Which would a better investment in terms of quality:
A set of Plan Objectives such as this one: http://www.ebay.ca/itm/New-DIN-Plan-Ach ... XQ0pNRpfjW
Or finding various Lomo Achromats
Chinese Plan Achros or Lomo Achros
-
apochronaut
- Posts: 6324
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am
Re: Chinese Plan Achros or Lomo Achros
You would want to make sure some other features are in order on the stand, before you jump into either of those. What is the stand, they are going on?
1) Will the stand accept the length of D.I.N. objectives or allow for close enough focus for the short Lomo objectives. They are generally not cross compatible, even though both have a 160mm T.L. What stand are they going onto.
2) What eyepieces do you intend to use and are they compatible with either.
3)Lomo can sometimes suffer from de-lamination. If you choose Lomo, I would want to be very careful in their selection. The nice thing about settling on Lomo, is that there are some very fine higher end Lomo objectives available, with which you can inexpensively upgrade in the future, if you so choose.
4) The Chinese objectives are probably going to cost less and in future, there are 160mm D.I.N. objectives, from other makers , that would be compatible with your evolved system , with which to expand.
1) Will the stand accept the length of D.I.N. objectives or allow for close enough focus for the short Lomo objectives. They are generally not cross compatible, even though both have a 160mm T.L. What stand are they going onto.
2) What eyepieces do you intend to use and are they compatible with either.
3)Lomo can sometimes suffer from de-lamination. If you choose Lomo, I would want to be very careful in their selection. The nice thing about settling on Lomo, is that there are some very fine higher end Lomo objectives available, with which you can inexpensively upgrade in the future, if you so choose.
4) The Chinese objectives are probably going to cost less and in future, there are 160mm D.I.N. objectives, from other makers , that would be compatible with your evolved system , with which to expand.
Re: Chinese Plan Achros or Lomo Achros
Apo has good advice.
You would want to make sure what other features you want and whether your current system can work with either.
In general, 45 mm parfocal DIN scopes will NOT focus with short 33 mm LOMO objectives, unless you modified your DIN scope (raised up stage and condenser like how I did it). 33-34 mm parfocal scopes can work with DIN 45mm objectives, in general, though your focus travel may not be as long as DIN scopes (it still works well enough).
LOMO compensating eyepieces are not cheap, if you want wide field 10x (they cost around $60 per pair). K15 and K5 eyepieces may be wide enough as they are.
LOMO objectives have many features, if you care for those. Things like high NA apo, water immersion, iris/darkfield, correction collar, can be bought relatively cheaply. Whereas the same may cost more from other manufacturers. I mainly use LOMO objectives, because of this reason.
LOMO objectives may not perform well in plain brightfield, as they (most of their short version) have no coating.
You would want to make sure what other features you want and whether your current system can work with either.
In general, 45 mm parfocal DIN scopes will NOT focus with short 33 mm LOMO objectives, unless you modified your DIN scope (raised up stage and condenser like how I did it). 33-34 mm parfocal scopes can work with DIN 45mm objectives, in general, though your focus travel may not be as long as DIN scopes (it still works well enough).
LOMO compensating eyepieces are not cheap, if you want wide field 10x (they cost around $60 per pair). K15 and K5 eyepieces may be wide enough as they are.
LOMO objectives have many features, if you care for those. Things like high NA apo, water immersion, iris/darkfield, correction collar, can be bought relatively cheaply. Whereas the same may cost more from other manufacturers. I mainly use LOMO objectives, because of this reason.
LOMO objectives may not perform well in plain brightfield, as they (most of their short version) have no coating.
Re: Chinese Plan Achros or Lomo Achros
Well I have a parfocal adapter for short barrel DIN objectives, so that issue can be resolved. Does Lomo really require compensating eyepieces for their objectives?
Re: Chinese Plan Achros or Lomo Achros
Also, I would want to know if the objectives are a good investment to upgrade my optics.
Re: Chinese Plan Achros or Lomo Achros
Parfocal extender will reduce optical performance of dry apo 40/0.95 and water apo 70/1.23. OK with others.
Yes, they need compens eyepiece to reach best performance. Though they will image just fine without.
Neither LOMO achromats or Chinese plans have good resale value. LOMO apos have good resale value. My water apo 70/1.23 currently has two watchers on eBay, for example, at $138.
Yes, they need compens eyepiece to reach best performance. Though they will image just fine without.
Neither LOMO achromats or Chinese plans have good resale value. LOMO apos have good resale value. My water apo 70/1.23 currently has two watchers on eBay, for example, at $138.
Re: Chinese Plan Achros or Lomo Achros
Just a note of clarification here:Well I have a parfocal adapter for short barrel DIN objectives
DIN (Deutsches Institut für Normung) are 45mm standard objectives
and
JIS (Japan Industrial Standards) are 36mm standard objectives
I don't know what you are currently using so this is a bit difficult, but if you just want an opinion of the value of the objectives I can offer that.Also, I would want to know if the objectives are a good investment to upgrade my optics.
These are what I would call a base grade product. That, in it self, does not make them bad. I see this objective as a common one in a basic college course, a vet tech school, a well equipped high school, and occasionally a veterinary practice. Once in a while I find them in GP medical practices where the demands are low.
If your microscope has a good condenser and good illumination they should serve you well. It may be that what you already have is very close.
lorez
Re: Chinese Plan Achros or Lomo Achros
Well the microscope I am using is an Omax M82ES with their stock achromats. Will these plans improve image quality compared to the stock achromats.
-
apochronaut
- Posts: 6324
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am
Re: Chinese Plan Achros or Lomo Achros
You will get a flatter field.
Any other image quality differences would be the result of significant differences in the optical design of the objectives in terms of achromatism,contrast,spherical aberration etc. These are unknown, until visually or optically tested and are manufacturer specific. Generally speaking though, in order to improve the image quality in those ways mentioned, you would have to move over to objective lenses from one of the major manufacturers that used a D.I.N. 160mm system. Zeiss, Vickers( Cooke-Baker), Leitz, PZO, Wild from Europe and Olympus, Nikon and I think Meiji too from Japan. Inexpensive objectives, such as the ones you linked to are unlikely to make much difference.
With respect to field flatness. This is only really noticeable with very thin samples, smears and prepared sections or other prepared slides. For thicker samples when using otherwise well corrected optics, field flatness, or the lack of rather, isn't much of a factor.
Any other image quality differences would be the result of significant differences in the optical design of the objectives in terms of achromatism,contrast,spherical aberration etc. These are unknown, until visually or optically tested and are manufacturer specific. Generally speaking though, in order to improve the image quality in those ways mentioned, you would have to move over to objective lenses from one of the major manufacturers that used a D.I.N. 160mm system. Zeiss, Vickers( Cooke-Baker), Leitz, PZO, Wild from Europe and Olympus, Nikon and I think Meiji too from Japan. Inexpensive objectives, such as the ones you linked to are unlikely to make much difference.
With respect to field flatness. This is only really noticeable with very thin samples, smears and prepared sections or other prepared slides. For thicker samples when using otherwise well corrected optics, field flatness, or the lack of rather, isn't much of a factor.