The Diatom that you can see here is Gyrosigma, and the photo was made with an LOMO inverted microscope, objective plan Apo 20X, ocular 10X,(200X magnification), under DIC, and with a CANON G7
Bloody Gyrosigma
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
Bloody Gyrosigma
Greetings everyone, i've been checking this forum and i have a lot of interest on microphotography, i decided to show you one of the greatest views i've seen under the microscope (one of many i could see heh)
The Diatom that you can see here is Gyrosigma, and the photo was made with an LOMO inverted microscope, objective plan Apo 20X, ocular 10X,(200X magnification), under DIC, and with a CANON G7
The Diatom that you can see here is Gyrosigma, and the photo was made with an LOMO inverted microscope, objective plan Apo 20X, ocular 10X,(200X magnification), under DIC, and with a CANON G7
Hi Soniclink,
I have been working with a LOMO for many many years and I could compare it with a Zeiss which I bought later. The optics of the LOMO are very nice (in contrary to the mechanical parts!), and I can see you have even a more sophisticated one. So I asked myself: is this all you can make of the Gyrosigma? The image remembers me of my first cheap and small plastic Japanese microscope which I bought in 1962.
Looking at your micrograph I think you have done something wrong. Did you make the photo through the eyepiece? Or, more likely, is the illumination ok?
Ferry
I have been working with a LOMO for many many years and I could compare it with a Zeiss which I bought later. The optics of the LOMO are very nice (in contrary to the mechanical parts!), and I can see you have even a more sophisticated one. So I asked myself: is this all you can make of the Gyrosigma? The image remembers me of my first cheap and small plastic Japanese microscope which I bought in 1962.
Looking at your micrograph I think you have done something wrong. Did you make the photo through the eyepiece? Or, more likely, is the illumination ok?
Ferry
well, this photo was made when i was getting used to the microscope and when i was beginning to use the camera to make photos. i did make the photo through the eyepiece, with no zoom added and in AUTO mode. Also, i don't know if it is an issue but the sample was viewed through a 35mm petri glass. i can add that the photo doesn't reflect the sharpness i've seen through the ocular
-
Franz Neidl
- Posts: 747
- Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:59 am
- Location: Italy
Hi
Yes look over your setup - there will be large improvment
if its right and if the objectives are matched for the inverted microscope
( the petri need special objectives )
Look at the net amnd see how the Gyrosigma shall look if everything is correct
Good luck
Pär Lundqvist
Sweden
Yes look over your setup - there will be large improvment
if its right and if the objectives are matched for the inverted microscope
( the petri need special objectives )
Look at the net amnd see how the Gyrosigma shall look if everything is correct
Good luck
Pär Lundqvist
Sweden
****** Seeing is Believing ******
the microscope manual indicated that the microscope LOMO objectives are made so they can see through a petri dish glass (Four long-working-distance objectives corrected for vessel bottom thickness of up to 2.5mm according to the LOMO web page), but also that objectives 10X and 20X are more sensitive to depth; the microscope objectives are composed of TQA series plan Achromats.
i put the sample in the 35 mm petri glass cover top (the substage only fits the top part of the petri dish), but i don't know the thickness of the top part. also in the lab that's the only material available for work...
i put the sample in the 35 mm petri glass cover top (the substage only fits the top part of the petri dish), but i don't know the thickness of the top part. also in the lab that's the only material available for work...