Reichert 410 "Microstar IV" head -- corrective element present in binocular path but not trinocular camera port

Here you can discuss everything related to taking light micrographs and videos.
Message
Author
hans
Posts: 636
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Reichert 410 "Microstar IV" head -- corrective element present in binocular path but not trinocular camera port

#151 Post by hans » Thu Oct 22, 2020 7:51 pm

I forgot the Photostar system in the previous post:

It is conceivable the official relay lenses could be better-corrected than the doublet/181 combination, most likely that would be for field curvature. apo has one, if I remember correctly the reason for not using it was excessive crop unless used with a full-frame sensor, and possible it was damaged also. I have not been able to find any example photos using the system. I think I mentioned somewhere, I did find some academic papers that used a Photostar but the images were not reproduced at high enough quality to be useful for comparison.

BrianBurnes
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2020 5:05 pm

Re: Reichert 410 "Microstar IV" head -- corrective element present in binocular path but not trinocular camera port

#152 Post by BrianBurnes » Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:11 pm

That's a good summary. It is true that we shouldn't lose the practical goal out of sight (to get good images out of a Microstar), but at the same time I found a lot of these investigations fascinating from a more academic standpoint, just to satisfy my own curiosity about how this system worked.

I think for practical intents putting the doublet+eyepiece on top of the trinocular port is the best guess right now. I have yet to fully test my adapter, as I have not had much time for microscopy since I made it, so I cannot speak to its practical use yet.
hans wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 7:40 pm
I don't think there have been any really conclusive tests of direct projection through the doublet. Brian mentioned he was unable to get the doublet in the right position. Zuul posted some test photos but I think those are confounded by the "Vienna" objective which may have more residual lateral CA than the "Buffalo" objectives designed for the 400 series. I have not tried it myself.
I am intrigued by this - I was not aware of this distinction. Do you happen to know which objectives fall under the Vienna vs Buffalo category? I have recently acquired a mix of older and newer AO objectives, and it would be interesting to know which ones I can expect trouble with.

If our current knowledge of the correcting doublet is accurate, then moving it further down the optical path should help correct for the additional CA - though there may be other issues. It would be interesting to know how the original system for the Vienna objectives worked. Did it use a different tube lens that corrected for the aberrations?

hans
Posts: 636
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Reichert 410 "Microstar IV" head -- corrective element present in binocular path but not trinocular camera port

#153 Post by hans » Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:25 pm

BrianBurnes wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:11 pm
I am intrigued by this - I was not aware of this distinction. Do you happen to know which objectives fall under the Vienna vs Buffalo category? I have recently acquired a mix of older and newer AO objectives, and it would be interesting to know which ones I can expect trouble with.
Pretty much all I know is the comments by Wayne Butter I linked a couple posts up in this thread. But I have not heard of there being any "Buffalo" objectives other than the ones designed specifically for use with the 400 series. My understanding is that the Poly* stuff (the large objectives you got -- nice score by the way) is "Vienna". I don't known anything about various older "Reichert Austria" labelled objectives.
BrianBurnes wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:11 pm
If our current knowledge of the correcting doublet is accurate, then moving it further down the optical path should help correct for the additional CA - though there may be other issues.
Yeah, this is intriguing, however I suspect moving the doublet basically trades lateral for axial CA while in some sense leaving the total amount of "disturbance" similar, so I'm not sure it can be done without disturbing the axial CA corrections of the objective.

hans
Posts: 636
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Reichert 410 "Microstar IV" head -- corrective element present in binocular path but not trinocular camera port

#154 Post by hans » Mon Nov 02, 2020 1:24 am

A few example photos of prepared slides using the aluminum eye tube mount afocally since I currently have it set up as pictured here: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=10873

These are using the 1732 10X 0.25 plan achromatic objective. The final images cover 1 mm square after cropping and 3:1 reduction from the 16 MP raw files which cover most of the 2 mm diameter field. (Or equivalently, 10 mm square crop from the 20 mm diameter intermediate image.)

The quality of the prepared slides is not very good. I bought them used on eBay and there is no brand marking but they look very similar to what AmScope and others sell. Cover glass thickness seems ok but on many the sample is not very flat against the cover glass. There is also a weird transparent graininess to the mountant, almost like looking through mixing hot/cold water, which lights up as bright speckles when viewed with polarized light. Not sure what that is but is does not seem to affect the view at 10X much.
Attachments
DSC_8966.jpg
DSC_8966.jpg (264.34 KiB) Viewed 1411 times
DSC_8965.jpg
DSC_8965.jpg (388.3 KiB) Viewed 1411 times
DSC_8964.jpg
DSC_8964.jpg (377.38 KiB) Viewed 1411 times

MichaelG.
Posts: 2588
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 8:24 am
Location: NorthWest England

Re: Reichert 410 "Microstar IV" head -- corrective element present in binocular path but not trinocular camera port

#155 Post by MichaelG. » Mon Nov 02, 2020 6:40 am

Looking good, Hans ... all your hard work is paying-off

MichaelG.
Too many 'projects'

hans
Posts: 636
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Reichert 410 "Microstar IV" head -- corrective element present in binocular path but not trinocular camera port

#156 Post by hans » Mon Nov 02, 2020 4:18 pm

Thanks Michael, still a ways to go in terms of usability and convenience, but the current setup is finally an improvement over a handheld smartphone, at least.

hans
Posts: 636
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Reichert 410 "Microstar IV" head -- corrective element present in binocular path but not trinocular camera port

#157 Post by hans » Sat Dec 12, 2020 5:51 pm

In case anyone else is interested in experimenting with the 145 eyepiece apochronaut has mentioned this seller just posted two individually, $20 free shipping, looks like nice condition:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/AO-American-Op ... 3806820871

Post Reply