Objectives?

Do you have any microscopy questions, which you are afraid to ask? This is your place.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
lperepol
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:51 am
Location: Castlegar

Objectives?

#1 Post by lperepol » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:43 am

Will higher end objectives from Zeiss, Leica or Olympus thread into an Omax microscope?
And will they resolve images better than the objectives that come with an Omax or one can buy from Omax?
1) OMAX 40X-2500X 18MP USB3 Plan Phase Contrast Trinocular LED with Turret Phase Disk
2) AmScope Trinocular Stereo, 3.5X-90X Magnification Four-Zone LED Ring Light

billbillt
Posts: 2885
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:01 pm

Re: Objectives?

#2 Post by billbillt » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:50 am

Hello,

If they are the same tube length and thread, they should fit and work.. And, probably not make enough difference to matter to the hobbyist...

BillT

Hobbyst46
Posts: 2158
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 9:02 pm

Re: Objectives?

#3 Post by Hobbyst46 » Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:58 am

lperepol wrote:Will higher end objectives from Zeiss, Leica or Olympus thread into an Omax microscope?
And will they resolve images better than the objectives that come with an Omax or one can buy from Omax?
Probably, yet there are several conditions for successful replacement:

1. That the objectives are of the same type of correction. Infinity corrected objectives do not fit on a fixed tube length microscope (160mm, 170mm) and vice versa.
2. That the parfocality length is OK. For example, short barrel (yet excellent optically) objectives (example: early Olympus objectives) might be two short for focusing on a microscope that accepts DIN optics.
3. That the objectives have the same thread as the nosepiece. This has been true for many objectives but modern objectives from the major brands can have a different thread, namely, not RMS.
Features 1-3 are part of the known specs of the objective in question.

4. That the objectives (if they are finite tube length) match the eyepieces with regard to corrections/compensations of aberrations.
This might be known from the experience of other microscopists.

5. And if those conditions are fulfilled, there are still surprizes. Theoretically, resolution depends on the NA of the objective, but in practice, the contrast afforded by the objective also matters. A prime-make objective might be superior than an inexpensive one in one respect, and inferior in another respect. Unless, perhaps, the high-end objective is the top of the line (and most expensive). See, for example, the two-part very comprehensive comparison, published on the web by Robert Otoole back in 2017. I forgot the link, but it is there somewhere. He compared AmScope to LOMO to Nikon 4X objectives.
Zeiss Standard GFL+Canon EOS-M10, Olympus VMZ stereo

User avatar
75RR
Posts: 6246
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:34 am
Location: Estepona

Re: Objectives?

#4 Post by 75RR » Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:12 pm

Looking at the link in Amazon, if that is your microscope, then you have 160 objectives. Achromats for Brightfield and Plans for Phase Contrast.

I don't know what additional objectives Omax has available.

You would need to find out what they have and then compare prices with the other makes.

In general terms if you are thinking of high-end objectives from one of the manufacturers you mentioned then you will need to buy matching eyepieces of the same make, as some of the corrections take place in the eyepieces, and most probably a high end condenser as well.

Now while the objectives and the eyepieces will fit on your Omax, the condenser most likely will not.

I would suggest, given that the cheapest way to buy these objectives is to buy a used stand - rather than buy them individually, that it would make more sense to consider selling what you have and getting a complete used stand from either Leitz/Leica, Olympus, Nikon or Zeiss. That way you know that things will fit and work correctly.

An Olympus BH2 stand for example will let you expand and upgrade pretty much as far as you want.
Zeiss Standard WL (somewhat fashion challenged) & Wild M8
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)

Scarodactyl
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm

Re: Objectives?

#5 Post by Scarodactyl » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:15 pm

Older nikon finite objectives (at least the labophot line) are rms, 160 and their eyepieces are not correcting. So that might be a good target for experimentation. Their finite E (economical) objectives are fairly inexpensive and would be a good test case.

apochronaut
Posts: 2732
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: Objectives?

#6 Post by apochronaut » Tue Jun 18, 2019 10:36 pm

lperepol wrote:Will higher end objectives from Zeiss, Leica or Olympus thread into an Omax microscope?
And will they resolve images better than the objectives that come with an Omax or one can buy from Omax?
Inexpensive mass marketed microscopes are not by and large made to be upgraded.
Your objectives are D.I.N. and based on the small amount of info., are probably 160mm tube length. Replacing them with planachros from a better brand would be quite expensive but it would improve your resolution. In order for there to be enough improvement to justify buying a new set of objectives , new compatible eyepieces and a compatible camera relay lens your best bet would be to search out older planfluorite D.I.N. 160mm objectives, though.
I can't think of too many that would come in under the radar in terms of price. Maybe Cooke Baker / Vickers . I'm pretty sure a set of any of the better known brands would get pretty expensive.

One of the members here, built his Amscope up with Olympus planachros and felt it was a worth while effort.

User avatar
lperepol
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:51 am
Location: Castlegar

Re: Objectives?

#7 Post by lperepol » Sat Jul 20, 2019 11:46 pm

Hobbyst46 mentioned a link to Robert Otoole's comparison of objectives.
1) 4X OBJECTIVE LENS TEST: PART 1 and
2) $17 PLAN 4X OBJECTIVE The Big Surprise
1) https://www.closeuphotography.com/4x-le ... 00-dollars
2) https://www.closeuphotography.com/seven ... -objective

I do not think one can expect the same results for higher magnifying objectives. However, one does not get what one expects though, one gets what one inspects.
1) OMAX 40X-2500X 18MP USB3 Plan Phase Contrast Trinocular LED with Turret Phase Disk
2) AmScope Trinocular Stereo, 3.5X-90X Magnification Four-Zone LED Ring Light

Sauerkraut
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 2:07 am
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Objectives?

#8 Post by Sauerkraut » Sun Jul 21, 2019 3:52 pm

I've been tinkering with an OM139 microscope (Chinese) with infinity objectives and have a few observations.

After accidentally ruining the original Plan 40x infinity objective that came with the scope, I replaced it with an Olympus Plan 40x/0.65. infinity 0.17 objective (same specs as original) and I can't really see any difference in image quality, though I'm not a fan of the higher magnifications in the first place. Threads and tube length matched with no issues though I checked with seller before buying.

I replaced the 100x oil objective with a generic Plan 20x objective from Amscope and am extremely pleased with the image quality.

I thought my 10x objective had a scratch so bought a 10x Plan objective from Amscope and was shocked that it was only in focus in the very center of the image - returned it.

I tried a Nikon Abbe condenser to replace the no name Abbe condenser - no difference in image quality and still yields very poor dark field results.

I tried a parabolic condenser for DF and results are promising but haven't had time to really play yet. A cardioid condenser has not worked yet, even by blasting halogen beams from a blindingly bright bike headlight into the condenser.

I found a new Nikon achromatic condenser (0.85 NA, widefield I think) for cheap and it's possibly slightly better in some subtle way not easily quantified (psychological?). I already had better success getting DF at 4x but ran out of time to check other magnifications for the time being.

My conclusion is (as Apochronaut stated) - probably some of these microscopes are not really meant for upgrading on the whole. Additionally, time and money spend trying to achieve improved results might be better spent on a name brand microscope. This is of course, just my opinion and others may disagree. Still it has been fun to learn and I'm very pleased with the bright field on my scope through 20x.

Heather

Post Reply