Leitz Wetzlar, Wild, Swift eyepieces

[imkap]

Hi everyone,
I have these objectives and a Zeiss GFL.

The one on the left works good, it's just that now I have 3 pieces of 40x objectives (Zeiss PLAN 40x, Zeiss-winkel 40x and this one), so I'm not sure which one to sell (or trade), if any... I don't think I need all of them (or do I? ). So please offer some opinions on these and advice for which one should I keep... I like the views through all of them so can't say, maybe in photos it will be different... I still don't have adapters to attach a camera, they will come in a few weeks.

The one in the middle is a Wild Heerbrugg pl fulotar 3x, it is great but I can't focus with it without lifting the specimen, I think it's made for a longer 170m tube, so maybe this one I don't need. Or is there an extension piece to solve this problem?

The third one is swift MP 40 Ph. D.M. I think it is for phase contrast, I don't have a right condenser for phase contrast, so can't really use it now. Maybe in future, I can't find any info on this one anywhere on the internet so I'd appreciate if someone tells me what is it? I suppose you get this one with a Swift microscope, but didn't find it on the images anywhere online... I'm wondering is it worth to keep it until I get a condenser or get rid of it now and buy something else.

Thanks

[Hobbyst46]

Old Zeiss objectives are sometimes not at their best, possibly due to delamination, which is not always easy to detect. And nobody knows for sure whether delamination will appear in an objective, any time.
So, assuming that the two Zeiss 40x objectives as well as the Leitz Fluotar 40x look good, I would keep them all.

If you really need to sell an objective, I would sell the Swift. Simply because of the very remote chance that it will yield phase contrast with the Zeiss phase-contrast condenser.

On eBay, there are cheap RMS-thread objective extenders that enable some (very approximate) parfocality of the Wild 3x objective with the other objectives. I would try to measure the exact difference between the focusing distances of the Zeiss 40X and the Wild 3X and buy the appropriate extender (they come in 1mm steps: 7mm, 8mm, etc).

The nearest option from Zeiss for low magnification objective is the Plan 2.5X. There is also a 4X apochromat with which I am not familiar.
In fact, there is also a Zeiss 3X simple achromat objective, not as good as the 2.5X, although it is parfocal with the other Zeiss objectives.

[imkap]

Thanks, great answer. I wanted to keep them all anyway... Probably will sell the Swift, not sure of it's value. Can't find it anywhere

It's not that I really need to sell it's just that I've got some doubles, so I thought why not sell and buy a 1.3 condenser or something for the money. I would also like to get a trinocular head and a stereo microscope in the future...

I have 3 pieces of Zeiss 2.5x, 2 plan and one old Winkel, the small one which is a little wider. The one of the plans is delaminated, other one and the Winkel seem good. I'll get the extension ring for the Wild, thanks for the info. It seems to have a good image.

[Hobbyst46]

I have 3 pieces of Zeiss 2.5x, 2 plan and one old Winkel, the small one which is a little wider. The one of the plans is delaminated, other one and the Winkel seem good. I'll get the extension ring for the Wild, thanks for the info. It seems to have a good image.

Oh, OK, the Plans 2.5x are fine. I use them without any condenser.
Regarding Leitz and Wild optics, please note also, that the camera sees things differently than the eye. In theory at least, the combination of aberration corrections by the eyepiece and objective performs best when they are both from Zeiss. I have been told that Leitz combine pretty well with Zeiss.
Rolf Vossen thinks highly of Zeiss-Winkel for photography, which IMO justifies keeping them although they are even older than our Carl Zeiss...
A trinocular head is a terrific improvement of the microscope.

[MicroBob]

The NPL Fluotar will do nicely, I really like these objectives on my Zeiss microscopes. The colour correction is close to that of Zeiss, you will get a good image with Zeiss eyepieces and Zeiss compatible phto adaptation. Only very critical testing can reveal the small difference. Compared to a Zeiss Planapo they are not quite as good but the Leitz objectives rarely deleminate.

Wild used 37mm parfocal length but a 3:1 may not have been parfocal at all. Wild intermediate image in the 160mm tube was 9mm below the end of the tube. So with an 8mm extender the actual tube lenght the objective has been calculated for will be exceeded quite a bit. I would give it a try and compare colour an planarity correction to the Zeiss Plan 2,5.

[imkap]

Rolf Vossen thinks highly of Zeiss-Winkel for photography, which IMO justifies keeping them although they are even older than our Carl Zeiss...

I have stumbled on his webpage and was very impressed with his work and later when reading I realized he's mentioned the Winkel 40x/o.65 which I happen to own... So I was quite happy with that.

I would try to measure the exact difference between the focusing distances of the Zeiss 40X and the Wild 3X and buy the appropriate extender (they come in 1mm steps: 7mm, 8mm, etc).

I'll do that and try to print the extension, there is one model on thingverse, the creator says the threads should be working so I'll try this first and compare the objectives.

I would give it a try and compare colour an planarity correction to the Zeiss Plan 2,5.

I assume planarity correction is ok if the whole field is in focus at the same time. I have an Olympus Plan 20 objective and just 2 days ago realized that the end of field is not in very sharp focus, so I figured it must be something to do with compatibility of objective with the eyepiece. If I had Olympus oculars then it should all be corrected ok, or the other parts have something to do with it also?

Colour correction I'm not sure what it is Does it have to do with chromatic aberration or there is more to it?

Thanks

P.S. It's crazy times we're living in, the browser is constantly checking my spelling as I write, so no mistakes anywhere. Not sure do I like this or not. I think I'll turn it off
It seems like typos are a thing of the past

[Hobbyst46]

I assume planarity correction is ok if the whole field is in focus at the same time. I have an Olympus Plan 20 objective and just 2 days ago realized that the end of field is not in very sharp focus, so I figured it must be something to do with compatibility of objective with the eyepiece.

Planarity means that most of the field of view (eye-view; the camera often sees only the central part of the FOV) is in focus. The Zeiss FOV is only 18mm wide. Olympus might provide 20mm or more.

If I had Olympus oculars then it should all be corrected ok, or the other parts have something to do with it also?

It should be OK. Olympus eyepieces from AX or BH2 microscopes can be used.
Colour correction has to do with chromatic aberrations.

[imkap]

Great, thanks...