| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mawyatt
Joined: 22 Aug 2013
Posts: 1802
Location: Clearwater
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2016 6:33 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Hi Saul,
Now I see how this works...thanks. The F mount on the lens assembly just interfaces with the Nikon bellows and the other end of the bellows mounts to the camera body with an F mount.
Looks like you have about 60mm from the Raynox front to the objective, how much adjustment range do you need with the focus helicoid? You show the PB-5 in your prior images, is this any better or worse than the PB-6, 4 or 3 for this type of work?
Thanks for showing all this, very nice setup indeed!!
Cheers,
Mike |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Saul
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 1291
Location: Naperville, IL USA
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2016 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Mike for the warm comment !
My first bellows were PB-5, so rig design was based on it. PB-6 & PB-4 have different dimensions and does not play with how parts are placed on the the granite base. And especially with new Nikon Labophot table. Do not want touch anything for now  . Nikon Labophot table is big improvement for my setup (cannot complain about old one, served very good), now next step is to finish assembly of the new controls - program is written, parts assembled, tested, just one problem - everything is still sitting in the shoe box
Regarding distances - I played more with Nikon MXA20696, I can confirm that best distance for his combo was between 60-80mm, so I used 76.5mm ( according Edmund Optics directions). I'm using Mitu 5x-Raynox 250 combo only, just to get 2.5x. All other magnifications are covered by other objectives and lenses. Even without any distance between them I was getting good results . I have to make more tests in order to find out what is better - directly, reversed, with gap or without (for 2.5x range)...
_________________
Saul
Studio, horizontal and field setups
Last edited by Saul on Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:24 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saul
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 1291
Location: Naperville, IL USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vikcious
Joined: 04 May 2016
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Thu May 12, 2016 4:15 am Post subject: 2 questions |
|
|
| Saul wrote: | Mitutoyo - Raynox assembly
 |
Hi Saul,
Thanks a lot for sharing the setup pictures with us.
I am planning on going for a similar setup (as described herehttp://www.mindat.org/article.php/2089/My+setup+chronology) and I have two questions related to the setup you provided:
1) what is the "Focuser", what is it necessary (if it really is!) for and could you provide a link (e.g. ebay or similar) where I could get more specs and be able to purchase.
2) is it really necessary to have that "extension ring"? If so, same, could you please provide a link to a supplier?
Thank you very much for your support. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saul
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 1291
Location: Naperville, IL USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vikcious
Joined: 04 May 2016
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Fri May 13, 2016 1:04 am Post subject: Re: 2 questions |
|
|
Thanks a lot for your feedback, Saul!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 19551
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
|
| Posted: Fri May 13, 2016 7:42 am Post subject: Re: 2 questions |
|
|
| Saul wrote: | Hi Vikcious,
| vikcious wrote: | 1) what is the "Focuser", what is it necessary
|
It is not necessary, just keep 60-80mm gap between Raynox and objective (according Edmund Optics - 76.5mm). I used helicoid during my tests looking for the best distance. Sometimes it is useful for the fine magnification adjustment if the specimen does not fit on the FOV. |
Saul, I am confused by these comments.
As background, I note that with any infinite setup, if the rear lens is focused at infinity to match the objective's design, then changing the separation between objective and rear lens will have no effect on magnification. The recommended spacing depends on fine details of the rear lens design (not the objective) and is for the purpose of minimizing aberrations. I am not aware that Edmund Optics has ever specified a recommended distance for a Raynox rear lens.
So, your comment about "fine magnification adjustment" makes me think that your setup has the rear lens focused somewhere other than infinity, and I'm guessing that the 76.5 mm you mention actually relates to some other rear lens, such as the Mitutoyo MT-4/MT-40 in the setup described at http://www.edmundoptics.com/resources/application-notes/microscopy/digital-video-microscope-objective-setups/ .
Can you clarify, please?
--Rik |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saul
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 1291
Location: Naperville, IL USA
|
| Posted: Fri May 13, 2016 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rik, thank you for your comment !
| Quote: | | makes me think that your setup has the rear lens focused somewhere other than infinity |
Rechecked - you are right ! Before I focused my tube lens to the distant tree. I had to focus to the "very very" distant tree  This difference gave me wrong understanding, that I can make "micro" magnification adjustments by changing distance between tube lens and objective.
Thanks for the link. Few years ago in the the printed Edmund catalog version I saw very similar information (not available in the later editions)
Question...
| Quote: | | It is important to note that 76.5mm is the recommended distance since these objectives are infinity corrected. However, if the distance is too short, the system may experience vignetting |
How too short distance can cause vignetting ? In the combination with the normal 200mm (70-200 other members or 70-300 in my case) lens we are trying to keep objective as close as possible . With Sigma Life size attachment - same story ( with bigger distance results were not good). When I tested Mitutoyo 5x/Reichert tube lens, gap was around 1cm and results were pretty good
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30766
Am I missing something ?
_________________
Saul
Studio, horizontal and field setups |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saul
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 1291
Location: Naperville, IL USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saul
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 1291
Location: Naperville, IL USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
As I mentioned in the one of the previous posts, I was looking for something to replace my horizontal setup which could be used in the field and studio and could be used in the manual and auto modes.
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30925&highlight=deltron
Finally my purchase has arrived... Assembly took few minutes, except 1/4 hole for the tripod at the bottom - had to spend some time to assemble back linear bearings.
Movement is ~2.0 - 2.5mm per turn, what is OK for my horizontal lower magnification shots. For the high magnification I'm using vertical setup
_________________
Saul
Studio, horizontal and field setups
Last edited by Saul on Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:51 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saul
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 1291
Location: Naperville, IL USA
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2016 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One more update for the focus stacking setup head ( I hope it is last one ... ).
Changes:
-shortened nosepiece with bracket. Now it allows me easily interchange different parts.
-shortened trinocular head top port "neck" - now I can keep infinity distance between sensor and Sigma Life size attachment - no need to use original Reichert tube lens (which is little bit worse than Sigma ) inside trinocular head and allows to use finite objectives when needed.
_________________
Saul
Studio, horizontal and field setups |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saul
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 1291
Location: Naperville, IL USA
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mitutoyo/Reichert tube lens assembly for Nikon Labophot. Missed something in the 3D model, had to adjust manually.
_________________
Saul
Studio, horizontal and field setups |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saul
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 1291
Location: Naperville, IL USA
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Horizontal setup with Del-Tron
_________________
Saul
Studio, horizontal and field setups |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saul
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 1291
Location: Naperville, IL USA
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Most recent vertical setup with Labophot base
_________________
Saul
Studio, horizontal and field setups |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 19551
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I had forgotten this thread, and I see that one of your earlier questions went unanswered.
| Saul wrote: | Question...
| Quote: | | It is important to note that 76.5mm is the recommended distance since these objectives are infinity corrected. However, if the distance is too short, the system may experience vignetting; if the distance is too long, the resultant image will be dim because of insufficient light. |
How too short distance can cause vignetting ?
...
Am I missing something ? |
No, you're not missing anything. The author of that bit was confused.
If the distance is too short, the system may experience aberrations (depends on the tube lens), but short distance certainly will not add vignetting.
I have added to your quote the original continuation, about if the distance is too long, the resultant image will be dim because of insufficient light. This is not quite correct either, but there is a grain of truth in it. No light is lost due to distance per se. However, if the distance becomes too long then vignetting will start to occur, and the first symptoms of that will be corner darkening as edge rays are blocked.
--Rik |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
