Since my Zeiss Stemi 2000C suffers from diffraction and poor quality images I would like to go for something better. For what I have read on this forum (and the internet) the best options are either an infinite CF microscope objective with a camera lens or a finite objective attached to the camera with no additional optics.
After going through the various topics, some things are not entirely clear to me:
I read that there is no absolute winner in terms of image quality (finite or infinite), but I also read:
Are there people that can confirm this? Is this such a big difference and how much is difference in reality if the setup is really stable?The infinite set-up is much harder to hold steady than a finite objective on a bellows, expecially with long camera lenses.
A quick search on Ebay did not give me a lot of finite objectives, but the infinite ones seem to be readily available. I have the chance to buy a set of two (unused) objectives for USD 592 (EUR 450)
NIKON CF PLAN 20x/0.46 A
NIKON CF PLAN 10x/0.30 A
What do you think of the quality and the price of these two objectives? How well suited are they and would you recommend buying them or is it maybe better to go for the finite solution or a different infinite objective?
Last but not least: to what extend is image quality dependent on the quality and the length of the camera lens? For example, a high quality Canon 200mm f2.8 is $800, a lot of money for a lens only to be used for attaching the microscope objective. Is there a cheaper solution that will give the same image quality? And what happens if you use the Canon 100mm makro in combination with these Nikon objectives? Do you get the same image quality, but only half the magnification?
I am asking all these questions because I am about to completely change my camera gear from Minolta/Sony to Canon. This means spending a lot of money, and I'd like to do it properly the first time.