Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

Everything relating to microscopy hardware: Objectives, eyepieces, lamps and more.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#1 Post by blekenbleu » Sun Jun 19, 2022 3:44 pm

I seldom use diascopic illumination, rarely over 40x objectives
and am reluctant to pay a high price for Nikon's flip-top condenser.
Zeiss' 0.9 appears to be the flip-top condenser most often priced lower,
but have not seen images of its bottom clear enough to determine
whether it has a similar circular dovetail,
much less whether it is of a compatible dimension.

Can anyone share information about low cost condensers with diaphrams
suitable for Optiphots/Labophots with lower magnification objectives?
If necessary, I have a damaged extra Nikon condenser carrier to modify...
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

PeteM
Posts: 2982
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 6:22 am
Location: N. California

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#2 Post by PeteM » Mon Jun 20, 2022 1:03 am

The Zeiss condensers have a much smaller dovetail, with the registration pin in the front (versus registering from the back like Nikon and Olympus). They sit lower as well (and won't reach near the stage without a riser above the dovetail).

While you could adapt a Nikon dovetail easily enough to it - and raise it to reach near the stage, the optics may not be a perfect match. In a very quick try of hand holding a Zeiss flip top condenser in an Optiphot, I could image the field diaphragm at 2x and 4x flipped down -- but the field was a bit uneven.

Cheap Nikon Abbe condensers often go well under $50 and the flip top ones sometimes under $100 - so that's the competition to buying some other condenser and adapting it.

The Nikon Abbe condenser is usable with a 4x objective if you drop it down. For visual rather than photo use, eliminating the condenser entirely still provides usable images for visual inspection if not photography with their 1x and 2x objectives. I haven't tried photography this way, but you could probably use a diffuser and get half decent images.

The flip top condenser works fine at 2x and 4x flipped down and preserves Kohler illumination. With the lens flipped up for 10x it provides much sharper views - as the condenser's numerical aperture has gone up

Nikon makes dedicated low power condensers for low power use. These tend to be expensive. I haven't tried it, but maybe a low numerical aperture Nikon inverted condenser could be found cheap and adapted?

I'd think that no condenser is an option, a cheap Abbe condenser not too bad if you don't go below a 4x objective, and the flip top condenser worth it if you'll be doing more transmitted work as time goes by. If you happen to find and adapt a cheap Nikon inverted condenser, I'd be curious to know how that works out.

User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#3 Post by blekenbleu » Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:33 am

PeteM wrote:
Mon Jun 20, 2022 1:03 am
The Zeiss condensers have a much smaller dovetail, with the registration pin in the front (versus registering from the back like Nikon and Olympus).
Thanks for the reply; I have yet to fully fathom diascopic illumination. Why are condensers registered?
They sit lower as well (and won't reach near the stage without a riser above the dovetail).
Within hours of posting, I found an eBay listing with helpful images:
Image
Image
While you could adapt a Nikon dovetail easily enough to it - and raise it to reach near the stage, the optics may not be a perfect match.
Yes, I think that shims in the Nikon condenser carrier can make up the difference from 42 to 45mm,
and the Optiphot condenser rack has a dovetail and clamp that offers flexibility in vertical positioning.
In a very quick try of hand holding a Zeiss flip top condenser in an Optiphot, I could image the field diaphragm at 2x and 4x flipped down -- but the field was a bit uneven.
My lowest power compound microscope objective is 5x; perhaps that will suffice;
I use a stereo microscope or camera macro setups for lower magnifications...
Cheap Nikon Abbe condensers often go well under $50 and the flip top ones sometimes under $100 - so that's the competition to buying some other condenser and adapting it.
I have seen several reasonably priced Nikon 1.25 n.a. Abbes, but read that condenser n.a. should be less than that of the objective.

The Nikon Abbe condenser is usable with a 4x objective if you drop it down. For visual rather than photo use, eliminating the condenser entirely still provides usable images for visual inspection if not photography with their 1x and 2x objectives. I haven't tried photography this way, but you could probably use a diffuser and get half decent images.
Pretty much all I do is photography; dropping the condenser would seemingly defocus it, boggling my already weak appreciation of what diascopic illumination is about.
I'd think that no condenser is an option, a cheap Abbe condenser not too bad if you don't go below a 4x objective, and the flip top condenser worth it if you'll be doing more transmitted work as time goes by. If you happen to find and adapt a cheap Nikon inverted condenser, I'd be curious to know how that works out.
In fact, I acquired a Diaphot ELWD 0.3 condenser, which fits my Optiphot 66 (Labophot) condenser carrier, which lacks an aperture diaphragm,
but have yet to fabricate a diascopic plate for that wafer stage or repair the Optiphot 1's fine focus gear.
Thanks again!
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

PeteM
Posts: 2982
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 6:22 am
Location: N. California

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#4 Post by PeteM » Mon Jun 20, 2022 6:18 am

By "registration" what I meant is that most microscopes fix the condenser at one point (spring-loaded at the front in the Zeiss case) and then have two adjusting screws to center it. In the Nikon case there is a screw at the back that fits into a slot in the carrier. So, that's a feature you'd want to add if machining an adapter for a Zeiss to Nikon conversion. Whatever you do, you'll want to be able to easily center the condenser.

If a typical stereo scope has an illuminated base, about the only care that's taken is to get an even light across the stage. There's no condenser, no Kohler etc. - yet it works. Some of these simple transmitted base stereo scopes will be up to the 80x range. Point being -- you may only need an even light that fills the field of view to image at 50x. Getting a perfect cone of light focused on the specimen may not be needed.

Just the relatively parallel path of light from the field diaphragm - condenser totally removed - could work pretty well for your 5x. There are other issues with low power - such as seeing dirt on the slide and cover slip due to the greater depth of field, somewhat paradoxically having a narrow focusing tolerance - but a condenser doesn't fix those. Indeed, if you stop it down for better contrast you're also more likely to see out-of-plane debris on the slide and cover slip surfaces.

A proper condenser will be better at every magnification, offering both an even field of view and control of stray light. So Nikon offers those, especially designed for low power objectives. Question is if you really need one?

I'm not sure why you were told that the condenser should have a lower numerical aperture than the objective, but a 1.25x Abbe will work as long is it covers the field of view and will still be pretty decent even if dropped down a bit to cover the 5x field of view. You'll still have some useful iris control.

For the absolute best image you want the condenser to have as high (or higher) a numerical aperture as the objective while evenly covering the field of view. If your 5x is, say, .12 na that's a pretty low power condenser. You might be surprised how well no condenser or an Abbe condenser might be. Worth trying. Once you get to 10x (100x total magnification), then the differences reallly start showing up - at least to my eye. You'll definitely want at least an Abbe condenser. If you need even better corrections, then something that's aplanatic or even aplanatic achromatic will be both better and more $$$.

Hope that helps. I've seen Nikon Abbe condensers go for as little as $30 and that might be all you need. I should add that some, maybe most, Nikon Abbe condensers let you unscrew the top element for wider coverage. If most of your transmitted work is at 50x, it wouldn't be much of a hassle to screw the top back on for 100x when it's needed.

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

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#5 Post by apochronaut » Mon Jun 20, 2022 12:17 pm

By far the best bargain in a condenser that will project a wide illumination field is the Reichert #1973 1.25 N.A. abbe aspheric. There are quite a few around and I have seen them for sale as low as 30.00.
Generally speaking but not always, a condenser's f.o.v. or image circle is closely related to the diameter of the lenses used. Small diameter top lens, small field usually, large diameter, larger field : just like with objectives. That is why, flip top condensers have tiny top lenses because the condenser does not need to have a large field when in full aperture mode. The top lens of the #1973 is 14mm across.

The #1973 has a group of quite wide lenses and has a natural field that will cover a 4X objective at a 20mm f.o.v. There is a facility in the bottom for a swing in aux. lens that I have used with a 2X planfluor objective and it provides perfect imaging right across the field, so it will light a 5,000 micron field naturally and a 10,000 micron field with the aux. lens swung in.
....and it is an abbe aspheric, quite a different animal than an abbe. In tests comparing it used dry against a .90 achromat aplanat and a 1.25 abbe, used to illuminate high N.A. objectives the performance of the abbe aspheric and achromat aplanat were pretty indistinguishable and definitely superior to the abbe. Oiled , the abbe aspheric was the clear winner.
With lower N.A. objectives the differences were even more evident.

The construction is sealed and quite rugged. I have had about 8 or 10 of them with no leakers. One had a botched iris diaphragm but it repaired easily. The iris turns with a 70mm grip ring, rather than a lever.
One other beneficial aspect of the design is that the dovetail is attached with 3 screws and is easily removed and replaced with another dovetail or can be built up with distance pieces or shims in order to alter the height. The heavily tapered lens housing is 40mm across and 23mm high, tapering to 18mm in width, over about 12mm.

The dovetail maximum width is 47mm.

User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#6 Post by blekenbleu » Mon Jun 20, 2022 1:26 pm

PeteM wrote:
Mon Jun 20, 2022 6:18 am
By "registration" what I meant is that most microscopes fix the condenser at one point (spring-loaded at the front in the Zeiss case) and then have two adjusting screws to center it.
In the Nikon case there is a screw at the back that fits into a slot in the carrier.
My AO condensers have such registration provisions, but my Nikon ELWD condenser lacks it.
I have not imagined their purpose, except perhaps to resist rotation when changing apertures?
If a typical stereo scope has an illuminated base, about the only care that's taken is to get an even light across the stage. There's no condenser, no Kohler etc. - yet it works. Some of these simple transmitted base stereo scopes will be up to the 80x range. Point being -- you may only need an even light that fills the field of view to image at 50x. Getting a perfect cone of light focused on the specimen may not be needed.
.. but stereo scopes are not well regarded for photography.
I'm not sure why you were told that the condenser should have a lower numerical aperture than the objective, but a 1.25x Abbe will work as long is it covers the field of view and will still be pretty decent even if dropped down a bit to cover the 5x field of view. You'll still have some useful iris control.
" In order to retain more good contrast with good resolution, the condenser iris (aperture diaphragm) is usually opened to about 3/4 of the N.A. of the objective."
https://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/faq.html
Instead of 3/4, Mortimer Abramowitz puts that number at 80% in "Microscope Basics and Beyond". https://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/pdf ... beyond.pdf
For the absolute best image you want the condenser to have as high (or higher) a numerical aperture as the objective while evenly covering the field of view. If your 5x is, say, .12 na that's a pretty low power condenser. You might be surprised how well no condenser or an Abbe condenser might be. Worth trying. Once you get to 10x (100x total magnification), then the differences really start showing up - at least to my eye. You'll definitely want at least an Abbe condenser. If you need even better corrections, then something that's aplanatic or even aplanatic achromatic will be both better and more $$$.

Hope that helps. I've seen Nikon Abbe condensers go for as little as $30 and that might be all you need. I should add that some, maybe most, Nikon Abbe condensers let you unscrew the top element for wider coverage. If most of your transmitted work is at 50x, it wouldn't be much of a hassle to screw the top back on for 100x when it's needed.
Thanks, it helps me rethink these problems. I mostly use 10-20x objectives, with 5x for finding and composing.
Whether changes are improvements usually involves comparing captured images on a high resolution monitor,
resulting in a tedious tuning process. My workflow needs improvement, perhaps using tethering software...
The Optiphot-1 is enough smaller than the -66 to locate within USB cable distance of the PC.
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

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

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#7 Post by apochronaut » Mon Jun 20, 2022 2:11 pm

blekenbleu wrote:
Mon Jun 20, 2022 1:26 pm
PeteM wrote:
Mon Jun 20, 2022 6:18 am
By "registration" what I meant is that most microscopes fix the condenser at one point (spring-loaded at the front in the Zeiss case) and then have two adjusting screws to center it.
In the Nikon case there is a screw at the back that fits into a slot in the carrier.
My AO condensers have such registration provisions, but my Nikon ELWD condenser lacks it.
I have not imagined their purpose, except perhaps to resist rotation when changing apertures?
The reason for the registration notch or locking pin is to align the position of the iris control lever, if present, markings and orientation of the swing out lens. There is no functional reason except to put the control parts where they are most efficient. In the case of some condensers, AO included, the dovetail can often be rotated against the condenser so that the iris lever can be moved from right over to the left or be out front, if the swingout lens feature is not necessary. The registration just assures that the condenser goes back in the way it is needed.

User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#8 Post by blekenbleu » Mon Jun 20, 2022 2:48 pm

apochronaut wrote:
Mon Jun 20, 2022 12:17 pm
By far the best bargain in a condenser that will project a wide illumination field is the Reichert #1973 1.25 N.A. abbe aspheric. There are quite a few around and I have seen them for sale as low as 30.00.
Generally speaking but not always, a condenser's f.o.v. or image circle is closely related to the diameter of the lenses used. Small diameter top lens, small field usually, large diameter, larger field : just like with objectives. That is why, flip top condensers have tiny top lenses because the condenser does not need to have a large field when in full aperture mode. The top lens of the #1973 is 14mm across.

The #1973 has a group of quite wide lenses and has a natural field that will cover a 4X objective at a 20mm f.o.v. There is a facility in the bottom for a swing in aux. lens that I have used with a 2X planfluor objective and it provides perfect imaging right across the field, so it will light a 5,000 micron field naturally and a 10,000 micron field with the aux. lens swung in.
....and it is an abbe aspheric, quite a different animal than an abbe. In tests comparing it used dry against a .90 achromat aplanat and a 1.25 abbe, used to illuminate high N.A. objectives the performance of the abbe aspheric and achromat aplanat were pretty indistinguishable and definitely superior to the abbe. Oiled , the abbe aspheric was the clear winner.
With lower N.A. objectives the differences were even more evident.

The construction is sealed and quite rugged. I have had about 8 or 10 of them with no leakers. One had a botched iris diaphragm but it repaired easily.
The iris turns with a 70mm grip ring, rather than a lever.
One other beneficial aspect of the design is that the dovetail is attached with 3 screws and is easily removed and replaced with another dovetail or can be built up with distance pieces or shims in order to alter the height. The heavily tapered lens housing is 40mm across and 23mm high, tapering to 18mm in width, over about 12mm.

The dovetail maximum width is 47mm.
Thanks for that recommendation; I'll research that #1973 for upgrading my AO 120,
having contemplated carving a damaged Nikon condenser carrier to accommodate its condenser's 47mm dovetail,
but that condenser lacks a diaphragm, and I am reluctant to cannibalize a working, albeit seldom used, scope.
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#9 Post by blekenbleu » Thu Jun 23, 2022 4:30 pm

PeteM wrote:
Mon Jun 20, 2022 1:03 am
If you happen to find and adapt a cheap Nikon inverted condenser, I'd be curious to know how that works out.
A Diaphot ELWD 0.3 condenser lacks an aperture diaphragm but fits a Optiphot condenser carrier.
With stage plate and fine focus at least temporarily hacked,
the Diaphot ELWD 0.3 condenser mounted in the Optiphot carrier can focus Optiphot's field aperture.
Sadly, my M42-T2 male coupler froze to a 1.25" telescope clamp,
so DSLR is precariously perched on Nikon T head eyetube instead of photo port:
Image
...and CF PL2.5XA projection lens may not seat at the correct distance in an ocular tube,
which may explain some chromatic aberrations:
Image
.. but an M Plan objective thru a glass slide is also not ideal.

Apologies for calibration slide debris and defects; unsure whether cleaning attempts would help more than hurt:
Image

With default gamma and contrast, background luminance varies from about 112/255 to 136/255:
Image
Reducing gamma and increasing contrast emphasizes non-uniformities:
Image

This orphaned and crippled Optiphot frame was missing its illuminator diffusion filter; a cheap (US$3) substitute was sourced from Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0041V9IX4
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

PeteM
Posts: 2982
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 6:22 am
Location: N. California

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#10 Post by PeteM » Thu Jun 23, 2022 6:23 pm

Thanks. I suspect a cheap import iris for a bit more control of stray illumination could be grafted on to the condenser as well.

User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#11 Post by blekenbleu » Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:34 pm

PeteM wrote:
Mon Jun 20, 2022 1:03 am
The Zeiss condensers have a much smaller dovetail, with the registration pin in the front (versus registering from the back like Nikon and Olympus). They sit lower as well (and won't reach near the stage without a riser above the dovetail).

While you could adapt a Nikon dovetail easily enough to it - and raise it to reach near the stage, the optics may not be a perfect match. In a very quick try of hand holding a Zeiss flip top condenser in an Optiphot, I could image the field diaphragm at 2x and 4x flipped down -- but the field was a bit uneven.
I raised a Zeiss flip-top by setting it on the Diaphot condenser's dovetail, after unscrewing its optics.
To get the Optiphot's field diaphragm focused with the Zeiss flip-top required it to be
over 25mm higher than when objects on my stage were in focus.
This Zeiss condenser differs from others in my limited experience
by having its diaphragm above its first lens,
resulting in that lever located too high to clear webbing cast into Optiphot's stage.
Regardless, with Optiphot's field diaphragm focused, then opened, here is background luminance
using that Zeiss flip-top with the same M Plan 5x objective and CF PL2.5XA projection lens:
Image

Luminance varies from about 80/255 to 110/255; of course, both would be greater with the lamp cranked higher:
Image

Here is nonuniformity aggravated by low gamma and high contrast:
Image

This may be the Optiphot's halogen lamp filament somehow being partially focused, despite having the field aperture focused;
something about Zeiss condenser optics defeating Optiphot Köhler..?
I have read about, but did not appreciate, differences between finite and infinity condensers; this may be an example.
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#12 Post by blekenbleu » Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:54 pm

PeteM wrote:
Thu Jun 23, 2022 6:23 pm
I suspect a cheap import iris for a bit more control of stray illumination could be grafted on to the condenser as well.
Thread between that ELWD condenser lens and dovetail ring has about 46mm (1.8") o.d..
If a 36mm iris separated them by not more than about 18mm,
it should fit and still allow field aperture focus.

A $US32 42-2.5mm iris has about 58mm o.d.: https://www.ebay.com/itm/294737659898.
40.5-46mm Step-up and 58-46mm Step-down rings cost $US4.80+4.00
https://www.ebay.com/itm/223429055921 + https://www.ebay.com/itm/293129245116
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

PeteM
Posts: 2982
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 6:22 am
Location: N. California

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#13 Post by PeteM » Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:01 am

blekenbleu wrote:
Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:34 pm
. . . Here is nonuniformity aggravated by low gamma and high contrast , , , ,
You did a far better job of checking this out than I (back in post #2). That non-uniformity also appeared to me, though I also saw some of it with a standard Nikon condenser as well.

Any idea how wide a field your .30na Nikon inverted condenser will cover in the Optiphot? Maybe even 2x objective??

User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#14 Post by blekenbleu » Fri Jun 24, 2022 11:22 am

Using a 0.1mm/div calibration slide face down on the stage
(so focused with M Plan 5x thru slide glass),
the field aperture was shut down just enough to focus blades near field periphery viewed with CFWN 10x/20M ocular,
with that diameter measuring about 3.6mm, corresponding to about 750 pixels in this first macro image before downscaling:
first3.6mm.jpg
first3.6mm.jpg (33.59 KiB) Viewed 2786 times
.. which is with face-down calibration slide replaced by face-down ground glass.

Fully opening the field aperture more than fills my approx 24mm improvised stage plate diascopic port:
fullyOpen.jpg
fullyOpen.jpg (32.92 KiB) Viewed 2786 times
.. amounting to about 4650 pixels before downsampling.

Attempting uniformity estimate this far off-axis was senseless;
I'll retry, shooting thru the Optiphot arm with head and turret removed
and fixed manual exposure camera settings.
Last edited by blekenbleu on Fri Jun 24, 2022 2:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#15 Post by blekenbleu » Fri Jun 24, 2022 12:53 pm

PeteM wrote:
Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:01 am
That non-uniformity also appeared to me, though I also saw some of it with a standard Nikon condenser as well.
Lacking a proper Nikon condenser with diaphragm,
proper halogen filament [de]focus is yet to be established,
and that ersatz illumination diffuser may be insufficiently diffuse.
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

User avatar
blekenbleu
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:55 pm
Location: South Carolina low country
Contact:

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#16 Post by blekenbleu » Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:01 pm

OK, after "eyeballing" filament alignment and focus thru the photo port,
I was able to line up and focus a Tamron 180mm f/3.5 macro lens
thru Optiphot's arm hole with head and objective turret removed:
Image

Turning lamp voltage way down reduced lens flare
so that calibration slide markings are distinguished. This is a 1:1 crop:
Image

.. and with gamma and contrast tweaked to accentuate nonuniformity:
Image

Untweaked image background luminance varies from about 160/255 to 180/255 over the center 70mm diameter:
Image
Metaphot, Optiphot 1, 66; AO 10, 120, EPIStar, Cycloptic

TiggerScope
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 10:10 am

Re: Optiphot condenser [in]compatibility with e.g. Zeiss .9 flip-top?

#17 Post by TiggerScope » Sat Jul 02, 2022 12:05 pm

I've done exactly this substitution. I wanted to use Zeiss condensers on a Nikon stand. True that the Zeiss condensers are lower, or flatter, and need to be raised a bit.

So here is my solution which works perfectly, an adapter with a Nikon male dovetail on the bottom and a Zeiss female dovetail on the top, here seen holding a Heine condenser which I had already modified with a Zeiss male dovetail for use on a Universal.

You can see that I sawed up a genuine Zeiss condenser holder to get the female dovetail flange. With one of those it's very simple to do (if you have access to a lathe).

Peter
Attachments
20220521_153303a (Small).jpg
20220521_153303a (Small).jpg (59.37 KiB) Viewed 2707 times
20220521_153322a (Small).jpg
20220521_153322a (Small).jpg (54.99 KiB) Viewed 2707 times

Post Reply