WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

Have a problem finding shops that sell specific materials? Ask here. Are you looking for microscope parts? Do you have anything to offer for sale? Note: this is not a section for external companies to advertise their products.
Post Reply
Message
Author
hans
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#1 Post by hans » Sun Jun 20, 2021 1:17 am

I have an extra 1744 40/0.66 phase in nice cosmetic condition, would also trade the 1744 plus some cash for a 1745.

apochronaut
Posts: 6272
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#2 Post by apochronaut » Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:10 pm

Getting hard to find as the popularity of the 400 series as a close to state of the art but low priced infinity corrected microscope grows. I can offer you an arrangement on an entire 3 piece Neoplan set but I don't want to break it up.

The 50X .80 show up from time to time. There is one on now for 99.00 I think. They should take less.

hans
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#3 Post by hans » Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:30 am

I actually bought two 50s already, both bad. Both refunded fully so no loss but a bit disappointing. Surprising because generally the 400 series objectives seem pretty robust. Out of all the well-used surplus stands I bought I only found one other bad objective, a 100X plan achro with oil inside, and I have some really beat-up looking ones (plier marks on the barrel, etc.) that work well.

Have you ever disassembled a 400-series oil objective? The 50X I still have is probably beyond repair (front element fractured in half) and the 100X not really worth it but might be interesting practice. (The second 50X which was nice cosmetically but had oil inside went back to the seller.) I tried a bit to get them apart but not much progress. Seems like the front piece needs to unscrew but is cemented in place?

apochronaut
Posts: 6272
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#4 Post by apochronaut » Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:44 am

I have repaired a 20 and a 40. The front section does unscrew. Production labs get careless with immersion oil. Leaving it on and just adding more, so it can creep into threads and become hardened like cement.
I agree that in general the AO objectives are top of the line when it comes to delamination and oil seepage problems. You don't see it that often.
Don't know why the 50 in particular would fail. I have seen a couple where the front bezel section was loose but they had not failed yet.
The 20 I repaired was actually for oil invasion, a pitfall of having a 20 with a short working distance.

arb566
Posts: 47
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2020 5:47 am
Location: British Columbia Canada

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#5 Post by arb566 » Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:39 pm

You wouldn't happen to have a 20X #1733 by any chance?
Thanks, Al.

apochronaut
Posts: 6272
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#6 Post by apochronaut » Wed Jun 23, 2021 11:13 am

Not sure whether that was directed at me or Hans. No free ones at the moment. I will keep a look out for you.
120 coming soon.

arb566
Posts: 47
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2020 5:47 am
Location: British Columbia Canada

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#7 Post by arb566 » Wed Jun 23, 2021 2:46 pm

Wasn't directed at anyone in particular, I hope Hans doesn't mind me butting in on his thread. If anyone comes across a 20X it would be much appreciated.

Al.

hans
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#8 Post by hans » Wed Jun 23, 2021 5:34 pm

No problem, I don't have a 20X either, and I think just about everyone with a Microstar IV is looking.

I did see a set of the mythical plan fluors listed a couple months ago for $1000 buy it now or best offer. Apparently gone now although the listing shows "ended" not "sold". I wonder how much they went for.

dtsh
Posts: 977
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 6:06 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#9 Post by dtsh » Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:23 pm

There was one (1733) on eBay last night with a couple of other AO objectives. I thought about it, but as I don't have a BF 410 (missing a stand) and I didn't need the 20x 1022's; I decided to camp on it, but someone else wanted it more than I did as it's gone now.

hans
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#10 Post by hans » Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:36 pm

Yeah the price seemed a bit high considering the rest of the stuff in the lot was not particularly rare. (Except maybe the 40/0.85, but not sure how generally useful that one is?)

arb566
Posts: 47
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2020 5:47 am
Location: British Columbia Canada

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#11 Post by arb566 » Wed Jun 23, 2021 9:03 pm

I missed that. The story of my life, a day late and a dollar short. LOL. I seem to use a 20X a lot. With the apparent scarcity of the #1733 I've been thinking I might go for a decent Chinese or India objective if I knew it would be a reasonable match for the AO/Reichert infinity system. Almost all I've looked at either say for Olympus or say nothing at all. Could be some expensive trial and error.
Al.

hans
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#12 Post by hans » Wed Jun 23, 2021 9:59 pm

I bought one of these quite a while ago before I understood the 0.6% lateral CA issue. Seller accepted a $50 offer:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/220929879488

The objective seems to be close to neutral in terms of lateral CA and the mismatch in a 410 is pretty obvious and distracting even visually. Lateral CA mismatch aside (not the fault of the objective) I was not that impressed with the overall build quality either. Parfocal distance and centering are way off compared to the tolerances held in the standard 400 series objectives. But maybe reasonable for an objective costing $50 new with free shipping...

apochronaut
Posts: 6272
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#13 Post by apochronaut » Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:23 pm

The Chinese seem to refer to those as 180mm ( Olympus) objectives. There are also 200mm NIS 45 and NIS 60 objectives. ( NIkon System). The Nikon system objectives are very close to the Reichert objectives in lateral ca. If you can find one of those it will be pretty close.

The 20X .50 planachros from AO will be better though, so I would hang in there. The #1891 40X .85 is a superb objective. They were not cheap. Strain Free.

hans
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#14 Post by hans » Wed Jun 23, 2021 11:26 pm

So "NIS 60" would be what Nikon calls CFI60? (I did buy a 0.17 mm cover glass corrected 20X plan apo from one of the recent $100 batches which I haven't messed with much yet but was not expecting it to work in a Microstar IV without some modification.) Not too familiar with Nikon stuff, what is Nikon's term for the 45 mm parfocal infinity system?

apochronaut
Posts: 6272
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#15 Post by apochronaut » Thu Jun 24, 2021 12:23 am

Don't know. I think they are only on the Eclipse 100. If you dig out a catalogue for that it should give you a rundown of the objectives available. Probably nothing fancy but about as good as the 1733 I suppose.

Another approach is to keep your eyes peeled for a 25X .45, such as was used on the 45mm parfocal Austrian stands. The lateral ca correction difference is there but very small. I'm a bit of a stickler about ca but I can tolerate that difference. It is almost imperceptible with planapos. However, if you use #145 eyepieces, they are slightly more compensating than the 181 or 91 and a bit of compensation is what those objectives need, so 145s are razor sharp across field. There are several options for use. If you mix objectives, you can swap in the 145 eyepieces when you have an Austrian objective dialed up. Or you could outfit the entire nosepiece with Austrian objectives and 145 eyepieces.

There are a few planfluor apos and planapos floating around too, so those objectives offer the opportunity to upgrade a 410 or 420 seriously.The higher end versions are more available than those for the series 400, probably because of more general use and a 14 year longer sales run. The 25X .65 planapo is a killer objective, as is the 40X 1.0 oil planapo. In fact with the objective iris reduced to about .65 and the field and condenser irises closed quite a bit too, that objective is about as good as the .66 planachro when it is used dry so it is both a good general purpose dry objective as well as an elite planapo oiled.

apochronaut
Posts: 6272
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#16 Post by apochronaut » Fri Jun 25, 2021 1:49 am

I spent about an hour this evening comparing the AO/Reichert #1734 40X .66 planachro and the Reichert 40X 1.0 oil planapo used dry, side by side in the same nosepiece with the same slide. Each was passed through both the 181 eyepieces and the 145 eyepieces. While this might seem like an odd comparison, the Reichert planapo oil 40X is not an uncommon objective to show up on ebay. It is an affordable and attainable high resolution planapo. Occasionally the seller will push the price on them, reflective of it's type and original value but being an oil objective they aren't the hottest item on ebay; I guess due to the resistance to the use of oil and the fact that it is a 40. Why use oil on a 40X when there are dry objectives as good, might be a thought? That question makes sense, especially in light of the fact that Reichert also supplied an extremely good 40X .70 planfluor, which is one of my favourite objectives. Dry, exceptionally clean for ca, longish working distance, high resolution, flat across the field and superb contrast. The 40X 1.0 oil is even better though, especially for DF use where it's iris diaphragm and oil immersion corrections make it the perfect companion for an iris equipped 100X oil immersion. The good thing is they can just as easily be found cheap. My first cost me 100.00. I passed on a second at around 150.00 a year or so later because I didn't really need one but recently bought another to build up a Diastar DF microscope for 125.00. These were what: $4,000.00 in 1990?
I always try out oil immersion objectives dry. They are not all cut from the same cloth. Most turn out to be terrible but I reported in a MicrobeHunter forum thread a few years ago about the AO cat. #1026 50X .85 oil immersion iris equipped achromat. In trials both dry and water immersed it performed very close to the 45X .66 dry achromats # 1078 and # 1116. It was perfectly useable as a dry 50X at about a .65 or so aperture with the added bonus that it's N.A. and resolution are that much better when immersed.

The Reichert Austria 40X 1.0 oil is similar. The key is to stop the light down. The field iris should be as small as you can make it without causing the illumination to dim. I have found that closing the iris to about 3/4 is best but that to some degree depends on the condenser setting. Those two irises can be played with. They need to be open enough to give the best resolution but still cut the flare and spherical aberration as much as possible.

In comparison to the #1734, the resolution is about the same. Carefull adjustment of the condenser iris can get the contrast of the dry planapo up to the same level as the planachro. Where the difference lies is in the level of ca. The 1734 has a slight playoff between magenta and a sort of aquamarine; I'll call it cyan, in it's ca profile. Depending on the sample it is more or less but it is an achromat and it has some ca as they all do. Small spaces in certain structures will have a light wash of cyan filling them. The planapo however remains colour free, so even though the resolution of fine details might be slightly better through the planachro than the stopped down planapo, there is enough resolution masking due to ca with the planachro that the dry planapo ends up revealing more detail. So it is a true multi-purpose objective.

hans
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#17 Post by hans » Sat Jun 26, 2021 7:11 am

Interesting comparison. I also have noticed the relatively low prices on some of the lower-magnification (but still high NA) oil immersion objectives and actually have two 40X for the Dynoptic sitting in my garage that arrived this week. Unfortunately from quick visual inspection it looks like they may both have issues and need to be returned but they were pretty cheap even listed in eBay "used" condition with returns allowed.

apochronaut
Posts: 6272
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#18 Post by apochronaut » Sun Jun 27, 2021 1:59 pm

You mean the 40X 1.0 oil fluorite they made for the 160mm B & L's? They made that objective back as far as the 20's.. with just a change in barrel shape. There was a partner to it, a 100X 1.30 fluorite. Unfortunately with that high N.A. it is not likely useful for DF, although there were probably funnel stops for thrm.

hans
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#19 Post by hans » Sat Jul 03, 2021 9:54 pm

apochronaut wrote:
Sun Jun 27, 2021 1:59 pm
You mean the 40X 1.0 oil fluorite they made for the 160mm B & L's?
Yeah, that's one, just started using it: https://www.microbehunter.com/microscop ... =5&t=13228

The other is actually not 40X, I was confused: 215mm T. L. / use without cover glass / apochromat oil [black dot] (strain free?) / 3mm 1.40. Not sure how useful that one might, assuming I even keep it. Looks like it might be delaminated but I haven't tested it yet. Need to get around to that before the 30 days is up...

hans
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#20 Post by hans » Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:17 am

The 3mm 1.40 is bad, internal cloudiness but also sort of a fractured look I have not seen before. Ordinary delamination, or something worse? Seller refunded and didn't want it back so maybe I will try disassembling at some point, my track record with objectives is not good so far, though...
Attachments
PXL_20210704_010750343.jpg
PXL_20210704_010750343.jpg (87.34 KiB) Viewed 5952 times


apochronaut
Posts: 6272
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#22 Post by apochronaut » Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:30 am

That is a somewhat typical pattern formed in Balsam and not as bad as many others i have seen. You are probably correct that it is a form of crystallization Scarodactyl..I have repaired some of them by immersing that lens in 100% ethanol, after removal. Timing seems important and maintaining some pressure. The method I have used with success is to use trimmed, fitted wine corks top and bottom and apply the pressure with the plastic pressure cap of a medication bottle. The corks have to be precisely cut so that they put just gentle clamping pressure on the lenses and the balsam balsam layer when the lid is turned to close it. Fill the bottle with ethanol put on the lid and leave about 12 hours. Drill a hole in the bottle and drain out the ethanol, keeping the lens under pressure until dry. You can drill many more holes in the bottle to aid drying but keeping gentle pressure on the balsam seems important. I have about a 60 to 70% success rate with this method. Sometimes, I am pretty sure that there were unknown impurities in the balsam and re--dissolving the balsam still leaves them evident. Even with a bit of suspended material though, the lens can be brought back to excellent performance. Some lenses probably did not have enough cement or the elements are stuck in their cell and gaps remain.

hans
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#23 Post by hans » Tue Jul 06, 2021 8:45 pm

Interesting, would xylene work, or too aggressive? I think 100% ethanol is difficult for private individuals to buy in the US. So is it not possible to actually separate the elements in the cell because of the way they are assembled? Or not possible to correctly realign after?

apochronaut
Posts: 6272
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: WTB Reichert objectives: 1745 (plan achro) or 1749 (neo plan) 100/1.25 phase, 1758 neo plan 50/0.80 oil

#24 Post by apochronaut » Tue Jul 06, 2021 10:02 pm

Don't know about xylene. 100% ethanol is difficult here too for a consumer but a permit to buy it for a scientific purpose is fairly easy in 500ml. bottles.
I have never tried it but some firepower neutral spirits might work : 50%? I would think the distilled water component would slowly evaporate off. Might just take more time.
The way I look at these crazed lenses is. : You have nothing to lose.

Post Reply