noob question How much of a quality difference between Phase Contrast Suppliers

[Gatorengineer64]

Curious as to the difference between the quality of say an Amscope Phase Kit versus say a Native Nikon Kit for my Elipse. In astronomy, I would say you have an 80/20 or 70/30 rule where you would get 80 percent of the result for 20 percent of the cost. Curious here about phase and other techniques....

Mark

[PeteM]

Mark, with Nikon infinity, you'll have a choice of at least three levels of phase objectives and a reasonably large number on the used market from many years of production. They'll have achromats, plan achromats, and plan fluorities. Plan apos as well, but even the used prices may be out of sight. The Nikon phase condenser will be well built. You might get a couple of objectives and a phase condenser for around $600.

With AmScope you'll most likely have to buy new. The plan achromats are OK, but not as good as Nikon. The condenser is built a bit less well. The condenser dovetail may need modification to fit your Eclipse. Recollection is that new kits are around $900 - used ones maybe much cheaper.

I suspect, but haven't checked, that the phase annuli won't allow you to mix and match objectives and condensers. It may be, depending on your use (pond critters?) that you only really need a couple phase objectives. Given that protists are moving up and down and back and forth, achromat objectives might be all you'd need. Your subject isn't going to stay in a plane. A brightfield objective, maybe sometimes set to darkfield, can be used as a 4x or 10x finder. You may not need a 100x. For me the 20x and/or 40x phase might be most useful to have.

Given that you already have an excellent start, but are looking to a gradually increasing want list -- maybe look for most everything you want in another Nikon scope and then sell a fairly complete second microscope to recoup some of your costs? Could be cheaper than buying parts one at a time.

Heaven forbid you start looking for DIC stuff -- that's a long journey requiring a pot of gold along the way to find a pot of gold at the end : -) Should you go down that path, you might not want to use the phase stuff so much.

[75RR]

+1

[Dubious]

Yeah, I think most here will agree that you should stick with Nikon optics. It isn't even a question of quality. In addition to the 80/20 rule, you have to consider that with a microscope the generic parts may not work at all. I would be interested in hearing whether you can even find someone at Amscope who knows whether they have or can order a generic phase contrast kit that is fully compatible with your infinity Eclipse system. (With Chinese companies manufacturing near-Nikon clones, it is certainly conceivable that one exists, but Amscope often does not seem to know much about the things it sells.) You would be a lot more certain of success just to start looking on Ebay for a reasonably-priced phase contrast condenser for the Eclipse and a couple of suitable Nikon objectives.

[apochronaut]

The entire Nikon Eclipse 100 system is Chinese. You can buy off the shelf Chinese components from Chinese suppliers and entire microscopes. The more economical Nikon components for the Eclipse 60mm parfocal systems are also made in China. The Nikon infinity 60mm system , called NIS60 in China has been used as a base for the better Chinese microscopes. One has been covered fairly well on this forum by Farnsey : the BS-2081. The Chinese NIS60 microscopes no doubt originated due to the fact that Nikon had contracted one or more Chinese factories to make components and probably frames . Subsequent to that, the factories themselves have produced improved versions of the basic Nikon scopes. I say improved because Nikon establishes limitations on how far one can upgrade their cheaper stands. You can't put DIC on an E200 for instance but you can on the Chinese clone. The Chinese saw a need for a low priced NIS DIC system and chose to offer that, rather than various phase options. The onle y phase objectives available are standard dark phase planachromats, which I would assume to be about as good as Nikon planachro dark phase objectives, since they are most likely made in China.
Very few Chinese phase systems offer anything but dark planachro phase ( except for some cheaper achromat systems). There is the occasional 45mm parfocal system that offers both positive and negative planachros but I think it is a 180mm reference length system, so Olympus type. You can buy the component objectives from Boli optics but I think possibly Amscope too. I have never seen fluorite or apo Chinese phase objectives, so outside of the standard NIS dark phase , either Nikon branded or Chinese branded, your only option if you wanted another phase or phase type or phase with a higher level of colour correction is Nikon branded.
The BS-2081 Chinese scope is also represented in India as the Radical RXL-5 NX. The optics are NIS60. Although not explicitly stated in the literature for that instrument , Radical makes muçh elsewhere of the fact that their phase systems were developed and are made by Seiwa. In the literature for the RXL-5 NX they list planapo phase objectives; 10X .45 up to 100X 1.45. For someone looking to increase the capability of a Nikon 60mm parfocal phase system, without feeling the pinch of 3000.00 for even a 10X objective, that might be an economical option. It is impossible to believe that anyone would make a lousy planapo objective, especially Seiwa, who has an excellent reputation. Radical tends to price in line with the Chinese, so there could be a bargain there.
The only issue would be whether those objectives were compatible with the Nikon diaphragm : size and placement in the Z axis.
I had a similar situation years ago. Reichert(AO) only made dark planachro phase objectives for the series 400 but for the Polylite and a couple of other Austrian microscopes they made planfluor phase and planapo phase, as well as anoptral phase: all working with a markedly different diaphragm/condenser than that of the series 400. It turns out that the Austrian objectives work well in the series 400 and 100X planapo phase was worth the 250.00 it cost.

[Gatorengineer64]

Thanks for the very thoughtful reply. Would be interesting but probably impossible to know if Nikon has any in plant QC or they just shovel out the door what is produced. I was cleaning the microscopes condenser, the lowest price Abbe and I have to say what a plastic piece of junk, which at this original pricepoint is quite shocking...

Would you say that Zeiss or Leica have maintained a higher standard, or have they entered the race to the bottom fray?

[Red_Green]

Curious as to the difference between the quality of say an Amscope Phase Kit versus say a Native Nikon Kit for my Elipse. In astronomy, I would say you have an 80/20 or 70/30 rule where you would get 80 percent of the result for 20 percent of the cost. Curious here about phase and other techniques....

Mark

The Amscope phase kit rules. I have it, I love it and I use it all the time. It's just as good as anybody else's. Except instead of rolling the dice on used gear, the amscope comes brand spankin' new in a snazzy little box, plan phase objectives and all.

[Dubious]

Curious as to the difference between the quality of say an Amscope Phase Kit versus say a Native Nikon Kit for my Elipse. In astronomy, I would say you have an 80/20 or 70/30 rule where you would get 80 percent of the result for 20 percent of the cost. Curious here about phase and other techniques....

Mark

The Amscope phase kit rules. I have it, I love it and I use it all the time. It's just as good as anybody else's. Except instead of rolling the dice on used gear, the amscope comes brand spankin' new in a snazzy little box, plan phase objectives and all.

Are you using the phase kit on an Eclipse? and which one? I'm not against trying generic Chinese objectives--I've seen some that performed very well indeed--but they obviously need to fit and work in the system before we even get to the question of quality.

[PeteM]

As mentioned before, the AmScope dovetail is likely too small for the Eclipse condenser holder. Someone with machining or 3D printing capabilities could adapt it.

AmScope lists its infinity dovetail for their 690 at 37mm. I haven't had one of their infinity phase contrast sets, but the finite ones plus the Motic, and Accu-Scope infinity condenser dovetails (around 43mm) have also been smaller than the Eclipse. The Nikon condenser dovetails I have range from a bit over 45mm to 46mm and have a locating pin at the back.

The AmScope kit we had was OK, but I wouldn't rate the phase condenser build quality equal to the Leica, Nikon, Olympus, and Zeiss phase condensers we've had. These would be older units. Now that the low end of most of these major suppliers is being made in China, the design and build have likely been cost reduced. New phase condensers for something like a Nikon 100 might not be any better than an AmScope equivalent.

There's a visible difference in the optical quality of Nikon's lower end 45mm infinity parfocal objectives and the 60mm parfocal versions - with the latter better. For phase contrast and fast moving protists, it might not be a big deal for many users.

[farnsy]

There's a visible difference in the optical quality of Nikon's lower end 45mm infinity parfocal objectives and the 60mm parfocal versions - with the latter better.

I was not aware that Nikon made any infinity corrected 45mm parfocal objectives. Are those lower-end and current or are they an older design, from before they decided to switch to 60mm/m25? Are you aware of which models featured these objectives?

[PeteM]

Farnsy, not sure about current production, but they were for their low end educational microscopes. For example:

https://www.microscope.healthcare.nikon ... lipse-e100

[apochronaut]

Thanks for the very thoughtful reply. Would be interesting but probably impossible to know if Nikon has any in plant QC or they just shovel out the door what is produced. I was cleaning the microscopes condenser, the lowest price Abbe and I have to say what a plastic piece of junk, which at this original pricepoint is quite shocking...

Would you say that Zeiss or Leica have maintained a higher standard, or have they entered the race to the bottom fray?

This is a factor of era. From the time that quality condenser/diaphragms were first envisioned in the 1840's, up until the 1960's they have been brass or bronze, changing over at different times at different companies to aluminum, then with plastic physical components added where structural strength was not that important. Quality condensers bodies are still mostly metal and the optics have changed little. The leaves have mostly been brass, blued steel, or stainless steel more recently. There is no doubt that there is way more plastic in less expensive microscopes but the only mechanical part in most condenser housings is the iris mechanism. The odd thing is, that the nature of this mechanism lends itself to a possible improvement with the use of certain plastic or nylon components, if made cheaply to be included in an entry level microscope.

The 4 remaining large microscope makers are all buying their entry level microscopes from countries with developing economies and trying to compete with those very same countries own products in the marketplace, sometimes with an identical product just badged with a recognizable name. The subterfuge is obvious but ridiculous products like the Zeiss Primostar are still being sold to institutions and individuals who are brand adherent. They are buying the name, not the microscope. If you bought 10 Zeiss Primostars, you could save $10,000 by buying them from the people that make them. Olympus and Nikon are a little different because they appear to contract Chinese factories to build unique designs for them. However, one can still buy a branded CX-31 from the manufacturer cheaper than Olympus sold them for.
Leica might be a little different in that they have been known to outsource production to India.
The bottom line is; if you want old school manufacturing quality, you have to either pay the price for authentic production from the native country which means more than $10,000 or shop around for a second hand gem from any of about 10 mfg. who made superior hands on production microscopes. An emerging option is to buy into a high end Chinese scope, some of which are rooted in the production regime of one of the major's lesser scopes but can be had for much less.

[Gatorengineer64]

I may have found cheap Nikon Phase objectives plus Nikon Phase rings will post back in a few days if it works out.

On Scopes thanks for the advice...... Interesting to hear Leica ""May"" still be a bit better. But working in engineering we have lots of problems with our Indian stainless rusting and being magnetic..... so......

[apochronaut]

I may have found cheap Nikon Phase objectives plus Nikon Phase rings will post back in a few days if it works out.

On Scopes thanks for the advice...... Interesting to hear Leica ""May"" still be a bit better. But working in engineering we have lots of problems with our Indian stainless rusting and being magnetic..... so......

Cheap stainless is notorious for impurities. I have seen 20-10 stainless that was magnetic. My father worked in aircraft design but lost his job to the Arrow debacle and worked in restaurant equipment design until retirement. Boy did the food fly out of the kitchen using that equipment. They switched from Canadian to Japanese stainless steel, sometime in the late 60's and the workload of the polishers doubled.

There are objectives out there that conform to the early AO infinity corrected pattern : usually referred to as 34mm parfocal infinity corrected. Although they are 45mm ,parfocal you can put put them into a series 10/20 microscope for instance and have them work perfectly. Leica must have been responsible for that. They went to India in the early 2000's for some production when they were still doing some repair parts for the microscope models that the umbrella company had inherited.
At one point microscopes branded Labomed were Indian, coming out of the same facility that manufactured for Leica.

[Gatorengineer64]

I dable in old cameras and one place that I work with has some old Nikon YS2s.... I bought them (2) about a month ago. they finally showed up. I will say this the condenser in the YS2 a basic Abbey is better than the Abbey in my Ecliplse The Eclipse has a plastic field lens and the prior owner got carried away with oil, and what a mess, I got most of it, but will need to go back in. Whereas the YS has a nice glass field lens, and it could be psychological, but I think the YS2 puts up a better image..... I ordered an eclipse flip top Achro today off of fleabay, will see how that works, if its not significantly better, I can put it back out probably for what I paid for it.....