Strange Bedfellows
Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2021 11:09 am
I have read from several users that Nikon 160mm D.I.N. objectives work well on an infinity corrected AO/Reichert series 400 scope. This always seemed odd to me but one of the reports came from someone that I have no reason to doubt and the particular objective was used for 20X D.I.C. too.
I should have tried this out while I had Seta's 60X Nikon planapo here for repair but the idea only ocurred to me after I had packed it for return.
Recently, an ebay merchant in Japan has been offering both Nikon and Olympus 160 D.I.N. objectives at quite low prices. One popped up, a uvF 100X 1.30 w./iris glyc. for a really low price , so I figured for under 100.00 shipping in, I couldn't go wrong. The fact that it was glycerin immersion was even better because I have this lone Reichert 63X 1.0 oo glyz. that although it is a 63X and 1.0, is a bit of a pain due to it's mismatch with every other objective I have for the system, except dry ones. I even have a restrictor rear diaphragm for it that I pilfered from a broken 100X of the same series so I can use it for DF at about .85. Having a 100X glycerin immersion to go along with it and with an iris diaphragm for DF seemed promising. Well, you know what? That Nikon 160mm objective works really well. It works best with the blue filter swung in for sure and magnifies about 110X in the system but there is nothing shabby about it's performance. It isn't plan but it is a fairly flat field objective, so that aspect of it is barely noticeable. The parfocality with the Reichert 63X is slightly off but nothing a few parfocalizing shims won't cure and the glycerin immersion is very nice.
I did a comparison between it and the standard 100X 1.25 planachro oil immersion from the Buffalo plant. The image quality is very similar with the planachro having just a slight resolution edge close to the periphery of a 20mm field , likely due to the Nikon not being plan but the image sharpness overall and ca correction is about equivalent. I have yet to trial it for DF.
I don't know how this fares for other 160mm Nikon objectives used in that system. No doubt they are best in their native system but if an attractive price on an attractive objective came along, it might be worth a try. Nikon is highly resaleable so it is hard to lose.
One note is that in the Microstar/Diastar the Reichert Austria objectives have a very slight lateral ca. It is almost imperceptible but cameras pick it up worse. This is cured by swapping to #145 eyepieces, which are slightly compensating. It appears that both the Reichert objectives and the 160 NIkons need about the same degree of compensation.
I should have tried this out while I had Seta's 60X Nikon planapo here for repair but the idea only ocurred to me after I had packed it for return.
Recently, an ebay merchant in Japan has been offering both Nikon and Olympus 160 D.I.N. objectives at quite low prices. One popped up, a uvF 100X 1.30 w./iris glyc. for a really low price , so I figured for under 100.00 shipping in, I couldn't go wrong. The fact that it was glycerin immersion was even better because I have this lone Reichert 63X 1.0 oo glyz. that although it is a 63X and 1.0, is a bit of a pain due to it's mismatch with every other objective I have for the system, except dry ones. I even have a restrictor rear diaphragm for it that I pilfered from a broken 100X of the same series so I can use it for DF at about .85. Having a 100X glycerin immersion to go along with it and with an iris diaphragm for DF seemed promising. Well, you know what? That Nikon 160mm objective works really well. It works best with the blue filter swung in for sure and magnifies about 110X in the system but there is nothing shabby about it's performance. It isn't plan but it is a fairly flat field objective, so that aspect of it is barely noticeable. The parfocality with the Reichert 63X is slightly off but nothing a few parfocalizing shims won't cure and the glycerin immersion is very nice.
I did a comparison between it and the standard 100X 1.25 planachro oil immersion from the Buffalo plant. The image quality is very similar with the planachro having just a slight resolution edge close to the periphery of a 20mm field , likely due to the Nikon not being plan but the image sharpness overall and ca correction is about equivalent. I have yet to trial it for DF.
I don't know how this fares for other 160mm Nikon objectives used in that system. No doubt they are best in their native system but if an attractive price on an attractive objective came along, it might be worth a try. Nikon is highly resaleable so it is hard to lose.
One note is that in the Microstar/Diastar the Reichert Austria objectives have a very slight lateral ca. It is almost imperceptible but cameras pick it up worse. This is cured by swapping to #145 eyepieces, which are slightly compensating. It appears that both the Reichert objectives and the 160 NIkons need about the same degree of compensation.