Wild M3B with Motic 1500.3 photo-bridge

[sreynolds]

I have a new-to-me nice example of a Wild M3B which I am fitting for photography using direct projection. This post https://www.microbehunter.com/microscop ... php?t=7354 describes a method to do that using a Motic 1500.3 photo bridge. I now have one of those, but I need a different adapter to use the Leitz-style 38mm to C-mount connection. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

CAM15795a.JPG (122.36 KiB) Viewed 4207 times

CAM15796.JPG (94.38 KiB) Viewed 4207 times

output port on 1500.3 - it measures about 32mm, and is too short to fit a camera beside the eye tubes

CAM15797.JPG (89.33 KiB) Viewed 4207 times

When it gets to be nighttime I will try to find the position of the intermediate image with the camera bare sensor positioned above the port.

Update - I can bring the intermediate image into focus on a mirrorless camera sensor with the camera flange about 3.625" above the top of the arm of the photobridge. I got the photobridge from Ted Pella, and it came with a 'C mount base', which is what I show in the pictures. I find a Motic part number SW01131D listed as an 'SLR adapter' which appears to accept an eyepiece - which I don't want - but it looks like it might get me to the right height for the 38mm ISO to C-mount adapter I want to use.

[Scarodactyl]

Just to be clear, you want to direct project onto a c-mount camera?

[sreynolds]

Just to be clear, you want to direct project onto a c-mount camera?

I am using a mirrorless camera without lens - Olympus Pen E-PL7 - with a C-mount to Olympus adapter connected to a lens-less D10NLC 38mm ISO to C-mount. So, no, not a c-mount camera per-se.

D10NLC C-mount to 38mm port adapter.jpg (26.49 KiB) Viewed 4169 times

[Scarodactyl]

The c mount seems like an unnecessary intermediate in that equation, and a potential bottleneck or source of flare if you get one with a slightly tighter or less well flocked interior. Probably easier to just adapt on cheap m42 spacers, an m42 helicoid and an m42 to m4/3 adapter.

[sreynolds]

Probably easier to just adapt on cheap m42 spacers, an m42 helicoid and an m42 to m4/3 adapter.

I will go that route if it turns out there is no suitable adapter from Motic - the post referenced above suggests that such a Motic adapter does exist - just can't find it, yet.

J Firesto setup for camera using 1500_3 Motic adapter.jpg (121.06 KiB) Viewed 4165 times

[MichaelG.]

.

Apologies if I am mis-reading your post … but if you already have the 1x C-Mount adapter as shown, then [as per the linked previous discussion] you should only need to attach a suitable C to m4/3 adapter.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/256123692902 for example.

MichaelG.

[sreynolds]

Apologies if I am mis-reading your post …

Michael - I do have the C to M4/3 adapter - what I need is the spacer tube between the photobridge and the proper camera position - picture below shows camera in approx. location to capture intermediate image, with the D10NLC attached to the camera.

CAM15799.JPG (158.23 KiB) Viewed 4097 times

[MichaelG.]

Thanks for the clarification

Must admit it looks rather different spacing to what I thought was used in the other discussion.
[ post #16]

MichaelG.

[sreynolds]

Must admit it looks rather different spacing

It would end up being similar to the tube that comes standard with the Wild phototube - this is my M7A with Wild tube, without camera.

CAM15077 resized.JPG (91.51 KiB) Viewed 4078 times

[jfiresto]

It appears that Motic reworked the photo bridge but did not update all their brochures. I have an older adapter shown in the K-Series brochure that downloads from some of their websites. The pictured photo bridge accepts an IS0-38 to C-mount adapter very much like the Leitz 543345, only with a broader and slightly taller flange.I just needed to raise a 543345 (or D10NLC) a millimeter or two.

You appear to have an SP100299D, that as far as I can tell, needs a different and much taller adapter, an SP100458. Does its geometry look right?

EDIT: A little photogrammetry on the linked product image suggests the adapter has a 19mm inner diameter, the same that I measure for a 543345. I would expect a bit of vignetting (of a full 4:3 image) compared to the D10NLC which I measure at 21.4mm.

[jfiresto]

The c mount seems like an unnecessary intermediate in that equation, and a potential bottleneck or source of flare if you get one with a slightly tighter or less well flocked interior. Probably easier to just adapt on cheap m42 spacers, an m42 helicoid and an m42 to m4/3 adapter.

I like that suggestion, given the photo bridge's long flange focal distance.

[sreynolds]

It appears that Motic reworked the photo bridge but did not update all their brochures.

Thank you, John. Same part number 1500.3 - different part. Go figure. I will work up something with M42 spacers and post pictures of outcome. May take a while.

[Scarodactyl]

If you or someone close has a 3d printer this is an easy task.
This is a good m42 helicoid for the price. https://a.co/d/dvVYVxw

[MichaelG.]

It appears that Motic reworked the photo bridge but did not update all their brochures.

Thank you, John. Same part number 1500.3 - different part. Go figure. …

.

They certainly managed to confuse me
… but I think [just maybe] this might be what you needed in the first place:
https://moticeurope.com/en/1x-c-mount-c ... s-168.html

Now that you are-where-you-are though … a DIY approach seems reasonable.

MichaelG.

[sreynolds]

I put together a plumbing-parts tube made of 1-1/4" and 1-1/2" sink drain, using the c-mount base that came on the Motic photobridge which conveniently is 1-1/4" ID. The D10NLC OD is 38mm = 1-1/2", so that connects to the 1-1/2" OD drain with a slip-over rubber tube. Total cost $6.49. It is closely parfocal at a length of 3-5/8" from top of photobridge to camera flange. I used the D10NLC because that is what I have; I haven't been annoyed by vignette yet. When I get around to building a proper tube, I will consider the other options. May ask RAF Camera for a custom tube. Shots below of camera, june bug molt (Melolonthinae sp.- single image, no stacking), and PCB board.

CAM15810a.JPG (105.66 KiB) Viewed 3922 times

P8241354a.JPG (128.25 KiB) Viewed 3922 times

P8241350a.JPG (182.63 KiB) Viewed 3922 times

[sreynolds]

I ordered a custom phototube from RAFCamera to replace my plumbing parts, and received it yesterday. It is a nicely machined piece of anodized aluminum made to my spec. From my testing so far, it seems to be exactly parfocal with viewing through eyepieces. Below are images of my spec, the adapter, the Olympus Pen-E with the D10NLC attached, and the whole setup. It appears that I could have just used the Motic part SP100458 (if I could find one) instead, but the D10NLC lets me use my camera interchangeably my other Wild phototube, and the Nikon 'F' head. It was easy and pleasant working with RAFCamera.

custom phototube spec.jpg (77.33 KiB) Viewed 3604 times

CAM15851a.JPG (55.88 KiB) Viewed 3604 times

CAM15852a.JPG (105.42 KiB) Viewed 3604 times

CAM15850a.JPG (127.32 KiB) Viewed 3604 times

[sreynolds]

[duplicate post deleted]

[Scarodactyl]

Glad it worked out so well for you!

[jfiresto]

Good job. Out of curiosity, is there a reason to have the E-PL7's LCD screen set in selfie-mode?

Flipped the other way, the upper dials and buttons are unobstructed and before you. You may, however, have to adjust to reading the menus upside down. I customize the controls to minimize that and consider it as honoring the pioneers of photography, who for decades had to compose their subjects viewed upside down.

[sreynolds]

is there a reason to have the E-PL7's LCD screen set in selfie-mode?

John - I had started out with the camera the other way, and I don't remember if the image was upside down, but I didn't like the menus upside-down, so that is why I switched.

[jfiresto]

Sorry, I seemed to have unwittingly laid a red herring and perhaps should minimize my posts until I am fully recovered.

All my photo-tubes produce an erect specimen image on the camera LCD – just the menus are upside down, which I can manage.

I have three MFT cameras that I should review as microscope cameras. Your reports are giving me more food for thought. Thank you.