LED en Nikon Fluophot

Here you can discuss DIY adaptations to the microscope.
Post Reply
Message
Author
Francisco
Posts: 552
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 11:23 pm

LED en Nikon Fluophot

#1 Post by Francisco » Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:48 pm

The illuminator of the Nikon Fluophot microscope (identical to the Biophot) gave me many problems because the lamp holder was "burned" causing lighting failures due to bad contact.
I decided to replace it with LED
When I make an adaptation I like to keep intact (as much as possible) the original configuration; Adapt unmodified.
I decided to connect a few pins on the LED radiator to be able to connect them to the socket of the lamp holder as if this were the original bulb.
The design has worked relatively well.
The next step will be to adapt the regulator of the base of the microscope for its operation with DC 0 - 3.3V

Image

Image

Image

Image

billbillt
Posts: 2895
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:01 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#2 Post by billbillt » Wed Sep 06, 2017 5:11 am

Great job.. I also like LED lighting for microscopy..

BillT

Francisco
Posts: 552
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 11:23 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#3 Post by Francisco » Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:41 pm

billbillt wrote:Great job.. I also like LED lighting for microscopy..

BillT
Thank you
I have used several LEDs. I think the XML T6 4000º is a good choice in microscope illumination

billbillt
Posts: 2895
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:01 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#4 Post by billbillt » Wed Sep 06, 2017 5:14 pm

Francisco wrote:
billbillt wrote:Great job.. I also like LED lighting for microscopy..

BillT
Thank you
I have used several LEDs. I think the XML T6 4000º is a good choice in microscope illumination
I have used many different types and have found that they all perform well.. My favorite color is the "warm white" .. It mimics natural sun light to me...

BillT

User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#5 Post by blekenbleu » Tue Nov 15, 2022 8:39 pm

Sad that images disappeared from @Francisco's entry; they were inspiring.
Image
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

MichaelG.
Posts: 3567
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 8:24 am
Location: North Wales

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#6 Post by MichaelG. » Wed Nov 16, 2022 6:45 am

It’s way above my price range, but the new Motic LUMOS is an interesting development and may inspire some DIY-ers

https://moticeurope.com/en/lumos-fl-led ... ource.html

MichaelG.
Too many 'projects'

User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#7 Post by blekenbleu » Wed Nov 16, 2022 3:58 pm

MichaelG. wrote:
Wed Nov 16, 2022 6:45 am
inspire some DIY-ers
For adapters more ambitious than simple halogen bulb replacement, those by @Saul seem hard to beat, e.g.
https://www.microbehunter.com/microscop ... php?t=7836

Online at https://www.flickr.com/photos/bauras/
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

MichaelG.
Posts: 3567
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 8:24 am
Location: North Wales

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#8 Post by MichaelG. » Wed Nov 16, 2022 4:20 pm

blekenbleu wrote:
Wed Nov 16, 2022 3:58 pm
MichaelG. wrote:
Wed Nov 16, 2022 6:45 am
inspire some DIY-ers
For adapters more ambitious than simple halogen bulb replacement, those by @Saul seem hard to beat […]
.

Sorry … wonderful as those are: it was the three fluorescence-orientated LEDs of the Motic device that interested me.

MichaelG.
Too many 'projects'

Scarodactyl
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#9 Post by Scarodactyl » Wed Nov 16, 2022 4:59 pm

Making a single LED die fluorescence lamphouse is pretty easy. I suppose a beam combiner would make a multi source one reasonably doable as well.

ldflan
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed May 22, 2019 11:36 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#10 Post by ldflan » Wed Nov 16, 2022 6:30 pm

Scarodactyl wrote:
Wed Nov 16, 2022 4:59 pm
Making a single LED die fluorescence lamphouse is pretty easy. I suppose a beam combiner would make a multi source one reasonably doable as well.
How and using what would you make a "beam combiner" for this purpose, considering the need for UV transparency and efficiency?

Scarodactyl
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#11 Post by Scarodactyl » Wed Nov 16, 2022 8:54 pm

Probably a series of dichroic mirrors.

MichaelG.
Posts: 3567
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 8:24 am
Location: North Wales

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#12 Post by MichaelG. » Wed Nov 16, 2022 9:41 pm

Have a look here:
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/ ... uorescence
… I believe #1 covers the device in question
The patent is in Chinese, but the summary looks promising.

MichaelG.
.

Edit: __ sorry, no it's not that one
Too many 'projects'

ldflan
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed May 22, 2019 11:36 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#13 Post by ldflan » Thu Nov 17, 2022 12:05 am

Scarodactyl wrote:
Wed Nov 16, 2022 8:54 pm
Probably a series of dichroic mirrors.
The best idea I have had is basically a version of the Leitz Variolum - a thick fiber optic bundle fixed in a loop and acting as a kind of light box mixer. Even with such a loop, unless you were able to fix your LED emitters very close to one another at one side, you would still need a lens (or a mirror) to get the light from the emitters efficiently into the mixing loop. Then you'd need another optical assembly to collimate the mixed light at the other side. These lenses would all have to be UV-A and UV-B transparent and thus expensive. I have seen a post elsewhere on line saying that the Variolum's lenses are "high quartz glass" and relatively UV transparent at the mercury peak... It might be so, but I find no evidence in the Leitz literature (or such that I can access) that the Variolum was recommended for or effective for use with mercury arc light. I plan to check, but does anybody know?

MichaelG.
Posts: 3567
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 8:24 am
Location: North Wales

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#14 Post by MichaelG. » Thu Nov 17, 2022 12:56 am

Here’s another possibility:

http://www.jollinger.com/photo/enlarger ... (1978).jpg
http://www.jollinger.com/photo/enlarger ... (1981).jpg

I keep hoping that some rich kid will do a Youtube ‘teardown’ of the Motic LUMOS :D

MichaelG.
Too many 'projects'

ldflan
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed May 22, 2019 11:36 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#15 Post by ldflan » Thu Nov 17, 2022 1:04 am

MichaelG. wrote:
Thu Nov 17, 2022 12:56 am
Here’s another possibility:

http://www.jollinger.com/photo/enlarger ... (1978).jpg
http://www.jollinger.com/photo/enlarger ... (1981).jpg

I keep hoping that some rich kid will do a Youtube ‘teardown’ of the Motic LUMOS :D

MichaelG.
They describe the "light pipe" in the dichroic enlarger heads as an "acrylic rod." I think it would probably be nearly or completely UV opaque as a result.

MichaelG.
Posts: 3567
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 8:24 am
Location: North Wales

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#16 Post by MichaelG. » Thu Nov 17, 2022 1:47 am

ldflan wrote:
Thu Nov 17, 2022 1:04 am
MichaelG. wrote:
Thu Nov 17, 2022 12:56 am
Here’s another possibility:

http://www.jollinger.com/photo/enlarger ... (1978).jpg
http://www.jollinger.com/photo/enlarger ... (1981).jpg

I keep hoping that some rich kid will do a Youtube ‘teardown’ of the Motic LUMOS :D

MichaelG.
They describe the "light pipe" in the dichroic enlarger heads as an "acrylic rod." I think it would probably be nearly or completely UV opaque as a result.
Did you read the second advert, from 1981 ?
I’m not sure if it’s a typo, or they upgraded it
… but it doesn’t really matter: https://www.emcoplastics.com/uv-transmitting-sheet/

MichaelG.
Too many 'projects'

Scarodactyl
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#17 Post by Scarodactyl » Thu Nov 17, 2022 2:30 am

ldflan wrote:
Thu Nov 17, 2022 12:05 am
Scarodactyl wrote:
Wed Nov 16, 2022 8:54 pm
Probably a series of dichroic mirrors.
These lenses would all have to be UV-A and UV-B transparent and thus expensive.
The motic one only has 365nm UV which you can handle with a relatively cheap glass condenser lens.

ldflan
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed May 22, 2019 11:36 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#18 Post by ldflan » Thu Nov 17, 2022 5:20 am

Scarodactyl wrote:
Thu Nov 17, 2022 2:30 am
ldflan wrote:
Thu Nov 17, 2022 12:05 am
Scarodactyl wrote:
Wed Nov 16, 2022 8:54 pm
Probably a series of dichroic mirrors.
These lenses would all have to be UV-A and UV-B transparent and thus expensive.
The motic one only has 365nm UV which you can handle with a relatively cheap glass condenser lens.
Well, about 360 nm is all I would really want in the UV range, for DAPI. But I am having a hard time believing that two big thick flint glass condenser lenses wouldn't rob you of a whole lot of the UV-A from an LED. I did just get a UV meter in the UV-A range, so I plan to check... Edit - Actually I guess 360nm is B range. Point is the same. If you can use ordinary glass, the fiber-optic mixer proposition should be pretty simple?

ldflan
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed May 22, 2019 11:36 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#19 Post by ldflan » Thu Nov 17, 2022 5:27 am

MichaelG. wrote:
Thu Nov 17, 2022 1:47 am
ldflan wrote:
Thu Nov 17, 2022 1:04 am
MichaelG. wrote:
Thu Nov 17, 2022 12:56 am
Here’s another possibility:

http://www.jollinger.com/photo/enlarger ... (1978).jpg
http://www.jollinger.com/photo/enlarger ... (1981).jpg

I keep hoping that some rich kid will do a Youtube ‘teardown’ of the Motic LUMOS :D

MichaelG.
They describe the "light pipe" in the dichroic enlarger heads as an "acrylic rod." I think it would probably be nearly or completely UV opaque as a result.
Did you read the second advert, from 1981 ?
I’m not sure if it’s a typo, or they upgraded it
… but it doesn’t really matter: https://www.emcoplastics.com/uv-transmitting-sheet/

MichaelG.
I guess you'd just have to pull out the "light pipe" and see how it behaves with UV...

Scarodactyl
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#20 Post by Scarodactyl » Thu Nov 17, 2022 6:13 am

When I say relatively cheap glass condenser lens I mean eg these thorlabs ones rated down to 350.
https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9. ... up_id=3835
It's what they use in their led illuminators.

MichaelG.
Posts: 3567
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 8:24 am
Location: North Wales

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#21 Post by MichaelG. » Thu Nov 17, 2022 8:54 am

ldflan wrote:
Thu Nov 17, 2022 5:27 am
I guess you'd just have to pull out the "light pipe" and see how it behaves with UV...
.

Well actually … No I wouldn’t

I was suggesting it as a design concept, not as a ‘make-from’
and I already have enough information to see that it could be done.

I had one of those enlargers, a while ago, and the lamp-house is much bigger than I would want for a microscope.
… for me this is just a mental exercise, to see whether I can deduce how Motic has done it.

MichaelG.
Too many 'projects'

ldflan
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed May 22, 2019 11:36 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#22 Post by ldflan » Thu Nov 17, 2022 6:25 pm

Scarodactyl wrote:
Thu Nov 17, 2022 6:13 am
When I say relatively cheap glass condenser lens I mean eg these thorlabs ones rated down to 350.
https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9. ... up_id=3835
It's what they use in their led illuminators.
On this page I only see the AR coatings described as having better than 99.5% transmission in the stated wavelength range, but AFAIK that's not the same thing as high UV transmission for the lens itself. I may have missed something?

The page also says "The -A Coating will not completely counteract the substrate's absorptive properties from 350 nm to 380 nm. . . . ." and "Please note that although the B270 substrate transmits from 380 - 2100 nm, these lenses are designed for use at visible wavelengths; focal shift plots are provided in the tables below for each lens for performance at other wavelengths." Transmission only from 380nm up takes it out of consideration for me.

But if as you say this is what Thorlabs uses for a UV light source condenser, then maybe the transmission rate at 350-360nm or so is good enough? The prices are indeed good if it will work. If you have to go to fused silica, the price is 10x higher.

Scarodactyl
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm

Re: LED en Nikon Fluophot

#23 Post by Scarodactyl » Thu Nov 17, 2022 7:16 pm

It's not 100% at 365 but from eyeballing the graph it looked like there should be at least some. Leds in this range can be really strong so losing some to the lens is likely not an issue.

Post Reply