Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Macro_Cosmos
Posts: 1511
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by Macro_Cosmos »

Yeah that's what I was saying. They are simply Thorlabs SM2 couplers of different lengths.
Please look at my photos.

I don't see how you're able to deduce a 0.5'' difference from the photos. It could be possible that Robert cut his, I just can't see the lengths. There's many ways to mount this SN8000ED lens. You can 3D print a sleeve and have it clamped in an SM2 collar or jam it into SM2 tubes. Mine was originally mounted in Nikon K tubes, I simply tapped a thread and ran a set screw to hold it, K tubes are M52x0.75, adapting to SM2 is trivial.

Not sure if I can recommend Raf's camera mount adaptors. I've read different comments, some say they wobble but an O-ring fixes it. SM2 can be easily adapted to M42, M52 etc. using Thorlabs' own adaptors, it's cheaper too at times. Just adapt it to M42, then mount it to the Canon via a high quality Novoflex adaptor.
https://www.thorlabs.com/navigation.cfm?guide_id=2327

nielsgeode
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:47 am
Location: Groningen, Netherlands

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by nielsgeode »

Macro_Cosmos wrote:
Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:06 am
Yeah that's what I was saying. They are simply Thorlabs SM2 couplers of different lengths.
Please look at my photos.

I don't see how you're able to deduce a 0.5'' difference from the photos. It could be possible that Robert cut his, I just can't see the lengths. There's many ways to mount this SN8000ED lens. You can 3D print a sleeve and have it clamped in an SM2 collar or jam it into SM2 tubes. Mine was originally mounted in Nikon K tubes, I simply tapped a thread and ran a set screw to hold it, K tubes are M52x0.75, adapting to SM2 is trivial.

Not sure if I can recommend Raf's camera mount adaptors. I've read different comments, some say they wobble but an O-ring fixes it. SM2 can be easily adapted to M42, M52 etc. using Thorlabs' own adaptors, it's cheaper too at times. Just adapt it to M42, then mount it to the Canon via a high quality Novoflex adaptor.
https://www.thorlabs.com/navigation.cfm?guide_id=2327
Please see my edited previous post.

Would you recommend getting via Novoflex / M42 instead of Rafcamera M52?

lothman
Posts: 959
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:00 am
Location: Stuttgart/Germany

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by lothman »

Macro_Cosmos wrote:
Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:25 am

It can't be adjusted very well. That's why I said they should make these longer adjustable tubes. It does work for ITL200. If you subtract the typical DSLR (45mm, 46mm types) flange distance from the setups (148mm recommended or 245mm retro), you get either 100mm or 200mm. You're focusing the ITL200 to infinity and the objective acts as an iris. There's more than enough play room to make up for the 1-2mm discrepancy. Using mirrorless? Just get a high quality mechanical adaptor to the F-mount.
When I am not interested in matching an exact magnification, does +/- 2mm distance between tube lens and sensor affect image quality? I suppose not.

nielsgeode
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:47 am
Location: Groningen, Netherlands

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by nielsgeode »

lothman wrote:
Thu Sep 03, 2020 4:04 am
Macro_Cosmos wrote:
Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:25 am

It can't be adjusted very well. That's why I said they should make these longer adjustable tubes. It does work for ITL200. If you subtract the typical DSLR (45mm, 46mm types) flange distance from the setups (148mm recommended or 245mm retro), you get either 100mm or 200mm. You're focusing the ITL200 to infinity and the objective acts as an iris. There's more than enough play room to make up for the 1-2mm discrepancy. Using mirrorless? Just get a high quality mechanical adaptor to the F-mount.
When I am not interested in matching an exact magnification, does +/- 2mm distance between tube lens and sensor affect image quality? I suppose not.
I think it does because the ITL200 has to be exactly in focus on your sensor. For the 8000ED scanner lens there is no effect.

Macro_Cosmos
Posts: 1511
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by Macro_Cosmos »

lothman wrote:
Thu Sep 03, 2020 4:04 am
When I am not interested in matching an exact magnification, does +/- 2mm distance between tube lens and sensor affect image quality? I suppose not.
It shouldn't, mounting an objective is effectively closing the iris. +/- 2mm, I don't think infinity will be thrown off. This can be easily tested, I don't have the time at this moment.
nielsgeode wrote:
Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:52 am
Is it correct that Tube #3 and the tube that is fixed inside the center ring collar are coupled together with an SM2T2 coupler
No, why would a coupler be involved when thorlabs offers SM2 tubes without male threads, with one male thread, and with 2 male threads, and 2 types of couplers?
SM2>F: male SM2
SM2M??: female SM2 on both ends
SM2L??: male on one end, female on the other
Then there are 2 couplers. One is effectively SM2M?? types, ie it couples 2 male threads together. Other would be SM2T??, which is the "threaded sleeve".
Image
1: SM2 tube with male and female threading
2: SM2 tube with no male threading, can also be used as a coupler
3: SM2 coupler, male threads
4: SM2 variable tube
5: SM2 iris, this thing has light leaks, pretty pathetic looking at how much it actually costs
6.: SM2 > F, SM2 male threads, F-mount male mount
7: SM2RC collar, mounted on arca-swiss plate using M4 screws and washers
8: SM2TC collar, lockable, easier to use but more expensive
9: SM2 extension tube, smooth internals (rather than most that has female threading)

This is why they have internal threads, spanner rings are used to secure optics for prototyping. This is also why they aren't flocked or there's no anti-reflection coatings. Adding those will either make this impossible or spew out lots of thin coating shards. It's after all designed to hold optics at various spaces, we're just using it at extension tubes here.
Image

While I don't know the exact length of the couplers in that photo, yes they would be the SM2T?? type couplers. One does look twice as long as the other, so 1'' and 2'' would be a good assumption.

nielsgeode
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:47 am
Location: Groningen, Netherlands

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by nielsgeode »

I think I see the problem. I had the assumption that the normale male / female SM2 tubes don't have internal threads over the entire length of the tube. They do have internal threading over the entire tube length?

nielsgeode
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:47 am
Location: Groningen, Netherlands

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by nielsgeode »

I put in my shopping card everything I think I need from Thorlabs for the 8000ED system. Do you see any mistakes? It adds up to more than I expected and I wonder what users do with the inside of the tubes, given they have threading all the way and are not flocked. Do they give flare and do they need flocking or can you use them as they are with good results?

Image

Macro_Cosmos
Posts: 1511
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by Macro_Cosmos »

nielsgeode wrote:
Thu Sep 03, 2020 9:21 am
I put in my shopping card everything I think I need from Thorlabs for the 8000ED system. Do you see any mistakes? It adds up to more than I expected and I wonder what users do with the inside of the tubes, given they have threading all the way and are not flocked. Do they give flare and do they need flocking or can you use them as they are with good results?
So several things to note before I look at your cart.
1. Yeah, these tubes are expensive! SM2 used parts are popular on ebay too, getting them used might be hard
2. They do offer one version without internal threads. The long extension tube in my photo doesn't have internal threads pass one inch, so it's 1 inches of SM2 female threading, and the rest is smooth bore. Unfortunately the shorter ones has threads. Their SM1 system offers threadless tubes, so maybe one can suggest the same for SM2. That said, you can make them threadless by buying a bunch of couplers and breaking the wallet (please don't do that)
3. Even the 3.5 and 4-inch ones has internal threads all over. The reason I've outlined, they are designed to house optics for coarse prototyping.

Now your list. I don't think you need 3 SM2RCs, two is honestly enough. What you should do is simply glue the SN8000ED to the couplers. If you don't want to do that, tap 3 M4 threaded holes into the coupler and secure the SN8000ED with nylon tipped setscrews.
https://www.thorlabs.com/thorproduct.cf ... ber=SS4MN6
A third non-destructive method I can think of is simply add some electrical tape to the coupler and force the SN8000ED in, let the friction secure the optic.

Here's my custom adaptor for the SN7E (7 element) and MN5400. Three set screws secure the optic inside the adaptor. You can just do the same to one of those tubes or the coupler.
2222.jpg

nielsgeode
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:47 am
Location: Groningen, Netherlands

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by nielsgeode »

I'm now looking at what to get for the ITL200 adapter. For now I only use it in 'normal' orientation with 148mm distance from sensor. The ITL200 itself is 28mm, so I think the ITL200 thread should be ca. 176mm from the sensor. Subtracking flang distance and a few mm for 44mm and novoflex adapters leaves 130mm. Taking 2 x SM2L20 tubes gives 101.6mm. In combination with the SM2V15 I think the ITL200 should be at the correct sensor distance. Am I right? I prefer the longest V15 tube because it's only slightly more expensive and it can be convenient in the future to have the extra adjustment range.

This gives me the following items in my shopping cart:

Image

Am I missing something or is this correct?

Macro_Cosmos
Posts: 1511
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by Macro_Cosmos »

Refer to this: https://macrocosmosblog.wordpress.com/2 ... vs-itl200/

Your calculations are definitely off. 148mm would be the detector to the surface of the entrance point of the tube lens.
The ITL200 protrudes the adaptor by about 5mm. See the photos in my article.
Image
So it's $148 - flange_{mm}+5$.

The adaptor allows a range of fine adjustments, so it's possible to get away without the SM2Vxx. Complicates stuff but this imo does make the system more stable.

When I first bought into the SM2 system, my thoughts were similar. "I'll just get the longest SM2V15". Now I have 2 each of the SM2V05, V10, and V15. Good job, myself.
If you're going to play around with various optics, the SM2V15 is too long, it will become a nuisance at some point. I therefore recommend the SM2V10. Note that the SM2Vxx itself adds 0.5 inches.

Also, consider using the SM2T10. SM2T10+SM2M15=SM2Vxx This is the same as SM2Vxx, except you can adjust the length of the Vxx part.
Look, I've put in too much time here. I think at this point, it's better if I wrote a full article on the SM2 system for photomacrography. There's so many stuff, and there's a myriad of alternatives using just Thorlabs' own parts.

chris_ma
Posts: 570
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2019 2:23 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by chris_ma »

I went through similar calculations when putting together my thorlabs setup, ended up having to order some more parts later on, so it‘s easier to just order some stuff and if it doesn‘t work order another part or two unless you are totally broke or enjoy planning things for ever (I‘m guilty of that myself)

It hurts a bit to spend serious money on a couple of metal rings the first time, but the parts are really nice to work with, so I don‘t regret it even though I‘ve spent way more then I originally planned for.
chris

nielsgeode
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:47 am
Location: Groningen, Netherlands

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by nielsgeode »

Look, I've put in too much time here. I think at this point, it's better if I wrote a full article on the SM2 system for photomacrography. There's so many stuff, and there's a myriad of alternatives using just Thorlabs' own parts.
Thanks a lot for your time so far! I very much welcome an article. May I show some new calculations?
Macro_Cosmos wrote:
Thu Sep 03, 2020 11:33 pm
Your calculations are definitely off. 148mm would be the detector to the surface of the entrance point of the tube lens.
The ITL200 protrudes the adaptor by about 5mm. See the photos in my article.
So it's $148 - flange_{mm}+5$.
The adaptor allows a range of fine adjustments, so it's possible to get away without the SM2Vxx. Complicates stuff but this imo does make the system more stable.
I had the ITL200 screwed in the other way, so the entrance point (ITL200 side without thread) points away from the adapter. This is where I got my numbers form.

I contacted novoflex and their M42 EOS adapter adds 4-5mm. The PDF on Thorlabs shows that the M42 SM2 adapter adds 4.3mm, so I get:
148 - 44 (canon) + 5 - 4 (novoflex) - 4.3 (M42 SM2) = 100.7 mm = 3.96"
and because I don't know the exact dimesions of the novoflex adapter yet:
148 - 44 (canon) + 5 - 5 (novoflex) - 4.3 (M42 SM2) = 99.7 mm = 3.93"

I think this scenario is when the ITL200 is fully threaded into the SM2A20 adapter? How can you fine adjust this and how do you lock the adapter in place so it's fixed and not 'wobbly'?
Also, consider using the SM2T10. SM2T10+SM2M15=SM2Vxx This is the same as SM2Vxx, except you can adjust the length of the Vxx part.
It's a good idea and definitely worth doing if I need it. Of course, I like to stick with as little parts as possible and if I can get away with only the stackable tubes and adjusting the fine distance with the SM2A20 adapter I would be very happy.

Edit: maybe I should just go for the SM2T10+SM2M15-type route. I think in that case I'd stick a 2" stackable tube on the M42 to SM2 adapter. Then an SM2T20, an SM2M15 and then the SM2A20. I think the extra thread of the SM2T20 (vs SM2T10) gives more room to play and also might give some more stability. It shouldn't hurt as the extra thread can be turned into the first 2" stackable tube. This gives me this shopping cart:

Image

Macro_Cosmos
Posts: 1511
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by Macro_Cosmos »

To avoid me spewing another wall out, I'll be brief.

Q: calculations
A: I haven't looked carefully, they they are very similar to my own, so I assume it's correct. You are either 0.7mm above or 0.3mm short of getting the perfect distanct
However, practically this can change. You should focus the TL to infinity by pointing at a distant tree or something. Cut out a piece of cardboard to toss in front, that would act as an iris. Makes focusing easier.

Q: How can you fine adjust this and how do you lock the adapter in place so it's fixed and not 'wobbly'?
A: I did address this already.
You use this: https://www.thorlabs.com/thorproduct.cf ... ber=SM38RR
You see, the ITL200 housing offers some room of adjustment, so they actually make a retaining ring. It also says customer inspired, so someone had the same thoughts as I did. That extra bit to get 100mm can be countered very easily.
This is exactly how you make sure the ITL200 isn't wobbly inside the SM2A20 unless it's twisted all the way in.
When you get your SM2 tubes, you will realise there's a load of retaining rings. They are used to hold optics and other parts, such as an adaptor in place.

Looking at the amount of people who have asked about using the SM2 with the ITL200 (or the now abundant CMH-200 clone), I'll write an article some time, maybe next week. I've came across 3 or 4 so far, I think.
I don't want to disassemble my measuring setup however, I might just get another SM2A20.

nielsgeode
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:47 am
Location: Groningen, Netherlands

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by nielsgeode »

Macro_Cosmos wrote:
Fri Sep 04, 2020 7:27 am
To avoid me spewing another wall out, I'll be brief.

Q: calculations
A: I haven't looked carefully, they they are very similar to my own, so I assume it's correct. You are either 0.7mm above or 0.3mm short of getting the perfect distanct
However, practically this can change. You should focus the TL to infinity by pointing at a distant tree or something. Cut out a piece of cardboard to toss in front, that would act as an iris. Makes focusing easier.

Q: How can you fine adjust this and how do you lock the adapter in place so it's fixed and not 'wobbly'?
A: I did address this already.
You use this: https://www.thorlabs.com/thorproduct.cf ... ber=SM38RR
You see, the ITL200 housing offers some room of adjustment, so they actually make a retaining ring. It also says customer inspired, so someone had the same thoughts as I did. That extra bit to get 100mm can be countered very easily.
This is exactly how you make sure the ITL200 isn't wobbly inside the SM2A20 unless it's twisted all the way in.
When you get your SM2 tubes, you will realise there's a load of retaining rings. They are used to hold optics and other parts, such as an adaptor in place.

Looking at the amount of people who have asked about using the SM2 with the ITL200 (or the now abundant CMH-200 clone), I'll write an article some time, maybe next week. I've came across 3 or 4 so far, I think.
I don't want to disassemble my measuring setup however, I might just get another SM2A20.
Thanks for the reply, it makes it all clear. If you want some specific pictures for you article I'm happy to make them using my own SM2A20 once I have it. You can then use them freely. So maybe then you don't have to order another SM2A20?

Macro_Cosmos
Posts: 1511
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Thorlabs ITL200 adapters help needed

Post by Macro_Cosmos »

It's all good, thanks for the offer!
I'm a pain in the bottom snob when it comes to these things. I must set everything up and verify it with reproducible results before posting. I don't see myself as a scientific, but I do want to be as consistent as humanly possible within my budget. I can always build my measuring setup back up.

For this one, I want it to act as a "for dummies" guide. I want a component list and precise explanation on how to get everything build. I also want it to apply to every single camera in existence. I'll do some thinking and build a mind map next week. There's this incredibly annoying C++ assignment I have to finish. I am unimaginably bad at coding. :smt022

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic