Curious if anyone recognizes the camera adapter tube on this Reichert 410

[hans]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/303621442697

I messaged the seller asking if there were any lenses in the tube but it sold quickly, before I heard back. I guess, because of the small diameter at the top, it would be for video?

[Zuul]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/303621442697

I messaged the seller asking if there were any lenses in the tube but it sold quickly, before I heard back. I guess, because of the small diameter at the top, it would be for video?

It does get quite narrow. C-mount would be the typical video attachment, and that is 1 inch. It’s hard to be sure, but that is probably close to an inch.

As always, Apochronaut will know exactly.

[apochronaut]

wouldn't last long with the camera adapter added in. Hard to tell but I think it is the Diagnostic Instruments tube. Might need a bit of tweaking for smaller formats but they were made for 35mm , so full frame.

[hans]

Maybe I missed out. Have been looking for camera adapters but generally skeptical of anything that looks like it might have been designed for use with older video equipment since the required level of optical performance could be pretty low. (I have a big box of old video inspection stuff pulled out of a dumpster a long ago, including some relay tubes that take standard 160 mm tube length objectives at one end and C-mount camera at the other, but none of it is really useful beyond 320x240 or 640x480 sort of resolutions.)

[Zuul]

I just finished my 410 camera tube this afternoon. Now I can generate photographic evidence that the rest of the scope still needs lots of work.

3800226F-A905-45F7-8170-98C4247F4E51.jpeg (94.64 KiB) Viewed 3296 times

3832A62A-19DC-46EC-B817-E8EFCED119D5.jpeg (130.41 KiB) Viewed 3296 times

[hans]

The parts replacing the splitter/eyepiece assembly look nice, did you machine them? I used to have a mini lathe but sold it two moves ago, obviously regretting that now that I have a microscope and camera I'd like to hook together.

Optically, it looks like you have turned the binocular head into a monocular one, then have the eyepiece projecting directly onto the sensor? Did you experiment with any other configurations?

[Zuul]

Yeah, I removed the binocular from the second head and turned the new parts on my little Taig lathe. The nice thing is it gives good access to the camera controls, and you don’t need to switch between eyepieces and camera. The downside is 1-stop less light and lots of man-hours In the garage. I’ve got an Olympus 2.5x photo eyepiece in there at the moment, and initial results are mixed. I’m seeing lots on CA. There’s a lot more testing to do, and like I mentioned above, the scope needs other work, too.

[apochronaut]

A whole bunch of proprietary photo lenses are going to over correct in your system. Putting a # 181 or 145 about 180mm from the second telan lens should give good results.

[Zuul]

A whole bunch of proprietary photo lenses are going to over correct in your system. Putting a # 181 or 145 about 180mm from the second telan lens should give good results.

I thought the lens (Oly PE) might be the problem, too. I tried a 181 in its place (literally same location) and was surprised to find that It was still nearly parfocal, but with A tighter crop. There was still strong CA. That’s why I said there needs to be more testing. I don’t know what’s going on yet.