bought the 150 was to get the trinocular head for my 410s but it turned out to be in such nice condition (very few signs of use and all the mechanisms are smooth with no backlash) that now I am tempted to find a head.
I hear you. The thing is, a head is going to cost as much as a 10, and what you will be left with is very nice, but extremely limited, stand. If you don't want or need another (and you don't ... me either) the sensible thing would be to keep the head and sell the rest along.

hans
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#6 Post by hans » Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:39 pm

I just noticed that there are a bunch of other Reichert-Jung 150s on eBay (listed without the keyword "150" in the title) in the same apparently-mismatched configuration as the one I bought:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/202747637102
https://www.ebay.com/itm/202750444428
https://www.ebay.com/itm/254217477247

This makes me wonder if possibly R-J made a trinocular head for the 150 that looked the same as the series 400 ones? None of mine have any markings or part number that I can see. Is there any way to positively identify a series-400 head other than checking for chromatic aberration? As I mentioned in my introduction thread I do see quite a bit of CA using the 150 with either the trinocular head that came with it or the series 400 binocular ones I already had, and also parfocality is poor, to the extent that if the 10X is focused the 40X will hit the slide. So I am almost certain that the trinocular head it came with is mismatched, unless there is something seriously wrong with the stand and objectives.

But then why so many of these 150s with the wrong heads floating around? Maybe a large organization already had them, and with no official trinocular head available, decided this configuration was good enough that is wasn't worth buying all new stands?

Zuul
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 9:01 pm
Location: California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#7 Post by Zuul » Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:51 pm

Does the trinoc produce a well corrected image on the 410? (through one eypiece ... I know you said there was some issue there) If so, I think that answered the question.

If the 150 were from an educational venue (likely) they may have been ordered that way simply to hit their budget. Students can learn a lot even with poorly corrected images. ;) :)

apochronaut
Posts: 3827
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#8 Post by apochronaut » Tue Jul 07, 2020 6:09 pm

I don't have a lot of experience with the 150 . I have tended to sidestep them in favour of the more professional stands. The 150 has a limited illumination system and condenser but it still could be equipped with a 4 objective phase system, so it must have been o.k.
The nice thing about them is that they can be equipped with any of the 34mm objectives and with a good head and eyepieces, perform optically as well as basic higher end AO scopes.

It's true that the 400 series telan lens lacks coherence with the 34mm objectives but there enough of them around.
There should be no mechanical mismatch between that dovetail and a series 100 head. A 10/20 head though, will need a spacer in order to fit. Any component or the custom made riser will work, as long as it is cheap enough.
Where there may be a problem is with the ability of the optical tube to allow free passage of the 20mm f.o.v. You can check that be trialling the 400 head with the 100x objective. Corrections won't matter for that test, you are just looking for vignetting.

If you do get vignetting, the series 100 head won't do. The series 10/20 head has a narrower f.o.v. so it might work.

You could use eyepieces with a narrower f.o.v., if vignetting in that vertical tube turns out to be a problem. The cat.# 161 eyepieces were original to that. I am unsure whether they were mated to the telan lens in 150 head. My guess would be not. Probably they just had poorer peripheral corrections than the #176, and thus hsd field stops at 18mm.

apochronaut
Posts: 3827
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#9 Post by apochronaut » Tue Jul 07, 2020 6:34 pm

Zuul wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:51 pm
Does the trinoc produce a well corrected image on the 410? (through one eypiece ... I know you said there was some issue there) If so, I think that answered the question.

If the 150 were from an educational venue (likely) they may have been ordered that way simply to hit their budget. Students can learn a lot even with poorly corrected images. ;) :)
There were quite a few of those produced. They may have been a transition scope, while the ATC 2000 was being prepared. They also put series 400 heads on some later 1820s, yet with the older 34mm parfocal L.W.D. objectives. I have never had an opportunity to trial one of those but I would be surprised if they went out poorly corrected. They no doubt ran out of frames for the series 100 head and since they were alteady in 400 series production it would make sense to use the available option. Fitting a certain number of them with the older telan lens wouldn't have been too hard. Wayne Butter would know for sure.

hans
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#10 Post by hans » Tue Jul 07, 2020 9:13 pm

Zuul wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:51 pm
Does the trinoc produce a well corrected image on the 410?
Yes, at least, it is not obviously worse than the other heads I have, to my inexperienced eye. I guess the problem is I don't really have a good idea how dramatic the 34 vs 45 mm correction mismatch should be, and there are a lot of other possible variables since this stuff is mostly well-used surplus from eBay that may or may not have been helped by my fiddling with it.
apochronaut wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 6:34 pm
They no doubt ran out of frames for the series 100 head and since they were alteady in 400 series production it would make sense to use the available option. Fitting a certain number of them with the older telan lens wouldn't have been too hard.
It sounds like there is some possibility that the situation is:
  • The trinocular head I got with the 150 is actually designed for it, just using the same housing as the series 400 heads.
  • I am thinking the mystery trinocular head works ok on my 410 because the differences between the 34 and 45 mm corrections are subtle and I don't know what to look for.
  • The worse CA I notice on the 150 is just the expected performance of the older 34 mm plan achro objectives vs. the 45 mm ones on the 410.
I will try to describe better the difference in CA I see between the 150 and 410 and maybe someone with more experience will have an opinion on whether this sounds normal:

The 10X objective on the 410 looks really nice, I think, good contrast, resolution beyond what my eyes can resolve, and not really any noticeable transverse CA even at the far edges of the field. There is uniform, not-too-distracting axial CA (if I am using the term correctly) where out-of-focus objects get either green or magenta fringe depending on whether they are above or below the focal plane. The 1127 10X plan achro on the 150 gives a sharp image and also not really much noticeable transverse CA, but the axial CA is quite a bit stronger, to the point of being somewhat distracting while focusing up and down, and the fringes are more blue/red than green/magenta.

The 40X objective on the 410 is sensitive to the slide preparation but can look very good also in terms of contrast and CA. Resolution gets close to, but not beyond, what my eyes can resolve, maybe limited by slide preparation? The 1128 40X plan achro on the 150 looks much worse in comparison. Resolution seems ok but in addition to red/blue axial CA as on the 10X there is noticeable transverse CA on in-focus objects near the edge of the field where edges are smeared out red-to-blue.

The objectives on the 150 have no obvious signs of abuse are in considerably better cosmetic condition than the ones I am comparing them to on the 410.
apochronaut wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 6:09 pm
... You can check that be trialling the 400 head with the 100x objective.
Lots of good info, thanks. I have not tried out any of the 100x objectives yet, still need to buy some immersion oil and practice, but I will keep that in mind.

apochronaut
Posts: 3827
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#11 Post by apochronaut » Tue Jul 07, 2020 10:07 pm

The symptoms you describe are typical of those created due to an improperly corrected telan lens, or eyepiece. The 1730 to 1737 series of objectives were definitely advancements but the 1128 should still be evenly corrected across the field. The 1128 was the last 34mm planachro they made and was offered when they had already moved on to the development of 45mm objectives. It was an inexpensive student scope planachto that they could also fill parts orders with, in support of existing 34mm microscopes in use. It performed about as well as the 1023 but was cheaper to make. The nadir of their 34mm 40X planacros was the 1309. It was pretty close to planfluorite class.

Here is a little test I did some years ago. The subject is thick as was the cover slip. I wanted to get an idea of the depth of focus differences too. The planapo is at a disadvantage due to the coverslip thickness. The field coverage is pretty much the 20mm field, so you can see that the 1128 corrects well across the field like the others.
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4420&hilit=40x+comparison

hans
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#12 Post by hans » Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:43 am

apochronaut wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 10:07 pm
Here is a little test I did some years ago...
Nice comparison, seeing the photo from the 1128 is helpful. The same sort of mild green/magenta axial CA I was trying to describe on my 410 is present to some degree in all your planachro photos and the advantage of the planapo in that regard is quite obvious. No sign of the more severe red/blue axial and transverse CA I see in my 150. So it seems likely that the trinocular head that was with the 150 is indeed designed for a series 400, and that the CA and objectives not being parfocal is just objective/head mismatch and not a problem with the 150 itself.
apochronaut wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 6:09 pm
The 150 has a limited illumination system and condenser...
The first thing I noticed was how dim the illumination is, especially next to the 410 which is blinding in brightfield without the blue and ND filters switched in. Not sure what to expect from the 150, or even if mine is working as well as it is supposed to since I haven't disassembled anything yet, but it seems marginal in a bright room. Would probably look better in a darker room.
Zuul wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:25 pm
If you don't want or need another (and you don't ... me either) the sensible thing would be to keep the head and sell the rest along.
I considered that, but I paid $24 + $40 shipping in an auction with other bidders so unless that was an unusually good deal (not sure since I had been mostly watching series 400 stuff) it seems like the stand/objectives alone are probably not valuable enough to be worth the trouble reselling on eBay. Since I am now fairly confident there is nothing wrong other than the head mismatch I will probably just end up hanging onto it for a while in case I see a good deal on a head.

Zuul
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 9:01 pm
Location: California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#13 Post by Zuul » Wed Jul 08, 2020 3:53 am

hans wrote:
Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:43 am
I considered that, but I paid $24 + $40 shipping in an auction with other bidders so unless that was an unusually good deal (not sure since I had been mostly watching series 400 stuff) it seems like the stand/objectives alone are probably not valuable enough to be worth the trouble reselling on eBay. Since I am now fairly confident there is nothing wrong other than the head mismatch I will probably just end up hanging onto it for a while in case I see a good deal on a head.
The objectives would probably sell easily enough if you priced them fairly.

hans
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#14 Post by hans » Tue Jul 14, 2020 8:17 am

I believe this is a Reichert-Jung 150 head, with decent photos of the underside:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/184362981284

Zuul
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 9:01 pm
Location: California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#15 Post by Zuul » Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:00 pm

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 wrong. The screws have unfinished heads instead of matching.

I would also mention that you can get trinocular heads, or (with patience) a complete series 10 in good condition, for the same price.

hans
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#16 Post by hans » Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:19 pm

Agree, regarding the crude look of the finish, but heads on other complete 150s have a similar look. I wasn't planning to buy it at that price, especially without eyepieces, was just the first photos I had seen of the underside showing the long extension with telan lens like the older 150 heads, but dovetail mounting instead of the two screws.

apochronaut
Posts: 3827
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#17 Post by apochronaut » Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:27 pm

Zuul wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:00 pm
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 wrong. The screws have unfinished heads instead of matching.
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 handy ring attached to the arm, so it could be suspended on a rod or darby and lifted out a window or doorway to a co-worker for portable use or in case the mix went wrong and the mud started falling from the ceiling. Quite a lot of forethought went into it.

Zuul
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 9:01 pm
Location: California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#18 Post by Zuul » Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:33 pm

apochronaut wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:27 pm
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 handy ring attached to the arm, so it could be suspended on a rod or darby and lifted out a window or doorway to a co-worker for portable use or in case the mix went wrong and the mud started falling from the ceiling. Quite a lot of forethought went into it.
:lol: :D :lol:

Too funny!

hans
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: AO/Reichert One-Fifty vs. Reichert-Jung Series 150 differences and head compatibility

#19 Post by hans » Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:57 pm

And as a cost-cutting measure they sold the microscopes unfinished and let the plasterers apply a finish themselves? The splatter on top of the carefully-machined knurling on the diopter adjustment is amusing, certainly doesn't give a good impression of quality.

Post Reply