Mitu QV 2.5x - any experience?

Lou Jost · Post by **Lou Jost** » Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:38 am

The first link,
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Used-Original-M ... SwoudW4WtR
appears to have the lens data written on the side that was not well-photographed, so it could still be the same as mine. The other lens isn't photographed from that side at all; so it too could be like mine. Mine was about half the price that these are going for. But since I don't have it yet, I can't vouch for its quality.

None of them match the appearance of the new one with NA=0.21. That objective has TWO light-colored rings around the black portion of the lens, instead of just one as in my version and the versions you linked to. Here is Mitutoyo's page for the new version:
http://s20150911mu.kfa.co.uk/vision-mea ... rettyPhoto

harisA · Post by **harisA** » Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:38 am

Lou Jost wrote:Sure, but it will be several months before I can retrieve it from Wisconsin where it was shipped. I will give a full report after my next trip to the US. I have a bunch of other very cool lenses waiting for me too, including some unique ones that appear not to be known to our community. Lots to report!

Lou my message was for user ''mjkzz'' who owns the qv objective and has already performed some comparison tests.

regards

Haris

Lou Jost · Post by **Lou Jost** » Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:39 am

oh, sorry.

dolmadis · Post by **dolmadis** » Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:48 am

Lou Jost wrote: ..........appears to have the lens data written on the side that was not well-photographed, so it could still be the same as mine.

............The other lens isn't photographed from that side at all; so it too could be like mine.

Thanks. I have asked both sellers for FI and photos.

BR

John

mjkzz · Post by **mjkzz** » Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:46 pm

Since you own this objective will you please let us know if the mitotuyo qv 2.5x can cover a m4/3 or even a aps-c sensor?

I think it covers APS-C well, not sure about full frame as I do not have one, though I SPECULATE it should, just like a regular mitty.

The fact that it needs 100mm tube lens is another attractive feature to me as I can use it on my 100mm macro lens or the 135mm lens just to get a bit higher magnification.

Here is one image I did with it -- Canon 550D (or 600D, forgot), an APS-C camera, 135mm tube lens.

Lou Jost · Post by **Lou Jost** » Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:49 pm

That's beautiful!

dolmadis · Post by **dolmadis** » Sun Aug 13, 2017 12:57 am

dolmadis wrote: I have just come across a 2.5x QV with no NA markings.

Actually now 4 !!

I have spent a little while delving further into Google looking at a few archived Mitutoyo Catalogues or Brochures.

http://studylib.net/doc/18098004/vision ... g-machines

Whilst far from conclusive of course this brochure shows a QV with no NA markings.

On page 25 there is reference to QV 2.5x at both 0.14 and 0.28 .

BR

John

Lou Jost · Post by **Lou Jost** » Sun Aug 13, 2017 5:23 am

Yes, that's the old one and the new High Res version. The HR version on the brochure you linked to quotes an NA of 0.28 but the link I gave above has the exact same part # with an NA of 0.21, which agrees with what is marked on the lens. I think the 0.28 is a typo.

All the QVs they illustrate in their objective page are marked, so I'd be a bit suspicious of unmarked ones.

dolmadis · Post by **dolmadis** » Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:46 am

Do we conclude that QV's with no NA markings are clones?

How can this be proven one way or the other?

Or is this just not possible and the prudent action is to just pass on these?

Would Mitutoyo know?

Any ideas which email address to contact them on?

Br

John

Lou Jost · Post by **Lou Jost** » Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:05 am

I certainly can't say with certainty that an unmarked one is a clone. But I would be suspicious.

Edit: We do know that Mitutoyo look-alikes are commonly sold.

dolmadis · Post by **dolmadis** » Mon Aug 14, 2017 9:16 am

dolmadis wrote:
I have just come across a 2.5x QV with no NA markings.

But it has a serial number or product number D60674.

Is it 0.14 or 0.21?

Lou Jost wrote:I certainly can't say with certainty that an unmarked one is a clone. But I would be suspicious.

Edit: We do know that Mitutoyo look-alikes are commonly sold.

I have taken the opportunity of sending photographs of this lens version to Mitutoyo (UK) Ltd.

I know that this is, again, far from conclusive but I felt it useful to share in support of some improvement of knowledge.

Mitutoyo (UK) Ltd wrote:Further to the email you sent, the lens does look genuine but old. Sometimes the NA could get rubbed off.

This is a Quick Vision 2.5x Objective, part number 02ALA410 with a NA of 0.14

BR

John

PS it seems to have had a slight (?) "knock" on the surround to the front glass.