Reichert Polyphos, Leitz Heine and Zeiss (West) Pancratic

[TiggerScope]

Hi all,

I'm a frequent user of my Heine, modified to fit a Zeiss Universal. It's great but the design does attenuate the light somewhat, and the ring of light is pencil-thin.

I've tried the Zeiss Pancratic but I don't like it because the base unit has to be changed out, and the condenser itself has no centration. So it would be best fitted to a dedicated stand, which takes up space and creates hassle.

I was wondering if a Polyphos was less light-hungry with a broader light ring. Does anyone have experience of both Polyphos and Heine that could comment on the similarities and differences? I don't use a Zetopan or other Reichert (except Polyvar which is a different thing altogether), but the fitting of a Zeiss condenser dovetail shouldn't be difficult; I did it on the Heine, easily enough.

Thank you
Peter

[zzffnn]

Peter,

I had Heine before and felt the same. Its thin circle of light produces too much halos for my eyes to like it. So I sold it after getting DIC parts for my scope.

I read extensively on Zeiss Pancreatic and Zetopan Polyphos before. My guest is that Polyphos is a better condenser. It has become an expensive collector item though. For not much more price, you may be able to get DIC working (if you don’t already have DIC), which would image better than Polyphos.

Eventually, for my own use, if I want to use it for COL and darkfield, I simply use a few DIY circular opaque masks at condenser back focal plane, along with power a LED. Or so use DIC. I rarely use phase contrast.

[TiggerScope]

Thanks for the analysis, I do have DIC but I also like the various effects a pancratic phase condenser like the Heine can give, circular oblique for example. I'm not using phase primarily for visibility, more for special photographic effects, sometimes in crossed pols. As you say, fixed annuli can certainly do these things, but I like the infinite adjustability, as well as the convenience.

And while there are some subjects that can't be picked up as well by DIC as by phase (low optical gradient), of course I agree that DIC is usually unequalled and can be spectacular.

[zzffnn]

Several fixed annuli installed on a turret condenser or on a long gliding filter + adjusting condenser height and condenser / objective iris can provide variations that are close to “good enough”.

But of course, that DIY rig’s adjustability is not infinite nor as convenient as Polyphos.

If you have the money and time to obtain a Polyphos (as it is quite difficult to find one), please do compare it to Heine and report back. I will be very interested to hear your analysis, Peter. Thank you.