www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Mitutoyo M Plan APO 20X question
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Mitutoyo M Plan APO 20X question

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Geopressure



Joined: 26 Mar 2017
Posts: 10
Location: TN

PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 2:27 pm    Post subject: Mitutoyo M Plan APO 20X question Reply with quote

Hi All,

Can anyone tell me the difference between the current model 378-804-3, and the older model 378-804-2? I assume it has been improved in some way.

Thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Greenfields



Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Posts: 91
Location: Nottinghamshire, England

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Unless Mitutoyo claim that the new version has some advantages, the only way to find out will be to compare the performance of the two versions.

That will be expensive - and you may find that there is no clear difference, as for example when the design of the 10x was refreshed in 2013:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20737

There are many reasons for refreshing a design. For example, supplies of a particular glass may no longer be available for environmental or economic reasons.

Sigma said that one reason they discontinued production of their excellent 70mm macro lens was because they could no longer obtain the special glass for one of its elements.

http://sigma-rumors.com/2014/11/kazuto-yamaki-full-frame-foveon-sensor-studying-that-challenge/

Henry
_________________
Feel free to edit my images.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Geopressure



Joined: 26 Mar 2017
Posts: 10
Location: TN

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for your input Henry. The only stated difference I have found for the newer model 20x objective is similar to what you show for the 10X. The nose is more recessed in the 378-804-3. Maybe the optics are the same.

Brad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
naturepics43



Joined: 11 May 2015
Posts: 60
Location: Hocking County, Ohio , USA

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks like the 378-804-3 is 100 g. lighter. I also found this reference that the 378-804-3 uses eco friendly glass. See if these links are helpful

http://www.artisantg.com/info/ATGgevdr.pdf page 12

http://www.mitutoyo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/E4191-378_010611.pdf page 19

http://www.google.com/search?q=Mitutoyo+378+Series+objectives&oq=Mitutoyo+378+Series+objectives&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60l2&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 6th link down refers to eco friendly glass

Seems Google likes to shuffle things. The last link is incorrect but here it is

www.mcbainsystems.com/pdf/Mitutoyo_optics_broch.pdf
glass-thickness compensation objectives that allow observation of a vacuum furnace interior through a glass, for example. • Taking eco-friendliness into account, the Mitutoyo microscope lens. (Order No. 378-XXX-3) employs environmentally friendly glass as the lens material (it has no lead or arsenic). • The FS70 series can ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Geopressure



Joined: 26 Mar 2017
Posts: 10
Location: TN

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for all the links Naturepics43. It seems that optical performance comparisons are hard to come by, though I have had someone tell me privately that one example of the current 378-804-3 tested better than one of the older models.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chris S.
Site Admin


Joined: 05 Apr 2009
Posts: 2849
Location: Ohio, USA

PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Geopressure wrote:
It seems that optical performance comparisons are hard to come by, though I have had someone tell me privately that one example of the current 378-804-3 tested better than one of the older models.

Geopressure,

I'd suggest not reading much into this single observation.

A number of dozens of Mitutoyo objectives (multiple samples of all magnifications from 2x-100x) have passed through my hands for comparative testing against my own set. While specimens of a given magnification have varied in minor outward details, and surely represent changes in model (I've not recorded model numbers), I've never noticed any trend that either older or newer models are better than the other. Pretty clearly, if design details have changed, performance standards have been constant.

While "bad" specimens of Mitutoyo objectives are not uncommon (they have likely been bumped out of internal alignment), there is inevitable variation among "good" specimens. No two Mitutoyo objectives I've ever seen render exactly alike under sufficient pixel peeping. After studying their images a while, I could easily identify which lens made a given photograph. Some specimens are a bit sharper in the center, while others maintain sharpness better towards the edges; some have a bit more contrast than others, combined with some off-putting trait such as a tiny bit of false color along the focus axis.

From this testing experience, and reading about how lenses and their internal elements are produced, I'm convinced that these objectives are assembled by hand from elements that have considerable variation; that mixing and matching of elements is performed to offset these variations; and that while each lens released must be within a specification range for a number of criteria, sample variation is inevitable. Each resultant lens will have its own character--at least under extremely picky comparison.

But none of this seems to relate to the model number on the Mitutoyo barrel, or the cosmetics of the lens.

My advice with Mitutoyo objectives is to buy without regard to a lens' age or model number. If second-hand, purchase only with a return privilege, and test carefully before acceptance. If new, simply purchase and enjoy.

--Chris S.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Geopressure



Joined: 26 Mar 2017
Posts: 10
Location: TN

PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Chris, I greatly appreciate your experienced input. It will help me make a much better informed decision. What a great forum!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chris S.
Site Admin


Joined: 05 Apr 2009
Posts: 2849
Location: Ohio, USA

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Glad to be of some help, Geo. Very Happy Good luck with your purchase!

--Chris S.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
bluefish



Joined: 06 Dec 2017
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 4:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chris S. wrote:

My advice with Mitutoyo objectives is to buy without regard to a lens' age or model number. If second-hand, purchase only with a return privilege, and test carefully before acceptance. If new, simply purchase and enjoy.

--Chris S.


Hello

In the very wide range of MITUTOYO microscopes, what models are most suitable for the MACRO and the most recommendable?

thank you for your reply
_________________
retired from the wine and vine, amateur of macro photography and who speaks English with difficulty. Mr Google will help me. Thank you for your indulgence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
enricosavazzi



Joined: 21 Nov 2009
Posts: 856
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Talking about Mitutoyo microscopes to be used as photomacroscopes, I would say that the models that take M Plan Apo objectives are the most useful. This would be in practice the FS-70 and the older FS-60. Most of the stands have no provision for transmitted illumination, and do not allow enough lifting of the head to fit a transmitted illuminator on the stage, especially not a darkfield illuminator. One may use a flat LED panel or similar for brightfield transmitted illumination with these stands, but then it is only diffused illumination. The FS-60 and FS-70 are occasionally advertised on eBay. One nice thing is that they provide an erect image in the eyepieces (not inverted).

There are several different stands and heads. I find coaxial illumination with these scopes essentially useless for generic macro subjects, but it may be the only feasible way to illuminate certain types of samples.

See e.g. http://savazzi.net/photography/mitutoyo_fs-60.htm

There are more expensive Mitutoyo scopes that rarely appear on the second hand market, like those designed for the M Plan Apo HR series of objectives.
_________________
--ES
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bluefish



Joined: 06 Dec 2017
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 7:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you for your answer but about the many types of lenses, what are the most appropriate for the macro?
_________________
retired from the wine and vine, amateur of macro photography and who speaks English with difficulty. Mr Google will help me. Thank you for your indulgence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChrisR
Site Admin


Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 7257
Location: Near London, UK

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 11:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From here: https://www.edmundoptics.com/microscopy/infinity-corrected-objectives/Mitutoyo-Infinity-Corrected-Long-Working-Distance-Objectives/

Mitutoyos are popular because of their long Working Distance WD, and apochromatic properties.
You need enough space to allow lighting. The SL Super Long WD versions have more WD than you probably need, but a smaller NA , so less resolution.
HR versions are Higher Resolution centrally, but have a smaller usable field which may not cover your sensor.
So, avoid SL or HR versions.

For normal microscopes there are alternatives from Nikon or Olympus. New they aren't better overall, though used they may offer better value, at some magnifications.

2x 0.055 There are better options for 2x on a camera, but having this in your set would be convenient
5x 0.14 Very good.
7.5x 0.21 Disproportionately expensive when compared with the others, but a very nice-to-have useful lens
10x 0.28 Very popular indeed.
20x 0.42 Very good,
50x 0.55 Very good,
100x 0.7 Very good but a modest improvement over the 50x

For members of this forum, popularity is probably in about this order:
10x, 5x, 20x 50x, 2x 100x
but it depends if you have something which works below 5X.
Most of us are NOT using them on microscopes. This means we can use a shorter "tube" lens to get a high quality lower magnification image. EG a 135mm lens gives 135/200 = 0.675x the magnification.

Buying used is risky, a lot seem to get damaged without showing any external sign.

J'espère que c'est le genre de conseil que vous cherchiez!
_________________
Chris R
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
enricosavazzi



Joined: 21 Nov 2009
Posts: 856
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bluefish wrote:
Thank you for your answer but about the many types of lenses, what are the most appropriate for the macro?

Many users of this forum use the Mitutoyo M Plan Apo series. There are good reason for not using other series (M Plan Apo HR, M Plan Apo SL, M Plan Apo NUV, M Plan UV, or any of the several M Plan (Apo) NIR series).
_________________
--ES
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bluefish



Joined: 06 Dec 2017
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good evening
Yes that's exactly the answer I was waiting for and I thank you for it.
Currently I am only equipped with lenses of LT 160, some PLANAPO on a microscope Zeiss universal therefore unusable because of their WD too short. Macro I use a ULWD 40 and ULWD 20 but not APO.
I do interesting things but the quality does not reach the one I see in the pictures on this site.
I will also post some photos later.
_________________
retired from the wine and vine, amateur of macro photography and who speaks English with difficulty. Mr Google will help me. Thank you for your indulgence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1799
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 7:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let me put in a good word for the 7.5x. It has a much larger image circle than the others (except the 20x) and so it can be used over a wide range of magnifications.
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group