I've been using a simple direct projection adapter that hooks the DSLR to the top photo tube and lets the objective directly project onto the sensor. This works reasonably well but normally the Leitz Periplan eyepieces correct some aberrations from the objective. I'm missing that correction with this setup. As a result the resolution of my images doesn't match what I can see through the eyepiece.
Note: I'm using a Leitz SM-D LUX with a 170mm tube length.
I've also experimented with using a standard Periplan eyepiece to project onto the sensor. This works better but I wonder if I should really be using a projection (or photo-relay) lens.
I've found some adapters on eBay, but am not really sure if they are what I need.
This looks like an all-in-one package with the corrective Periplan lenses incorporated. However, it is for the newer 160 mm Leitz scopes and I have a 170 mm. Does anyone know if this will work? It is also not clear how the camera would attach to this
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Leitz-376110-Ph ... SwzaJX9AIi
This looks like an adapter that would hold a projection eyepiece
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Leitz-Microscop ... Sw42JWC2NC
All the Leitz projection eyepieces I've found are this 4x model
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Leitz-4x-Projec ... Sw2GlXI5iA
Can someone give me some advice on what I really need to get the best images out of my system?
Thanks,
Bill
Looking to better my Camera to Microscope connection
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
Go to the afocal approach (many Leitz cameras of that era did)
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?p=99265
The "Leitz-376102-Photo-Extension-Tube-Periplan-12-5x-10x-GF-160mm-Tube-Length" you linked is an empty tube to hold an eyepiece at the trinocular head for afocal based Leitz cameras.
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?p=99265
The "Leitz-376102-Photo-Extension-Tube-Periplan-12-5x-10x-GF-160mm-Tube-Length" you linked is an empty tube to hold an eyepiece at the trinocular head for afocal based Leitz cameras.
Pau
-
Ichthyophthirius
- Posts: 1152
- Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:24 am
Hi Bill,
I agree the Pau, afocal is the solution you need.
This is what the SM-D-Lux looks like: http://www.leitz-ortholux.de/forum/SM-D-Lux.jpg
In order to recommend the parts, you have to tell us
- which trinocular tube you have (post a photo of find a link)
- what camera do you have
- do you have Plan objectives or regular ones
Regards, Ichty
I agree the Pau, afocal is the solution you need.
This is what the SM-D-Lux looks like: http://www.leitz-ortholux.de/forum/SM-D-Lux.jpg
In order to recommend the parts, you have to tell us
- which trinocular tube you have (post a photo of find a link)
- what camera do you have
- do you have Plan objectives or regular ones
Regards, Ichty
Surprised to hear that afocal would be the best solution, but you guys are more expert than me.
There is what my scope looks like:
I have a Canon 700D camera. The only actual lens I have for it is a basic EFS 18-55 mm.
I actually tried some afocal early on and found i would get quite a bit of vignetting. However, I'm willing to try it again. Right now I'm using regular achro objectives (10x, 25x and 40x are my most used ones. Also have 10x and 40X phase objectives.
Really appreciate the help.
Bill
There is what my scope looks like:
I have a Canon 700D camera. The only actual lens I have for it is a basic EFS 18-55 mm.
I actually tried some afocal early on and found i would get quite a bit of vignetting. However, I'm willing to try it again. Right now I'm using regular achro objectives (10x, 25x and 40x are my most used ones. Also have 10x and 40X phase objectives.
Really appreciate the help.
Bill
You need a 10X Periplan with eyeglasses (the model for 170 tube that has shorter upper part than the 160 and has not engraved the field number 18 or 20). A clean and undamaged upper lens is very important.
You can try your 18-55 at 40-45, focused to infinite and with the diaphragm wide open (M or Av mode). Te best option for your camera will be a 40mm pancake to get 1.6X magnification, an inexpensive 50mm manual standard lens will also work well delivering 2X
You can try your 18-55 at 40-45, focused to infinite and with the diaphragm wide open (M or Av mode). Te best option for your camera will be a 40mm pancake to get 1.6X magnification, an inexpensive 50mm manual standard lens will also work well delivering 2X
Pau
-
Ichthyophthirius
- Posts: 1152
- Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:24 am
Hi Bill,
Great microscope! Afocal is the best way of doing this and (with the rare exception of some negative eyepieces) it was the only solution that Leitz used for their own camera adapters!
I would also recommend the well-tested combination of Periplan 10x (glasses) and a 40 mm prime lens for the APS-C camera. (A 50 mm prime lens also works for non-plan objectives but you might later upgrade to plan objectives and these are covered better by a 40 mm.)
As Pau said, you need the 170 mm version of the Periplan which doesn't have the field number marked. Like this one http://www.mikroskop-online.de/mikrosko ... 34x300.jpg
Suitable 40 mm lenses are the SMC Pentax-M 40mm f/2.8 (stable construction!) and the Canon EF 40mm (plastic).
Finally, you need a mechanical connexion between microscope and camera objective. Do you have some kind of clamp adapter already? Maybe it could be modified to connect to the filter thread of the camera.
The Periplan 10x (single) shouldn't cost more than $50.
The Proj.Ok 4x is a projection eyepiece for 170 mm tube length (it produces an image at infinity like visual eyepieces) that is also very useful for adapting cameras. It has to be used for afocal with a suitable lens around 90 mm and the image quality is outstanding. However, finding a suitable 90 mm lens is not so easy so I would recommend the much simpler approach with Periplan 10x and 40 mm prime lens.
Regards, Ichty
Great microscope! Afocal is the best way of doing this and (with the rare exception of some negative eyepieces) it was the only solution that Leitz used for their own camera adapters!
I would also recommend the well-tested combination of Periplan 10x (glasses) and a 40 mm prime lens for the APS-C camera. (A 50 mm prime lens also works for non-plan objectives but you might later upgrade to plan objectives and these are covered better by a 40 mm.)
As Pau said, you need the 170 mm version of the Periplan which doesn't have the field number marked. Like this one http://www.mikroskop-online.de/mikrosko ... 34x300.jpg
Suitable 40 mm lenses are the SMC Pentax-M 40mm f/2.8 (stable construction!) and the Canon EF 40mm (plastic).
Finally, you need a mechanical connexion between microscope and camera objective. Do you have some kind of clamp adapter already? Maybe it could be modified to connect to the filter thread of the camera.
The Periplan 10x (single) shouldn't cost more than $50.
The Proj.Ok 4x is a projection eyepiece for 170 mm tube length (it produces an image at infinity like visual eyepieces) that is also very useful for adapting cameras. It has to be used for afocal with a suitable lens around 90 mm and the image quality is outstanding. However, finding a suitable 90 mm lens is not so easy so I would recommend the much simpler approach with Periplan 10x and 40 mm prime lens.
Regards, Ichty
houstontx,houstontx wrote:I have an orthomat kit that is in good condition but I really have no use for it, I could try and remove the black tube adapter piece from the main camera body, maybe it would fit your camera? It came from a dialux 22...Just a thought...
Thanks for the offer. I think I will try Ichty and Pau's afocal suggestion. I also am getting some parts to refine my eyepiece projection method. I'll do a test to see which system works best.
Icthy and Pau,
Thanks again for the advice. I will pick up a used Canon EF 40 mm and a new Periplan. I do have Periplan high eye point eyepieces for the binocular tubes. The have a different shape than what you suggested (with a conical top). Is there an optical difference of just a different model year? Of course, I'll still need to get another for the photo tube.
Does it matter if I get WF or not?
Yes, I already have a clamp adapter that threads onto Canon lenses and should hold everything at the proper distance. Do you recommend a protective filter to prevent the eyepiece from accidentally touching the lens, or does that put too much space between them.
Thanks again for the advice. I will pick up a used Canon EF 40 mm and a new Periplan. I do have Periplan high eye point eyepieces for the binocular tubes. The have a different shape than what you suggested (with a conical top). Is there an optical difference of just a different model year? Of course, I'll still need to get another for the photo tube.
Does it matter if I get WF or not?
Yes, I already have a clamp adapter that threads onto Canon lenses and should hold everything at the proper distance. Do you recommend a protective filter to prevent the eyepiece from accidentally touching the lens, or does that put too much space between them.
-
Ichthyophthirius
- Posts: 1152
- Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:24 am
Hi Bill,
Great, you've got a clamp adapter already! I wouldn't put a filter in between because of possible reflections and the increase in distance to the lens. Just arrange the clamp adapter in a way that brings the Canon 40 mm very close to the top of the eyepiece but without actually touching. Leave a few mm of distance. The front lens gets easily damaged during setup so maybe tape it off!
Attach the Canon 40 mm to your camera, focus to infinity with a far-away object, then turn off the autofocus (AF to MF on the lens). The 40 mm needs to be focussed to infinity permanently. Then open the aperture to maximum and keep it open permanently.
I don't know the older Periplan you have. It should work in principle but the antireflective coating might be not as good and the field of view smaller than the the newer models. The one I linked to has a field of view of 18.
Regards, Ichty
Great, you've got a clamp adapter already! I wouldn't put a filter in between because of possible reflections and the increase in distance to the lens. Just arrange the clamp adapter in a way that brings the Canon 40 mm very close to the top of the eyepiece but without actually touching. Leave a few mm of distance. The front lens gets easily damaged during setup so maybe tape it off!
Attach the Canon 40 mm to your camera, focus to infinity with a far-away object, then turn off the autofocus (AF to MF on the lens). The 40 mm needs to be focussed to infinity permanently. Then open the aperture to maximum and keep it open permanently.
I don't know the older Periplan you have. It should work in principle but the antireflective coating might be not as good and the field of view smaller than the the newer models. The one I linked to has a field of view of 18.
Regards, Ichty
I'm resurrecting this thread for advice. As recommended, I got the Canon 40 mm lens and the exact Periplan eyepiece recommended. It works reasonably well, but unless I'm very careful I get a center bright spot in my images. The problem is worse at higher powers (40x objective). See the attached picture.
Ichty said to have the eyepiece very close to the lens. When I do so the bright spot is very pronounced, even at low power. I need to add spacers to move the lens about 50 mm away. Then it is not much of a problem at low power but is still a issue at higher power.
Any idea why I'm having this issue?
Ichty said to have the eyepiece very close to the lens. When I do so the bright spot is very pronounced, even at low power. I need to add spacers to move the lens about 50 mm away. Then it is not much of a problem at low power but is still a issue at higher power.
Any idea why I'm having this issue?
-
Ichthyophthirius
- Posts: 1152
- Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:24 am
Hi Bill,
It's a hotspot. The field aperture is imaged on one of the lenses in the camera adaptation.
Before you change anything, you need to track down the location of the hotspot. Most likely it's in one of the camera objective lenses. When you remove the camera from the objective (leaving the objective attached to the microscope) can you see the hotspot anywhere?
You can try to change the distance between eyepiece and objective or exchange either of them for another type until the problem goes away.
I had the same problem with the combination of a Periplan 10x glasses and a Nikkor 50 mm f1.8 AI-s 'pancake'. It went away when I switched to the Pentax 40 mm. There are some unlucky combinations. Haze inside the objective can be another cause.
Regards, Ichty
It's a hotspot. The field aperture is imaged on one of the lenses in the camera adaptation.
Before you change anything, you need to track down the location of the hotspot. Most likely it's in one of the camera objective lenses. When you remove the camera from the objective (leaving the objective attached to the microscope) can you see the hotspot anywhere?
You can try to change the distance between eyepiece and objective or exchange either of them for another type until the problem goes away.
I had the same problem with the combination of a Periplan 10x glasses and a Nikkor 50 mm f1.8 AI-s 'pancake'. It went away when I switched to the Pentax 40 mm. There are some unlucky combinations. Haze inside the objective can be another cause.
Regards, Ichty
Hi,
sorry for the hot spot issue, I was recommending this lens in base to the adequate focal length and some experiences from other people.
Because you need to isolate the cause, first try the same setup with a different eyepiece (even if its magnification or construction is less adequate) and second with another lens to see if the spot remains or disappears.
This kind of Periplan eyepieces are well known to be excellent for afocal photomicrography:
,
the right side one is the model for 170 microscopes, the left one is for 160, optically they seem identical, I've both models. The red dot marked models are specifically recommended for photography but I haven't found any significative difference.
sorry for the hot spot issue, I was recommending this lens in base to the adequate focal length and some experiences from other people.
Because you need to isolate the cause, first try the same setup with a different eyepiece (even if its magnification or construction is less adequate) and second with another lens to see if the spot remains or disappears.
This kind of Periplan eyepieces are well known to be excellent for afocal photomicrography:
,the right side one is the model for 170 microscopes, the left one is for 160, optically they seem identical, I've both models. The red dot marked models are specifically recommended for photography but I haven't found any significative difference.
Pau
Ichty,
Taking the camera body off and looking down the back of the lens doesn't really show a hotspot. However, the light is pretty intense view that way so I'm not sure I'd be able to see it anyway.
I did try adjusting the objective to eyepiece distance by putting in some spacers under the shoulder of the eyepiece. Increased the distance by a couple of mm and it made no significant difference.
Pau,
The Periplan I got does not have the part number engraved on it but otherwise appears identical.
As I said, if I increase the distance between the sensor and the eyepiece to 5-6 cm the spot goes away. The image appears to be just as sharp and contrasty at this distance so maybe I should just live with it like that.
I do have a 8x Periplan that came with the scope and it does not appear to have this problem when used. However the 10x is a better match to the visual field of view so I'd prefer to use it. The 8x also has much more vignetting of the field, giving a round border to the image.
Taking the camera body off and looking down the back of the lens doesn't really show a hotspot. However, the light is pretty intense view that way so I'm not sure I'd be able to see it anyway.
I did try adjusting the objective to eyepiece distance by putting in some spacers under the shoulder of the eyepiece. Increased the distance by a couple of mm and it made no significant difference.
Pau,
The Periplan I got does not have the part number engraved on it but otherwise appears identical.
As I said, if I increase the distance between the sensor and the eyepiece to 5-6 cm the spot goes away. The image appears to be just as sharp and contrasty at this distance so maybe I should just live with it like that.
I do have a 8x Periplan that came with the scope and it does not appear to have this problem when used. However the 10x is a better match to the visual field of view so I'd prefer to use it. The 8x also has much more vignetting of the field, giving a round border to the image.