Questions regarding Nikon universal DIC condenser.

[WaterGoblin]

hey, I found a microscope like this on a local spanish second hand marketplace but for a cheaper price: https://www.ebay.com/itm/324285391098 (same microscope model, same condenser and top DIC prism part but different objectives)
I can't find much footage online recorded with these DIC components, if anyone happens to have them and has some videos, please send them to me.
I am also unsure if I can attach my Olympus SPLan Apo objectives on it.
I found Olympus DIC parts but for way higher prices, so if possible I'd rather go with nikon, are there any major downsides?

[PeteM]

The microscope you posted is a Nikon Optiphot 2 with DIC components from the original Nikon Optiphot. It will work fine as shown, but you don't want to mix up the upper prism from one version with the condenser from another since the alignments are off by 45 degrees.

Optically and mechanically, the Nikon Optiphot and Olympus BHS are both excellent and very similar. There are only the slightest reasons to prefer one or the other.

- The Nikon has "Chrome Free" objectives, which don't require eyepiece corrections and can sometimes make hooking a camera easier. Full frame works fine for the Olympus since 2.5x photo relay lenses with the proper chromatic corrections are readily available. If you're using something like an APS-C sensor, you may prefer to go direct with the Nikon objectives. This is a slight plus for Nikon in my opinion.

- Nikon only offers DIC prisms to cover 20x, 40x, and 60x/100x with the top slider configuration. They made a rare finite version with individual prisms for each objective in the nosepiece, but you are unlikely to find one complete. The Olympus Vanox originally had only 10x, 40x, and 100x in the top slider configuration, but later added 20x for the BHT and BHS models. Having DIC at 10x is a slight plus for Olympus unless you find the rarer Nikon versions with individual turret prisms. FWIW, I have had all of these versions and find 20x the most useful magnification. A more macro-oriented photographer might want DIC at or below 10x - and here Leica DM infinity series and Zeiss Standard finite DIC are scopes that could be equipped to do DIC at 5x (50x) and 6.3x (63x), respectively.

- The original Optiphot has a 50-watt lamp and the Optiphot 2 has a 100-watt lamp. Olympus BHS models have a 100-watt lamp, and the other BH2 models 20 watts. For DIC at the highest magnification and especially while taking movies, you'll want the 100-watt illuminator, though 50 watts is generally good. After-market LED or DIY replacements are another option, including the version made by Saul that incorporates flash capabilities. A draw, IMO.

- The Nikon models often have a broken fine focus gear. A poster here provides metal gear replacements, so it's not a big deal. The plastic wrist pads on the Optiphot 2 may also need the paint stripped and replaced. It had a soft touch finish that often turns gummy over the years. I've seen slightly more broken power supplies out of Olympus, but again, repairs are possible. The slightest advantage to Olympus in terms of a bit of work needed to bring one of these scopes to like-new functionality.

- Nikon trinocular heads tend to be cheaper and readily available in more configurations (2-way "F" trinocular with no glass in between, 3-way trinocular, ergo, ergo trinocular, quad, super wide etc.). The slightest advantage to Nikon if you don't find a scope with the head you want.

- Nikon "CFN" and Plan Apo objectives work well for their DIC. The Olympus equivalents are their SPlan and SPlanApo. Both series are excellent, with wide plan fields of view, and essentially equivalent in optical quality in properly configured systems.

- I've played around a bit with interchanging objectives between the platforms. My recollection is that while some results were OK, the prisms are likely located at different backplanes, and you really ought to stay within the same family. You can likely sell what you have and come close to breaking even in getting the equivalent Nikon or Olympus objectives.

- The CFN and SPlan objectives have improved glass, corrections, and numerical apertures over ordinary plan achromats. With fewer lens elements you may find they provide slightly higher contrast than the better-correction plan apos from each maker. DIC is excellent with the CFN and SPlan objectives, so you may only want to spend the extra for a plan apo in something like a 60x 1.4na objective. It depends somewhat on your subject.

The bottom line is that the only drawback to Nikon is that it doesn't have usually have DIC at 10x. You can approximate it by dropping the condenser a bit and can also add a nifty DIC-oblique effect by rotating a condenser prism a bit. It also has a few minor advantages compared to Olympus, as noted above. If you want DIC below 10x - neither platform (nor their infinity Eclipse or BX equivalents) would be the right choice.

[WaterGoblin]

Hi, I bought the DIC Nikon Optiphot, I'd like to upgrade the 20X.
I see 2 different "Plan Apos":

https://www.ebay.es/itm/305180062987

https://www.ebay.es/itm/125415394870

Which one of them would work with DIC?

[Pau]

Not sure (and I'm not knowledgeable on that Nikon stuff) but I'm almost sure that the NA 0.65 is a CF and the NA 0.75 is a CFN. If so, likely each one will work better when paired with condenser and DIC prisms of the same time/series. Is yours an Optiphot or an Optiphot 2?

[WaterGoblin]

Optiphot

[Pau]

If the DIC components are also for the Optiphot the 0.65 one seems more adequate.
That said, if the 0.75 was adequate it will be nicer...
Is there a Nikon expert to answer it?

[viktor j nilsson]

The later Optiphot 2 DIC system was optimized for the CFN plan achromat objectives. So even with the later system, you would be mixing and matching if you were to use better corrected objectives like those planapos. That said, it seems as if most of the CFN PlanApos works decently well with the Optiphot 2 system.

Although I haven't seen this in any official documents, I think it's safe to assume that the earlier Optiphot 1 system was also optimized for use with plan achromats.

Here's an Optiphot 1 with DIC fitted with CF plan objectives marked "DIC":
https://expresslabwerks.com/products/ni ... -condenser
I think those are the original objectives matched to that system.

Also, to complicate things, there's at least three or four different versions of DIC for the Optiphot. But I don't think that matters here.

To sum it up. Since you will be taking a chance anyway with an objective which your system was not designed for, I would go with the later and excellent CFN PlanApo.

[WaterGoblin]

Right now my Optiphot has a set of CFN Plan objectives marked with "DIC"

(https://buyee.jp/item/yahoo/auction/k1093660421)

[PeteM]

Hi, I bought the DIC Nikon Optiphot, I'd like to upgrade the 20X.
I see 2 different "Plan Apos":

https://www.ebay.es/itm/305180062987

https://www.ebay.es/itm/125415394870

Which one of them would work with DIC?

I use the higher numerical aperture 20x (with the large knurls) on an Optiphot 2 or Microphot-FXA and find it provides reasonably even DIC with either the fixed prism DIC condenser or the Universal System condenser. $200 is a fair price for it, if in good condition.

As Victor says, the older version with a lower numerical aperture would likely prove satisfactory. In that listing, however, it is also more expensive as well as having an older design and lower resolution.

The main criterion for these finite objectives to be marked "DIC" is that the glass has been checked to be strain-free. In my experience, almost all the CFN objectives are relatively strain-free without being so marked.

Comparing the CFN objectives with Plan Apos, the latter have many additional lens elements to get somewhat better corrections. Each additional lens element and coating provides an opportunity for a fractional loss of contrast.

Depending upon what you are viewing with DIC, there are cases where you might even prefer the higher contrast of the CFN Plan Achros (with the equivalent of fluorite glass) to lower contrast but better corrected Plan Apos. This might be the case when the DIC effect provides a sharp pseudo-3D effect at boundaries that pretty much obscures any remaining color fringing.