What ocular to use with a set of Wild Fluotar objectives?

Begonnen von deBult, Januar 24, 2020, 18:48:24 NACHMITTAGS

Vorheriges Thema - Nächstes Thema

deBult

Hello,

I have a set of Wild objectives (Fluotar) and a small Olympus mono microscope 160 mm tube with standard lenses  I use as a travel scope. The Wild lenses are way better corrected compared to the standard Olympus ones but I do not have a Wild ocular.

I have a range of oculars: Olympus both Huygens and corrected ones, Lomo both compensated and Huygens, Leitz Periplan, Zeiss compensated, Reichert Huygens but no Wild.

Any recommendation on the best match?

Your guidance is appreciated (and if somebody has a spare Wild ocular I'm would appreciate a PM).

Best,
Maarten
Reading the German language is OK for me, writing is a different matter though: my apologies.

A few Olympus BH2 and CH2 stands with DIC and phase optics.
The correct number of scopes to own is N+1 (Where N is the number currently owned).

Bob

Hi Maarten,
I would first look at the design parameters of objectives and microscope.
According to Klaus Henkels Mikrofibel:
Olympus old: 160mm mechanical tube length, objectives place the image 16mm down in the tube
Wild: 160mm mechanical tube length, objectives place the image 9mm down in the tube

This would mean that you should have a look at eyepieces with about 9mm pickup point.
Here Zeiss West with 10mm and newer Leitz eyepieces for 160mm microscopes with designations like 10x18 (field size is stated on eyepiece) would be options. I would try this and then see whether you get colour fringes towards the border of the image.

Bob

A. Büschlen

Hallo Bob, Hallo Maarten,

oder einfach orig. Wild Okulare vom Typ K oder KW!

Gruss Arnold Büschlen

Schwerpunkt z.Z.:
- Laub- und Lebermoose.
- Ascomyceten als Bryoparasiten.
- Nikon Optiphot I mit HF, DIC.
- Nikon Microphot mit HF, Pol.
- Zeiss Standard Universal mit HF, Ph, Pol.
- Wild M3Z mit Ergotubus.
- Nikon SMZ-U Zoom 1:10 mit ED Plan Apo 1x.

JB

Hello Maarten,

Since you have all these eyepieces already, you can run a simple test to find the best one. Use a high-contrast, plan object like a stage micrometer and take a photo through the eyepiece with a camera/smartphone. The image should be plan (at least in the centre) and without strong colour frindges at the edge of the field: https://www.mikroskopie-forum.de/index.php?topic=3697.0

There is a good chance the Olympus and Leitz eyepieces will work, as their colour compensation is intermediate among the different companies: https://www.mikroskopie-forum.de/index.php?topic=22303.30

The camera can sometimes introduce colour finges of its own but that's usually not a big problem. The images make it easier to compare the eyepieces than the naked eye. If you don't have any Wild Plan objectives, you have to re-focus to observe the colour frindges at the edge.

Best wishes,

Jon

deBult

Tnx for the guidance.

Will try my Leitz 10*18 tomorrow.

Best, Maarten
Reading the German language is OK for me, writing is a different matter though: my apologies.

A few Olympus BH2 and CH2 stands with DIC and phase optics.
The correct number of scopes to own is N+1 (Where N is the number currently owned).

deBult

#5
Thanks for the observations on the position of the the image: Wild 9mm down the tube and Olympus/Zeiss West/Leitz-160 expects the image at 16 mm. Zeiss and Leitz-160 at 10 mm (correction tnx JB) I was not aware Wild did this differently.

Some results of this morning: probably nothing new for the more experienced users: but it was fun experiencing this on my side.

Well my photo setup for the Mono Olympus HSC (my travel scope) is an old Nikon 990 with Leitz Periplan 10/18 high eyepoint: so using that setup to compare the combinaties will not work. Will look into using the iPhone but for the first comparison we go visual only.

Combinations I tried out
- Olympus WF10 ocular
- Leitz-160 Periplan 10x/18 high eyepoint

Objectives (all short barrel 36 mm)
- Wild PL Fluotar  40/0.65 d=0.17 (with damaged coating, no scratches)
- Olympus FL 40/0.75 0.17
- Olympus Plan 40/0.65 0.17
- Olympus standard 40/0.65 0.17
- Wild Fluotar 10/0.25
- Wild standard 10/0.25
- Olympus Plan PL 10/0.25 (Phaco lens)
- Olympus standard 10/0.25

Samples:
- Pelargonium cut WASim III
- Stage micrometer with mm distribution
- Klaus Kemp diatom test slide

Note: critical lighting used no Kohler using a simple LED source on battery , aperture diaphragm at approx 80 %

Observations:
- In 40x the Wild Fluotar / Leitz combo wins on contrast, and color representation, no visible color-fringing in the corners, overall my preference. 
- The Olympus FL fluor slightly wins on resolving the diatoms (as expected)
- The flat image on the Olympus plan is well ...  plan (never compared them side by side before)

In 10x the Wild Fluotar / Leitz combo wins heads on: no comparison at all: what a beautiful image.  It does not match my Olympus SPlan 20 on the BH2 scope (the best performing objective I own) but still very good, I now I really wonder how the original matching Wild WK objective would perform.

Tnx for guiding this beginner,
Maarten
Reading the German language is OK for me, writing is a different matter though: my apologies.

A few Olympus BH2 and CH2 stands with DIC and phase optics.
The correct number of scopes to own is N+1 (Where N is the number currently owned).

JB

#6
Zitat von: deBult in Januar 25, 2020, 11:54:14 VORMITTAG
Thanks for the observations on the position of the the image: Wild 9mm down the tube and Olympus/Zeiss West/Leitz-160 expect the image at 16 mm.

Hi Maarten,

Zeiss West/Leitz-160 are at 10 mm (DIN). There should be no problem. Short-barrel Olympus is 16 mm.

Thanks for testing. The Leitz-Periplan/Wild Fluotar combination seems to work well, which is nice to know  :D  Leitz is said to have developed its NPL-Fluotar series https://www.mikroskopie-forum.de/index.php?topic=36152.msg264519#msg264519 with input from Wild in the 1970s.

Best wishes,

Jon