WF10X/22 vs Olympus GSWF10x/22
WF10X/22 vs Olympus GSWF10x/22
Hi, I found a SZ40 trinocular in Europe, the first one in a year or so, it even has a SZ-ILA base and most importantly price isn't over the top, not a bargain, but ok.
Missing are the eyepieces, NFK photo eyepieces, collector lens for the base and the photomicro L adapter (SZ-PT and the one below are included). So I'm thinking about buying it and then either selling my binocular or putting the trinocular port on mine and selling the other one. My only problem are the missing eyepieces, as the original Olympus ones are pretty expensive.
There is a collector lens on eBay not too expensive and the other parts missing come by often at good prices and for a start I could exchange the L adapter and NFK eyepieces from the BHS...
So I'm wondering how much of a difference would it make if I'd put a pair of third party 30$ WF10X/22 from China on a microscope I'd be selling. I've never looked through these. Thanks
Missing are the eyepieces, NFK photo eyepieces, collector lens for the base and the photomicro L adapter (SZ-PT and the one below are included). So I'm thinking about buying it and then either selling my binocular or putting the trinocular port on mine and selling the other one. My only problem are the missing eyepieces, as the original Olympus ones are pretty expensive.
There is a collector lens on eBay not too expensive and the other parts missing come by often at good prices and for a start I could exchange the L adapter and NFK eyepieces from the BHS...
So I'm wondering how much of a difference would it make if I'd put a pair of third party 30$ WF10X/22 from China on a microscope I'd be selling. I've never looked through these. Thanks
Re: WF10X/22 vs Olympus GSWF10x/22
I've had good luck with them, especially the ones with a diopter adjustment. In some stereo scopes (Leica CMO, Olympus SZH-U, etc.)they need to sit lower in the tube to be parfocal. The price is right, even if you later decide to go for OEM eyepieces.
My own SZ-4045 has Olympus 10x/23 eyepieces. I mention this because there are Chinese versions with the wider 23mm field that might work. I have tried the Chinese 10x/22 are they're fine - at least to my eye.
My own SZ-4045 has Olympus 10x/23 eyepieces. I mention this because there are Chinese versions with the wider 23mm field that might work. I have tried the Chinese 10x/22 are they're fine - at least to my eye.
Re: WF10X/22 vs Olympus GSWF10x/22
Thanks, so there should not be a dramatic difference in the image quality. I think I'll buy this lot, as they are very rare to come by. I'll just sleep it over, it probably won't disappearPeteM wrote: ↑Sun Mar 12, 2023 10:02 pmI've had good luck with them, especially the ones with a diopter adjustment. In some stereo scopes (Leica CMO, Olympus SZH-U, etc.)they need to sit lower in the tube to be parfocal. The price is right, even if you later decide to go for OEM eyepieces.
My own SZ40 has Olympus 10x/23 eyepieces. I mention this because there are Chinese versions with the wider 23mm field that might work.
Re: WF10X/22 vs Olympus GSWF10x/22
I want to deviate from the theme.
Why don't you consider purchasing a vertical illuminator kit (similar to BH2-RLA)? Although it will increase the cost of purchasing a metallographic objective lens (infinite), the reduced floor area is very conducive to family harmony, isn't it?
I realize vertical lighting on the BHS at a total cost of no more than $500.
Best Regards
Why don't you consider purchasing a vertical illuminator kit (similar to BH2-RLA)? Although it will increase the cost of purchasing a metallographic objective lens (infinite), the reduced floor area is very conducive to family harmony, isn't it?
I realize vertical lighting on the BHS at a total cost of no more than $500.
Best Regards
Micrographers from China, thanks to the forum for providing a platform for exchange
-
- Posts: 2789
- Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm
Re: WF10X/22 vs Olympus GSWF10x/22
While the nfk eyepiece works OK with the sz40 you can also just direct project onto aps-c with imo better results.
-
- Posts: 6325
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am
Re: WF10X/22 vs Olympus GSWF10x/22
There are at least two versions of Chinese 10/23mm eyepieces. One is just a derivative of the 10/22 with the 23.2mm tube and it is quite common as a generically available eyepiece. It has an insert and field stop section with a substantial threaded O shaped flange around the insert tube. Thinning out the depth of the threads on that flange and or shortening the insert tube itself will bring the front lens of the eyepiece lower to improve parfocality.PeteM wrote: ↑Sun Mar 12, 2023 10:02 pmI've had good luck with them, especially the ones with a diopter adjustment. In some stereo scopes (Leica CMO, Olympus SZH-U, etc.)they need to sit lower in the tube to be parfocal. The price is right, even if you later decide to go for OEM eyepieces.
My own SZ-4045 has Olympus 10x/23 eyepieces. I mention this because there are Chinese versions with the wider 23mm field that might work. I have tried the Chinese 10x/22 are they're fine - at least to my eye.
The other design of 10/23 can be modified similarly but with a little more difficulty.
In terms of corrections, in a comparison using a Nikon planfluor objective as a benchmark, there is a very slight difference in the corrective capacity between them but it is only noticeable right near the periphery.
Last edited by apochronaut on Tue Mar 14, 2023 1:25 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Re: WF10X/22 vs Olympus GSWF10x/22
For my humble Olympus VMZ, I replaced the original, low eyepoint GF 10X/22 eyepieces with affordable high-eyepoint Chinese 10X/23. Diopter adjustment is done with the eyepiece tubes, not the eyepieces themselves. They work very well IMHO. For observation, anyway.imkap wrote: ↑Sun Mar 12, 2023 10:10 pmThanks, so there should not be a dramatic difference in the image quality. I think I'll buy this lot, as they are very rare to come by. I'll just sleep it over, it probably won't disappearPeteM wrote: ↑Sun Mar 12, 2023 10:02 pmI've had good luck with them, especially the ones with a diopter adjustment. In some stereo scopes (Leica CMO, Olympus SZH-U, etc.)they need to sit lower in the tube to be parfocal. The price is right, even if you later decide to go for OEM eyepieces.
My own SZ40 has Olympus 10x/23 eyepieces. I mention this because there are Chinese versions with the wider 23mm field that might work.
Re: WF10X/22 vs Olympus GSWF10x/22
Now you got me thinking... Although this purchase should be a good chance for me, as I might break even in the end. I started thinking if it will make the whole microscope a lot bulkier with the trinocular pole and the SZ-ILA bottom illumination housing. Not sure if it's worth it, image quality wise? I don't know how good of transmitted illumination does SZ-ILA give and if you say that NFK doesn't give me much except maybe being able to project to full frame...Scarodactyl wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 5:16 amWhile the nfk eyepiece works OK with the sz40 you can also just direct project onto aps-c with imo better results.
Thanks for the info everyone, by parfocality you mean within the zoom range?
Re: WF10X/22 vs Olympus GSWF10x/22
I ordered the thing it should be good...
Seller seems to know something about microscopes and claims there are no problems, apart from the missing eyepieces.
Seller seems to know something about microscopes and claims there are no problems, apart from the missing eyepieces.
Re: WF10X/22 vs Olympus GSWF10x/22
I just recieved WF10X/23 (focusable black version) and they are almost parfocal. Just a little less parfocal than the genuine Olympus GSWF10X/22 (which are almost parfocal too).
Definitely usable without much hassle, I didn't notice any difference in image quality...
Definitely usable without much hassle, I didn't notice any difference in image quality...