NFK Photo Eyepieces and Zeiss MC 63 A Adapter

A forum to ask questions, post setups, and generally discuss anything having to do with photomacrography and photomicroscopy.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

rsb
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:42 am
Location: Maryland, USA

NFK Photo Eyepieces and Zeiss MC 63 A Adapter

Post by rsb »

I'm pretty new to this. I am using a Zeiss Standard 18 Microscope with Zeiss Objectives. I'm doing afocal with 10x kpl -W eyepiece and a 35mm Nikkor on a Canon 450D but would like to try direct projection. From what I've read the Olympus NFK Photo eyepieces play well with Zeiss objectives. a little CA on the edges but not bad. So I acquired a 2.5x which came with a 5x at a good price. I can't afford the 1.67x for my Canon 450D. But, some time ago when I REALLY didn't know what I was doing I bought a Zeiss MC63A Photo adapter. This seems to have 0.8x and 0.25x reducing lenses which can be placed in the optical path. I'm thinking is if I can get these optics in the right location between the NFK and the film plane I would have the following choices of magnification;

2.5x NFK 0.80x reducing lens 2.00x magnification
5.0x NFK 0.25x reducing lens 1.25x magnification
6.7x NFK 0.25x reducing lens 1.68x magnification

So the 2.5x 0.8x would improve the Canon APS fit, The 5.0x .25 x would serve 4/3 systems well and the 6.7x 0.8x would be perfect for the APS sensor.

First, would it work? Would the extra lens degrade the image? If it's worth a try my next problem is placement of the lens. I know the NFK is 150mm top of tube to sensor. But does the intermediate lens change that. and even if it doesn't how far is lens from the microscope and sensor. The original 35mm film camera seems to be placed very close to the lens. The flange to sensor plane of the Canon is farther and may require machining off part of the MC63A. I also don't have the correct Trinocular head on my Standard for the MC63A so I have to eyeball that too. And of course the whole mess was set up for a 10x Zeiss photo eyepiece not a 2.5- 6.7x NFK. Luckily I do have the ability to machine the unit and adapters.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
Robert

g4lab
Posts: 1437
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 11:07 am

Post by g4lab »

It would probably be more reasonable to just throw the MC63A away and do a proper job of adapting adapting the various cameras and the scope.

There are lots of ways to skin that cat. You probably would experience some image degradation (with the method you propose)and the Olympus NFK oculars may or may not have the correct CA correction for Zeiss objectives. Probably not correct.

Why magnify and then reduce? Just magnify the correct amount for the camera in use.

If you want a second MC63A I have one that came with a lot of stuff I did want to buy. Available for postage plus handling. It does have a nice silicon photodetector in it whose mirror can be switched in and out of the optical path.

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6051
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

The MC63 has a 63mm lens focussed to infinite and is intended to work afocally with a visual type eyepiece, if you use Zeiss objectives, with the KPL and S-KPL. It will provide 0.25X magnification, so 2.5X with 10X eyepieces and 2X with 8X ones.

I use what I think is similar, the 63mm 0.25X SLR adapter with good results. I have a Oly NFK 3.3X and some time ago I tested it with the Zeiss adapter. the result was clearly deceiving: vignette and lack of parfocality, together with a magnification higher than expected, in fact just a bit lower than with my Leitz 6.3X Periplan if I remember well.

Projectives are designed to project a real image at a finite distance and the written magnification refers to it while visual eyepieces are designed to project to infinite, so its best use is with the eye or camera lens focused to infinite (afocal). Their written magnification is computed visually by comparison with an object viewed with the naked eye at 25cm, so both magnifications have a very different mean. For example, a 10X KPL raised some mm will project with a magnification about 2.5X, many people use this way.

Despite being possible to use them with their roles exchanged (projectives afocally and visuals directly projecting) you're are forcing the optics to work well outside their design. This can lead to parfocality issues and optical aberrations.

If you the adapt the MC63 for your Canon, test it and please let us know your results, but in principle I don't recommend doing it for the NFKs but for the KPLs.
Without a trinocular head this make no sense, the adapter wouldn't fit the bino tube
Pau

rsb
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:42 am
Location: Maryland, USA

Post by rsb »

You're probably right, I did wonder about the magnify then reduce. On the other hand, if I'm reading the old catalogs correctly the standard Zeiss system was to use a 10x eyepiece and the reduce the image by 0.8x ( I assume for 4x5 negatives) or 0.25x (35mm film). Don't know but assume the results from Zeiss weren't too shabby. Could be wrong or mis-informed.

I have found several (actually 2) sources that indicated the Zeiss/Olympus NFK combination is not too bad. If there are other reasonable solutions I'd be happy to try them.

rsb
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:42 am
Location: Maryland, USA

Post by rsb »

Pau, we had crossed messages. So the 63A is for standard eyepieces. Now I understand. I guess I'll live with 2.5x. I actually have a full frame Nikon but need to resolve vibration which I guess is not a big deal.

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6051
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

There is a projective compensating Zeiss PK 2.5X but it's very rare and expensive.

Very likely the best approach for you will be to work afocally with your Zeiss 10X KPLs.

With APSC with 10X eyepieces the ideal lens will be a 40mm pancake (40*10/250=1.6X) and for and for FF a 60mm standard or macro (60*10/250=2.4X).
Another good combo will be with 8X KPL with 50mm lens or 80mm lens respectively.

(Edited to add the numbers)
Pau

rsb
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:42 am
Location: Maryland, USA

Post by rsb »

Thanks so much for your help. I would have wasted a lot of time had I charged off on my own. I'll take your advice and stay afocal with the 10x kpl -W eyepiece and a vintage 35mm Nikkor on a Canon 450D (seems ok with no vingetting, would 40mm pancake be better?).

I take it you think that afocal would give better results than the 2.5x NFK with the Zeiss objectives on a full frame Nikon camera? By the way my first post was not clear and left the impression I had a binocular scope. It us a Trinocular Zeiss Standard but the tube doesn't fit the M63.

Going forward; My objectives are and odd mix of achromatic Zeiss. I will upgrade along the way. Would you recommend going to Olympus S-Plan Apo's to be compatible with the 2.5x NFK/full frame camera? Or should I upgrade but stay with Zeiss and forget the NFK. You apparently have Zeiss; is there a post describing your setup.

Thanks again.
Robert

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6051
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

would 40mm pancake be better?
Not sure, but being a 35mm a more complex wide angle design it could have more distortion and a bit wider FOV, but if it works well it's OK. 1.6X is the standard relay magnification for APSC and normal field microscopes, but a bit more or less wider doesn't hurt.

So you have a trino with 25mm phototube, do you?. A cylinder from 25mm inner to 40mm outer diameter will be easy to machine and will allow to fit it.
A Pentax M42 microscope adapter like: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Asahi-Pentax-Mi ... 1975372587
will be very useful both to make afocal with a M42 adapter to your lens filter thread mount or for direct projection with a M42 adapter to your camera bajonet, maybe adding some extension tubes.
I take it you think that afocal would give better results than the 2.5x NFK with the Zeiss objectives on a full frame Nikon camera?
At least about chromatic correction yes, Zeiss needs more compensation than Olympus. It seems that Zeiss KPLs also compensate for flatness of field but I'm not sure if this is important or if Oly also does.
My objectives are and odd mix of achromatic Zeiss. I will upgrade along the way. Would you recommend going to Olympus S-Plan Apo's to be compatible with the 2.5x NFK/full frame camera? Or should I upgrade but stay with Zeiss and forget the NFK.
There is not a simple answer, Oly S-Plan Apos are usually more expensive and both are excellent, Zeiss Planapos often suffer from delamination you need to be very careful buying them, but a bit of delamination doesn't affects noticeably the image and makes the price much lower...
If you plan to get Phase contrast or DIC Zeiss condensers and Oly objectives may not be compatible, so mixing could be risky. Bright field and dark field condensers will work OK.

I use both Leitz and Zeiss optics, like Zeiss and Olympus they are compatible but partially as they have different correction so they work better with the matched eyepieces. I've posted my setup time ago:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 9265#99265

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 9260#99260

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=26165
Pau

Ichthyophthirius
Posts: 1152
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:24 am

Post by Ichthyophthirius »

Hi,

I agree with Pau. Afocal with Zeiss Kpl eyepieces is the easiest option and gives great results. For APS-C, 40mm pancake and 10x Kpl (glasses version) are a trialed and tested combination.

The Olympus NFK (designed for direct projection) just can't be used with the Zeiss MC63 (designed for afocal).

Using an Olympus NFK together with a camera objective is possible www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25345 but since you have Zeiss objectives, afocal with Zeiss Kpl is the way to go.

If you ever wanted to use the NFK 2.5x with Olympus objectives on a Zeiss stand, you'd need eyepiece adapter PM-ADF http://www.alanwood.net/photography/oly ... s.html#adf and Adapter L http://www.alanwood.net/photography/oly ... ter-l.html plus preferably a full frame camera.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic