Home Made Extra Widefield Eyepiece And:

[Rodney]

And camera mount for this camera I have. I spent a lot of time trying to find a good match for the eyepiece. Most all of the parts are from a 35mm film cameras except the tube assembly. So when I finally put it all together it will be a permanent unit. I will have to clean the oil from my fingers off the lens and align all the parts. I tested it by just placing the camera up against the lens in one of my binocular scopes, a 10x eyepiece was on the other side, looks to be extremely close to a 10x at this point but I want really know until later. For me the eye relief is really good and it looks like the picture size has increased by 25 percent from what my average photo`s are lately. Since I have a drawer full optical glass I thought I would try some of them out. Anyway a lot of time. The first photo is the extra widefield eyepiece and some of the parts. The second is a photo taken with it of an insect wing. The objective used was a 4x. You can actually make out the dust on the wing.

Rodney

[Rodney]

This photo taken with it and not cleaned.

Rodney

[Rodney]

I`m still testing it out, with dirty lens and parts hanging on by gravity. A second photo with this eyepiece.

Rodney

[Rodney]

Photo of combination extra wide eyepiece and a camera adapter mounted on microscope. As I was saying all of this is from surplus parts and lens. This is just an extra one that seems to be working real good.

Rodney

[gekko]

Good work! You said it does show somewhat more of the field of view. Can you maximize this by adjusting the distance or of the zoom setting of the camera?

[Rodney]

Soon to be finished and again tested photo of the adapter. No I never use the zoom function on this point and shoot camera. I find this camera zoom degrades the image very quickly after a certain point. I sometimes use the zoom function on a certain microscope but very rarely for photo`s.

Rodney

[gekko]

Does your camera have optical (as opposed to digital) zoom? If so, you might just want to try it in order to see if at some zoom setting you can get a significantly greater field of view (only as an experiment).

[Rodney]

Thanks for the question; this camera does have optical view zoom, this section can extend out another 2.0 inches if not longer, estimated. I don`t use it because I don`t want the zoom portion running into the eyepiece while microscopy viewing. All of my pictures are shot in the S camera setting, which is small and within size limits for this forum. I have not taken the large ones and reduced the size. I can increase the photo size by at least 4 times. The camera settings are S, M2, M1, and large. Small, medium, medium, and large. These last three will provide a larger photo with a lot more pixels.
I was mostly concerned with extra eye relief and a larger image from the eyepiece and being able to make one out of surplus optical glass and parts that as accumulated over the years and staying out of the land field.

I am very satisfied with the results and I will be testing it out soon.

Rodney

[billbillt]

This looks to be just glued together... If you download the pics and zoom in, you can see globs of glue holding it together..... Semi-permanent.....

[Rodney]

Glue was used, I would love to own an micro machine shop but I try to enjoy this as a hobby without all the fuss. American optical glued prisms in place, so nothing new. The eyepiece I made works fine and should continue so for a good while. I really like it myself.

Rodney

[billbillt]

You don't need a "micro machine shop" to do machining...Machine turning can be done with a hand drill if you use some ingenuity...

[Rodney]

Thanks Mr. T, if you look at my last picture you will be able to see a small hole where a set screw is in place. You can not see the set screw in the picture. The other 2 holes and set screws are spaced out around and are out of view, each one has a SET SCREW OK. This was done for any alignment that may be needed in the optical path. Certainly well designed for a cheap free. I would like to see a picture of one of your designs.
Thanks

Rodney

[billbillt]

I would just buy what I needed all ready to use... No glue, no junk... The widefield stuff I have here works just fine..

[billbillt]

I actually don't see where this does anything..

[mrsonchus]

Nice job - thanks for sharing it - it has points that may be used for similar projects that others may like to attempt themselves, with a minimum of resources and a large-helping of determination.
It may not be perfect - but a Ferrari still needs a mechanic!

[billbillt]

I just can't see where this can be called a "wide field"... All I can see it does is magnify a little... The field of view in the photos looks no larger..

[Rodney]

I will go over this one more time. I made this eyepiece adapter to fit this camera I have and for myself, not trying to sell the idea to anyone. More than likely no one would have the same parts to pull out of the junk box anyway, so no real procedures given other than a general idea from the picture of what could be made. I`m not an optician by any means but I do rebuild my personal microscopes if needed and I do a good job of it on the hobby side of things. If anyone does make one I would like to know how well it worked out. This one took me a good while to match up the lens correctly so that could be another problem. Image quality seems to be exactly the same when compared to my other eyepieces, the recording pixel shows to be larger with all of the photo`s. I will check that out closer when I have time. Sometimes I can obtain a fairly good photo with one shot but generally I can`t. It does take a lot of Real Work for me to obtain some satisfaction with the equipment I have. But going back to the micro machine shop, take a look at this picture. I removed one the set screw and threaded the micro tap back in. More than anything this helps make the entire assembly stronger and nothing moves when the camera is mounted. Rodney

[billbillt]

You presented this thing as a "Home made Extra Widefield Eyepiece".. Your words... If photos taken with it "show" more pixels, that is because the image is somewhat magnified, not necessarily wider... A tap in the hole or not, the glued joints will still be the weak link in the assembly... Taking a long time for you to find the right lens combination is not virtuous, it just shows you lack the math skills to calculate what lens would be needed.. Nothing more.. Just saying it is wide field does not make it so.. You have to be able to prove your statement...

[billbillt]

I am not going to comment any further on any of the junk you try to present on this forum.. If you want to try to BS people here, I don't think you will succeed in it here like you didn't anywhere else.. I just wish you would not try to ruin this forum like you did the others with your bombastic and cocky posting... I am finished with any communication with you... I am going to stop... I don't want this forum contaminated with childish junk.. Good luck here with any other junk you come up with..

[Rodney]

You wanted the proof, so take a look. The wider field of view is the first photo with this eyepiece I made. The second photo is with a standard 10x widefield eyepiece. The recording pixels are larger because the field of view is larger.

[Rodney]

Standard 10x widefield.

[mrsonchus]

Erm.. I'm afraid to say Rodney that these two images look completely the same, save for the slightly different position of the light-source. From these two pictures I would say there is no difference demonstrated to support or validate your description. I'm going purely on what you've demonstrated, which does appear essentially without substance. Sorry - I admire your obvious industry and enthusiasm but cannot really say that I have observed your stated results.

[billbillt]

To Mrsonchus:

This was one of the points I was trying to make.. This thing does absolutely nothing.... We went through this type of thing over and over on other forums.... Just gluing together some lenses without knowing what you are doing makes nothing...

[mrsonchus]

To Mrsonchus:

This was one of the points I was trying to make.. This thing does absolutely nothing.... We went through this type of thing over and over on other forums.... Just gluing together some lenses without knowing what you are doing makes nothing...

I may in principle agree with you based upon what has or hasn't been demonstrated as this is the first requirement of any possible validation of a procedure etc....
I would also say that harshness is rarely helpful or desirable, although of course sometimes it is the only effective means of communication....

That's my lot for this thread, I've lost interest I'm afraid and do not like the tone that it seems to be slipping towards. Best to leave before offence, which would of course be unintentional, is caused to anyone - life's too short.

[billbillt]

Agreed... I am fished with this also... You would have to know the background of all of this to understand...
The Best,
Billt

[Rodney]

I would agree that both of the pictures are extremely close to being the same. Except the first picture overall diameter is wider or slightly larger. What I did gain is a nice working eyepiece adapter that will fit the lens on this camera. And while doing so I used up some parts. I understand that Bill doesn`t think so and he is very rude, but this unit works very well, better than I expected.

Rodney

[Charles]

Hi Rodney,

I can see a slight increase in the field of view but nothing note worthy. A thing I have noticed in your microscope photos is the severe vingetting. I believe if you solved that problem, your pictures would come out better. Some ways are increasing the zoom , a proper relay lens or a longer photo tube perhaps?

[Rodney]

Thanks Charles, I WAS in the process of checking all this out, I just finished this eyepiece over the last several days but I will take a closer look at what you said.

Rodney