ZEISS photo eyepiece Projektiv

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6053
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

Ichthyophthirius wrote: It would be easy to use a cheap NFK 2.5x (< $100) with a matching camera lens (as you would with a Zeiss Mipro), but it doesn't work well, you can't even get it parfocal. Otherwise everyone would do it.
I've tested it with my only one NFK 3.3X and the results were clearly inferior than with a visual eyepiece.
A longer distance projective like the ones in discussion could be work better for afocal than the camera projectives because they will not be working so differently than a visual eyepiece wich is designed to form its image at infinite.
Pau

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6053
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

Ichthyophthirius wrote:
enricosavazzi wrote:This worked well, and I never revisited the other eyepieces.
Hi Enrico,

Maybe you should have another look. The performance, at least of the smaller Mipro 63 and 80 together with a relay optic, is outstanding: http://www.mikroskopie-ph.de/Vergleich-MC63-Elmar.jpg
Interesting test, although a bit apples to oranges, magnification is so different..

I'm mostly surprised by the amount of chromatic aberration he's getting with a Planapo with matched KPL eyepiece and realy lens, I also use a Zeiss 63mm camera adapter (must be similar to the MC63) and my experience is different.
Last edited by Pau on Sat Feb 27, 2016 12:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Pau

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

Post by Ichthyophthirius »

Pau wrote:I also use a Zeiss 63mm camera adapter (must be similar to the MC63) and my experience is different.
Hi Pau,

Is this relay objective "47 60 29"? Here's another test of this combination http://www.mikroskopie-forum.de/index.p ... #msg175815

There seem to be minimal colour finges, on the edges. Do you have an image from your microscope to compare it to?
Pau wrote:Interesting test, although a bit apples to oranges, magnification is so different..
Well, the Mipro/Elmar combination gives a field twice the diagonale with no colour finges ... how great is that!

Cactusdave
Posts: 1631
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:40 pm
Location: Bromley, Kent, UK

Post by Cactusdave »

I have been following this thread with great interest. The subject of the best way to connect a camera to a microscope is always absorbing and frequently controversial with different methods and pieces of kit having their own advocates. On my Zeiss Standards I have tried eyepiece projection using the Pentax style two part adapter, which uses a visual eyepiece pulled somewhat out of its design parameters by being raised in the trinocular tube to ensure parfocality, projecting directly on to the camera sensor; the Zeiss afocal photoadapter 47 60 29 which use a f = 63mm lens in conjunction with a (Kpl) visual eyepiece; and afocal coupling with a visual eyepiece and a 40-50mm fixed focal length prime lens mounted on the camera. They all work and they all work very well. There are undoubtedly circumstances, high magnification very well corrected planapochromats for example which will expose their limitations. I have had the best results in this situation with afocal coupling with a high quality visual eyepiece in good condition (no delamination) that matches well the compensation needed by the objective. I have not used the Zeiss adapter 47 60 29 extensively, but my impression is that it was not as good. However the 63mm lens in this adapter is awkward to clean and I may not be getting the best from mine.

I am always open to new ideas, and though I was aware of the Zeiss Mipro eyepieces I had dismissed them for practical camera coupling because of their extreme length and different original purpose. Icthy seems to be making a quite convincing case that they will actually work well in an afocal setup. I would be interested to know how this works in practice. I'd really like to see a picture of your setup Icthy with one of the Mipros in place on the microscope, and the camera and lens set up above it for afocal photography.
Leitz Ortholux 1, Zeiss standard, Nikon Diaphot inverted, Canon photographic gear

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6053
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

Ichthyophthirius wrote:Is this relay objective "47 60 29"? Here's another test of this combination http://www.mikroskopie-forum.de/index.p ... #msg175815
Yes, 47 60 29.
Thank you very much for the link! It also links to http://www.mikroskopie-forum.de/index.p ... #msg120059 very interesting

I have not at hand comparable tests and I don't have the expensive S-Kpl, I only have 10X Kpl and 8x Kpl and in fact have not done intensive tests with them as I mostly use Leitz objectives and eyepieces, but I have never seen this amount of CA with well matched good objectives and eyepieces, both Zeiss or Leitz. Time ago I tested the 63mm lens against a Olympus 50mm 1.8 afocally and I'd find the results about the same, magnifcation aside.

Used alone as camera taking lens 47 60 29 is very poor while the Oly is very good but they are not designed to do the same. In a different but to some extent comparable situation Rik, IIRC, posted a test of different tube lenses for infinite objectives and tested the winner, a Raynox close-up doublet as taking lens: unsurprisingly it was poor for that job, so likely only real life tests will end to be significative

After this most interesting discussion I've added redoing the tests in a careful way to my long to do list, but likely it not in the short term.
Pau

75RR
Posts: 766
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 12:38 pm
Location: Estepona

Post by 75RR »

I have reopened this thread as I have come across two differing Microprojection 63mm eyepieces.
Have resized then to approximately the same diameter
Apart from the variation in the description there is the question of sleeve length and therefore how far they would sit in the trinocular phototube.

Image

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Carl-Zeiss-proj ... Sw~OdVb~Fy
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Microscope-Eyep ... SwzgRWurlu

The first one seems to be more common.

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

Post by Ichthyophthirius »

Hi,

Yes, they should both work equally well.

The Mipro is the older projective, intended for a microprojector and cinematography but also found to be highly suitable for photography.

The Projektiv is the redesigned photoeyepiece that replaced the Mipro, with a much shorter shoulder to make it easier to adapt to a camera system. The sleeve is very long because the re-design placed the field lens very far away from the shoulder.

Both designs have a field number of 20. Personally, I have only ever seen used the Mipro and all the tests I've seen are of the Mipro as well, but since the Projektiv was the intended replacement, I doubt that it performs any less well.

Regards, Ichty
Last edited by Ichthyophthirius on Sun Apr 17, 2016 5:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

75RR
Posts: 766
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 12:38 pm
Location: Estepona

Post by 75RR »

Many thanks Ichthy

bromodomain
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:50 am

Re:

Post by bromodomain »

Ichthyophthirius wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2016 6:18 am
The other Mipros, 63 mm and 80 mm, are outstanding photo eyepieces for APS-C when used with a suitable relay optic.
What would be a suitable piece of relay optics for the 80 mm Mipro that is to be used with an APS-C sensor (Canon 50D)?

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic