Leitz Fluoreszenz vs PL Fluotar vs Plan APO

[Cyk-Cyk]

Leitz got has three different "flavors" higher quality lenses of lenses.

I looked at parameters like NA and I must say that regarding this Fluoreszenz objectives look very good. Are they good enough for every day use, o rather to be use only with epi?

Second question: how big is quality different between fluotar and Plan APO?

[Ichthyophthirius]

I looked at parameters like NA and I must say that regarding this Fluoreszenz objectives look very good. Are they good enough for every day use, o rather to be use only with epi?

They are designed for epifluorescence but they also perform very good in transmitted brightfield illumination.

There are different series. The Achromat "Fluoreszenz" are simply achromats with high NA and short wavelength transmission. They have noticible colour fringes.

The NPL Fluotar Fluoreszenz are fluorite objectives and give very good, high contrast images, better than the achromats. Whether your prefer them to dry PL Fluotars really depends on how much you mind oil immersion.

The NPL Fluotar Fluoreszenz 25/0.75 Oil has a working distance (WD) of only 0.14 mm which I find very short for aquatic objects www.science-info.net/docs/leitz/Leitz_n ... s_1985.pdf The WD of the dry lenses 25:1 are much longer!

Second question: how big is quality different between fluotar and Plan APO?

The PL APOs are slightly better in brightfield but rare and much more expensive ... your choice really. The PL Fluotars are better in darkfield and are Leitz' choice for DIC.

I would say NPL Fluotars and PL Fluotars for lower magnifications (10:1 up to 40:1) and Pl APOs for high magnification (63:1 or 100:1).

Regards,

Ichty