Nikon DIC conversion

[Paul92706]

You dont see those very often. Once i've had one for sale, if pictures gonna help you with your search, it looks like that:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... f5d2090932

There are also other variants:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... b264992935

Ah! Yes somthing like that i will need. does anyone know if the Olympus intermediate tube work? Seems to have the same flang to connect to Nikon Optiphot.

[Ichthyophthirius]

Ah! Yes somthing like that i will need. does anyone know if the Olympus intermediate tube work? Seems to have the same flang to connect to Nikon Optiphot.

The Olympus intermediate tube (with DIC prism) goes on top of the BH(2) stand, male dovetail is below.

The Nikon Optiphot intermediate tube attachment hangs below the top of the stand, the male dovetail is on top.

So this is not going to work. The DIC prism has to have the correct distance to the objectives for it to work. Also, the dovetail diameters are different.

Then on the Optiphot for reflected light, the tube length should be 210 mm. For the transmitted light objectives it's 160 mm.

You're going to have to jump through a lot of hoops to get this to work. As the DIC system itsself is quite expensive I'd recommend to simply buy a stand that fits your DIC system rather than the other way around.

Regards, Ichty

[Paul92706]

To Itchy, thanks for that information in regards to Olympus Intermediate tube not being compatiable. so your saying i should get another Microscope frame? What would you recommend? It would probably be easier to source the intermediate tube for the Optiphot no, thats pretty much all i need, with combining prism and analyzer of course.

[abednego1995]

Just curious, but what happens when you mount the 40,100x objectives on the 20x objective prism spot? If you could use the 20x nicely, the 20x objective prism might have the nearly correct shear and alignment. Another problem is already mentioned, the TL 210mm objectives from nikon are designed to be used sans coverglasses, so you'll have massive amounts of spherical abberations kicking in from around NA0.4 when looking at mounted specimens. The blurriness might be SA.

P.S. The black nikon DIC intermediate tube in the photo is for the Optiphot2. It won't mount on a Optiphot.

[Smokedaddy]

... not that it helps you but here's what my newly acquired one looks like.

[Paul92706]

Just curious, but what happens when you mount the 40,100x objectives on the 20x objective prism spot? If you could use the 20x nicely, the 20x objective prism might have the nearly correct shear and alignment. Another problem is already mentioned, the TL 210mm objectives from nikon are designed to be used sans coverglasses, so you'll have massive amounts of spherical abberations kicking in from around NA0.4 when looking at mounted specimens. The blurriness might be SA.

P.S. The black nikon DIC intermediate tube in the photo is for the Optiphot2. It won't mount on a Optiphot.

Hmm i havn't tried that i will try it later and reply back with results. Yes the 20x seems to work fine and i am messing around with the 40x and seems like i am having sucess with it also, it depends on the specimens i am vieiwing at, if i am viewing specimen that is light transparent i get a semi faded image with 40x but if i view an opaque specimen i get a really nice image. yes i am using the BD (Bright field/Dark field) 210mm DIC objectives so i asume using coverslips is ok. Thanks for giving the heads up on the intermediate tube, i would have been fooled.

[Paul92706]

Just curious, but what happens when you mount the 40,100x objectives on the 20x objective prism spot? If you could use the 20x nicely, the 20x objective prism might have the nearly correct shear and alignment. Another problem is already mentioned, the TL 210mm objectives from nikon are designed to be used sans coverglasses, so you'll have massive amounts of spherical abberations kicking in from around NA0.4 when looking at mounted specimens. The blurriness might be SA.

P.S. The black nikon DIC intermediate tube in the photo is for the Optiphot2. It won't mount on a Optiphot.

Hmm i havn't tried that i will try it later and reply back with results. Yes the 20x seems to work fine and i am messing around with the 40x and seems like i am having sucess with it also, it depends on the specimens i am looking at, if i am examining specimen that is light transparent i get a slight faded image with 40x but if i view an opaque specimen i get a really nice image. I am using
the BD (bright field/Dark field) DIC objectives so i asume using coverslips is ok. Thanks for giving the heads up on the intermediate tube, i would have been fooled!

[Paul92706]

very nice SmokeDaddy, that must have been expensive huh?

[Chris S.]

where can i source the right Nomarski prism for this item?

Good luck with that!

Paul, I have a set of DIC prisms somewhere in my debris field that sound like a hemi-demi-semi-possible-maybe. (Or not--my knowledge of these items is very limited.)

The invoice described them as follows (item numbers reference eBay):



The description for the 20x -100x read: "Up for sale is a NEW Nikon DIC Slider Prism to be used in conjunction with the 20X -100X objective on the Nikon Optiphot-300 I.C. Wafer Engineering Microscope. This prism fits into the special DIC nosepiece for these microscopes. This Slider is absolutely new having only been removed from packaging to photograph. The old Nikon number is 81620 and new Nikon number MBH62020 with a last list price of $778.00."

Descriptions for the other two DIC prisms ran along similar lines, but I no longer see them online.

As one might expect, I paid a great deal less than the quoted list prices for these prisms. If they'd happen to work for you, I'd pass them on at my cost. (PM me if you want specifics.)

I bought them with the thought of having a go at DIY reflected DIC. While I still have this thought, it has not moved from thinking to doing in several years. If they worked for you, it would be one item off my to-do list. This said, I would have to actually locate the things, which is not trivial.

--Chris S.

[Pau]

Hmm i havn't tried that i will try it later and reply back with results. Yes the 20x seems to work fine and i am messing around with the 40x and seems like i am having sucess with it also, it depends on the specimens i am vieiwing at, if i am viewing specimen that is light transparent i get a semi faded image with 40x but if i view an opaque specimen i get a really nice image. yes i am using the BD (Bright field/Dark field) 210mm DIC objectives so i asume using coverslips is ok. Thanks for giving the heads up on the intermediate tube, i would have been fooled.

I've marked bold the sentences I find weird if not just contradictory:

- Transmitted light microscopy and even more with DIC works better with thin transparent specimens. With thick specimens and high magnification you can expect the messy results

- BD objectives are to be used without cover. 210/0 means to form the primary image at 200mm from the objective shoulder and 0 cover glass thickness (just no cover). As I formerly said if you go outside this specifications you get spherical aberration, its effect quickly increases with the objective NA. It will be small with a 20/0.40 but strong with a 40/0.65 and destructive with a 100/0.90 not oil immersion objective.

At this point I would like to see your images to better understand what are you doing.

[Paul92706]

Hmm i havn't tried that i will try it later and reply back with results. Yes the 20x seems to work fine and i am messing around with the 40x and seems like i am having sucess with it also, it depends on the specimens i am vieiwing at, if i am viewing specimen that is light transparent i get a semi faded image with 40x but if i view an opaque specimen i get a really nice image. yes i am using the BD (Bright field/Dark field) 210mm DIC objectives so i asume using coverslips is ok. Thanks for giving the heads up on the intermediate tube, i would have been fooled.

I've marked bold the sentences I find weird if not just contradictory:

- Transmitted light microscopy and even more with DIC works better with thin transparent specimens. With thick specimens and high magnification you can expect the messy results

yes my case seems to be opposite, very strange.

- BD objectives are to be used without cover. 210/0 means to form the primary image at 200mm from the objective shoulder and 0 cover glass thickness (just no cover). As I formerly said if you go outside this specifications you get spherical aberration, its effect quickly increases with the objective NA. It will be small with a 20/0.40 but strong with a 40/0.65 and destructive with a 100/0.90 not oil immersion objective.

At this point I would like to see your images to better understand what are you doing.

I will try and snap a picture, i don't have expierience in taking video or pictures but i will do my best.

[Paul92706]

[Paul92706]

Sorry for bad picture i am not expierienced in taking photos, anyhow i dont know how the picture has a blue/purple tint, it acutally was a whiteish background and specimen was brown. anyhow it was taken using 40x BD Objective.

[Paul92706]

I came across somthing wierd, when i remove (pull out top prism) i get No effect nothing changes image appears the same way, isn't this the phase where the beams combine with the delta shear offset? Then go out to analyzer? I still get a DIC effect without top prisms on or off, how is this so? Could be the Objectives that are DIC? Please someone clarify? Could it be that the Prisms are backwards due to reflected light setup?

[Pau]

I came across somthing wierd, when i remove (pull out top prism) i get No effect nothing changes image appears the same way ...
...Then go out to analyzer? I still get a DIC effect without top prisms on or off...

Well, this demonstrates that you aren't actually getting DIC but likely some kind of oblique illumination where the condenser prism interference band is acting just to darken partially the aperture. Graham calls it VOILA
Take a look at
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... php?t=4386
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=14148