Infinity objective with Raynox DCR-150 as tube lens
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
- Joaquim F.
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:06 pm
- Location: Tarragona, Spain
- Contact:
Infinity objective with Raynox DCR-150 as tube lens
Hi, have some setup pictures mounting the infinity corrected microscope objective in combination with the Raynox DCR-150.
A general view showing the complete rig:
Elements Bottom-up:
Manfrotto 190pro Alu tripod, I hang the Lowepro Minitrekker backpack with some weight in the center to gain stability.
Manfrotto Macro Flash Bracket threaded directly to 3/8 tripod plate screw (just the two bigger parts) working as "interface", no head here, I have a 460 MG too light for high magnification work.
Newport 426 stage with sm-25 micrometer.
Nikon PB-6 (mounted in the PB-6E long clamp)
From left to right:
Nikon D300.
Panagor 21mm extension ring.
Nikon PB-6.
Raynox DCR-150 macro conversion lens, a 52-49mm step-up to fit in the bellows pressure circular clamp and a 52-43mm step-down in the back thread of PB-6 frontal bracket.
Nikon PN-11 extension ring (a very solid piece of equipment)
Nikon M2 extension ring (is possible some variation here, depending of the desired separation between lenses), I like the M2 "rectangular baffle" for cut-off internal reflections.
Nikon-T2 adapter, a cheap Chinese one.
Beljan T Mount-RMS adapter.
Nikon infinity corrected CF PLAN EPI 10X/0.30 NA 16.5 WD, I can mount the 5X/0.13 22,5 WD and the 20X/0.35 20.5 SLWD too!
I'm still working in the specimen setup... now is a very simple double sliding melamine board and a Manfrotto tabletop tripod with ball head and a little clamp on the desktop table.
The illumination is with a Nikon SB-26 flash and a paper or plastic diffuser.
OK... that's all, suggestions and comments are welcome!
Cheers
Joaquim
A general view showing the complete rig:
Elements Bottom-up:
Manfrotto 190pro Alu tripod, I hang the Lowepro Minitrekker backpack with some weight in the center to gain stability.
Manfrotto Macro Flash Bracket threaded directly to 3/8 tripod plate screw (just the two bigger parts) working as "interface", no head here, I have a 460 MG too light for high magnification work.
Newport 426 stage with sm-25 micrometer.
Nikon PB-6 (mounted in the PB-6E long clamp)
From left to right:
Nikon D300.
Panagor 21mm extension ring.
Nikon PB-6.
Raynox DCR-150 macro conversion lens, a 52-49mm step-up to fit in the bellows pressure circular clamp and a 52-43mm step-down in the back thread of PB-6 frontal bracket.
Nikon PN-11 extension ring (a very solid piece of equipment)
Nikon M2 extension ring (is possible some variation here, depending of the desired separation between lenses), I like the M2 "rectangular baffle" for cut-off internal reflections.
Nikon-T2 adapter, a cheap Chinese one.
Beljan T Mount-RMS adapter.
Nikon infinity corrected CF PLAN EPI 10X/0.30 NA 16.5 WD, I can mount the 5X/0.13 22,5 WD and the 20X/0.35 20.5 SLWD too!
I'm still working in the specimen setup... now is a very simple double sliding melamine board and a Manfrotto tabletop tripod with ball head and a little clamp on the desktop table.
The illumination is with a Nikon SB-26 flash and a paper or plastic diffuser.
OK... that's all, suggestions and comments are welcome!
Cheers
Joaquim
Last edited by Joaquim F. on Mon Jun 07, 2010 2:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
- rjlittlefield
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23561
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
- Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
- Contact:
- Joaquim F.
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:06 pm
- Location: Tarragona, Spain
- Contact:
- Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
- Joaquim F.
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:06 pm
- Location: Tarragona, Spain
- Contact:
This setup is not easier but I win some quality at the image margins, by design and luminosity the Raynox is similar to Nikon tube lens but is necessary a long extension and put all together in a solid setup, there is another reason to mount it in the bellows, I'm mulling over the possibility of mounting a homemade "Epi-illumination" lighting because these objectives are designed for that kind of light. I'm still looking for information about this...Pau wrote:Joaquim,
This setup doesnt seem more compact or easy to use than your former tests coupling the infinite objective on a 200mm tele lens. Are your results better whith this aproach?
Yes, is easy change the distance between lenses using extension rings, I simply follow the information found in Nikon MicroscopyU site, in his articles talk about the convenience of some distance between lenses for better optical performance and in my setup seems work better in the 150mm distance range, in the middle of the Nikon recommendations (100-200mm).Charles Krebs wrote:Joaquim,
I'm curious if you have tried it with the objective mounted closer to the Raynox lens. Is there a reason you have it extended so far out front?
Cheers
Joaquim
- rjlittlefield
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23561
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
- Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
- Contact:
I think it would be better to put such a thing between the objective and the tube lens.Joaquim F. wrote:there is another reason to mount it in the bellows, I'm mulling over the possibility of mounting a homemade "Epi-illumination" lighting because these objectives are designed for that kind of light.
One of the great advantages of the infinity design is that you can for example stick a half-silvered mirror between the objective and the tube lens without getting ghosts in your images. See discussion HERE.
--Rik
- Joaquim F.
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:06 pm
- Location: Tarragona, Spain
- Contact:
Thank you, a very interesting and detailed discussion! (I really need some time for understand all that!)rjlittlefield wrote:I think it would be better to put such a thing between the objective and the tube lens.Joaquim F. wrote:there is another reason to mount it in the bellows, I'm mulling over the possibility of mounting a homemade "Epi-illumination" lighting because these objectives are designed for that kind of light.
One of the great advantages of the infinity design is that you can for example stick a half-silvered mirror between the objective and the tube lens without getting ghosts in your images. See discussion HERE.
--Rik
Please a question, I have some references which mentions a beneficial effect of a polarizing filter on the blue halos usually seen around bright areas with some lenses, a half-mirror may have a similar effect? (I really hate that blue halos!!!)
I take this opportunity to upload some pictures taken with this setup the last Sunday (Stormy weather here)
Beetle wingtip, Nikon CF PLAN 10X with Raynox DCR-150, 120 images with 0.01mm increments in Zerene Stacker PMax:
Full frame:
center 100% crop:
Some dust here, sorry!
Bottom center margin 100% crop:
Extreme bottom left corner 100% crop:
Criticism and comments are welcome!
Cheers
joaquim
- rjlittlefield
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23561
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
- Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
- Contact:
Sorry, I cannot help here. I have not seen those references. But I cannot imagine how a half-mirror could help to reduce those halos.Joaquim F. wrote:I have some references which mentions a beneficial effect of a polarizing filter on the blue halos usually seen around bright areas with some lenses, a half-mirror may have a similar effect?
--Rik
Joaquim, I'm responding to this older thread instead of the newer similar threads HERE and HERE to bump it up with the other ones. I missed this discussion when first posted and others may have as well. Your tests answer many of my questions and you are using (Nikon) equipment very similar to mine, so the results are even more valid for me.
I don't own any of the Raynox diopters yet; so I'm trying to plan the best approach. Too bad Raynox doesn't make a variable FL zoom diopter!
Thanks,
This is also one of my main questions. My goal is to construct a small portable optical assembly for field use using a helicoid like shown by Craig in the linked thread. Have you carefully tested image quality at different distances between the Raynox and the 10x/0.25 CFI objective, with the Raynox at infinity focus from the sensor? If the quality at 150mm is better, in what way---sharpness center to corner, CA center to corner?Joaquim F. wrote:Charles Krebs wrote:
Joaquim,
I'm curious if you have tried it with the objective mounted closer to the Raynox lens. Is there a reason you have it extended so far out front?
Yes, is easy change the distance between lenses using extension rings, I simply follow the information found in Nikon MicroscopyU site, in his articles talk about the convenience of some distance between lenses for better optical performance and in my setup seems work better in the 150mm distance range, in the middle of the Nikon recommendations (100-200mm).
I don't own any of the Raynox diopters yet; so I'm trying to plan the best approach. Too bad Raynox doesn't make a variable FL zoom diopter!
Thanks,
Bob in Orange County, CA
- Joaquim F.
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:06 pm
- Location: Tarragona, Spain
- Contact:
I just read the post about the tilted CFI neutral density filter and the partial reflection that would occur is very much like using a semi-mirror although very little angle! I have not mounted the epi-illumination, many things to do and little time but I think could work well.rjlittlefield wrote:Sorry, I cannot help here. I have not seen those references. But I cannot imagine how a half-mirror could help to reduce those halos.Joaquim F. wrote:I have some references which mentions a beneficial effect of a polarizing filter on the blue halos usually seen around bright areas with some lenses, a half-mirror may have a similar effect?
--Rik
greetings
- Joaquim F.
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:06 pm
- Location: Tarragona, Spain
- Contact:
Well, not very carefully test, just fast and not very scientific ones but using the new CFI is possible to shorten the lens distances to about 10 cm without problems, at less distance margins are a little worse. It seems that if the raynox catches light coming from CFI objective at too much angle loses a bit of quality even in the DX camera. Perhaps the easiest way is used directly in the 105mm or the 200/4 AI that also works well on DX sensor cameras. Assembling camera + tube + raynox + rings + CFI seems more complicated for a portable rig.Bob^3 wrote:Joaquim, I'm responding to this older thread instead of the newer similar threads HERE and HERE to bump it up with the other ones. I missed this discussion when first posted and others may have as well. Your tests answer many of my questions and you are using (Nikon) equipment very similar to mine, so the results are even more valid for me.
This is also one of my main questions. My goal is to construct a small portable optical assembly for field use using a helicoid like shown by Craig in the linked thread. Have you carefully tested image quality at different distances between the Raynox and the 10x/0.25 CFI objective, with the Raynox at infinity focus from the sensor? If the quality at 150mm is better, in what way---sharpness center to corner, CA center to corner?Joaquim F. wrote:Charles Krebs wrote:
Joaquim,
I'm curious if you have tried it with the objective mounted closer to the Raynox lens. Is there a reason you have it extended so far out front?
Yes, is easy change the distance between lenses using extension rings, I simply follow the information found in Nikon MicroscopyU site, in his articles talk about the convenience of some distance between lenses for better optical performance and in my setup seems work better in the 150mm distance range, in the middle of the Nikon recommendations (100-200mm).
I don't own any of the Raynox diopters yet; so I'm trying to plan the best approach. Too bad Raynox doesn't make a variable FL zoom diopter!
Thanks,
Greetings
- rjlittlefield
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23561
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
- Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
- Contact:
If you add a polarizing filter then you will add reflections. Tilting the polarizer is a good way to get rid of some of those added reflections. No problem there. The part I can't imagine is how adding a polarizing filter or half-mirror would eliminate halos that would be present without them.Joaquim F. wrote:I just read the post about the tilted CFI neutral density filter and the partial reflection that would occur is very much like using a semi-mirror although very little angle! I have not mounted the epi-illumination, many things to do and little time but I think could work well.rjlittlefield wrote:Sorry, I cannot help here. I have not seen those references. But I cannot imagine how a half-mirror could help to reduce those halos.Joaquim F. wrote:I have some references which mentions a beneficial effect of a polarizing filter on the blue halos usually seen around bright areas with some lenses, a half-mirror may have a similar effect?
--Rik
Regarding blue halo removal:
I have seen reports that using a simple UV-cut filter can reduce blue haloes on some lenses. The claim is that the filter removes UV and a small amount of blue light. The lens has poor corrections for these colors; this is the reason for the haloes. Removing the light removes the haloes.
A polarizing filter might accidentally have a similar effect.
I have seen reports that using a simple UV-cut filter can reduce blue haloes on some lenses. The claim is that the filter removes UV and a small amount of blue light. The lens has poor corrections for these colors; this is the reason for the haloes. Removing the light removes the haloes.
A polarizing filter might accidentally have a similar effect.
- Joaquim F.
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:06 pm
- Location: Tarragona, Spain
- Contact:
Looking for some filters I see an astronomical one named "Baader Fringe Killer", is name is the best description for the intended use!Bob S wrote:Regarding blue halo removal:
I have seen reports that using a simple UV-cut filter can reduce blue haloes on some lenses. The claim is that the filter removes UV and a small amount of blue light. The lens has poor corrections for these colors; this is the reason for the haloes. Removing the light removes the haloes.
A polarizing filter might accidentally have a similar effect.
Seems to cut out violet-blue halos around stars in affordable achromatic refractor telescopes.
Use it between the two elements of the infinite optical system don't seem to be a problem (except for necessary adapters)
The bad thing is that it seems a very special technical filter and is more expensive than a used Nikon CFI 10X/0.25 at least at the most popular seller prices.
For now maybe is best some try with a good UV or polariser filter.
Greetings
Joaquim