infinity corrected microscope objective parts list

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

Moderators: ChrisR, Chris S., Pau, rjlittlefield

Macro Photog
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 11:45 am

infinity corrected microscope objective parts list

Post by Macro Photog »

I just jumped in feet first with my first infinity corrected microscope objective, I want to move beyond (way beyond) my MM 10x which is great but only made me want to go farther. The new objective is a Mitutoyo M Plan 50 SL APO. I've been reading the threads and frankly I'm overwhelmed. Conceptually I think I get what I need:

objective
RMS thread? to F mount (Nikon) adapter

extension tube(s) (200mm) based on the number on the objective barrel and Rik's "how to" thread (if I am interpreting everything correctly)

tube lens or Raynox DCR-150

My list seems way over simplified based on the parts lists I see in various threads. I would like help in creating a parts list that will allow me to best use my new objective.

Thanks
Last edited by Macro Photog on Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Macro Photog
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 11:45 am

Post by Macro Photog »

This needs to be moved to the equipment thread. Sorry for the inconvenience...

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 20987
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

I'll move the thread after you've had a chance to see this reply.

Regarding your equipment needs, take a look at the recent post http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 555#189555 and the discussion earlier in that thread.

Addressing a couple of specific points...

Your Mitutoyo M Plan objective has 26mm x 36tpi threads, not RMS. You can purchase an adapter from that thread to several other threads, typically M42 x 1 mm pitch or 52mm x 0.75 mm pitch. That adapter then mates with other adapters and/or tubes that will eventually get you back to the Nikon bayonet mount that you need to fit your camera.

The amount of extension that you need is whatever makes your tube lens focus at infinity, when the objective is not mounted. It won't be exactly 200 mm, even if you're using a tube lens with focal length 200 mm.

--Rik

Macro Photog
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 11:45 am

Post by Macro Photog »

Hi Rik, Got it. You can move it now.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 20987
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Done...
--Rik

Macro Photog
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 11:45 am

Post by Macro Photog »

Ok, I've read through most of the threads (incredibly helpful) and using Saul's setup (http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 145#187145) I need, starting at the camera end:

1 F-42 adapter
1 42 to 43 adaptor
1 Raynox
1 49-42 adapter
1 Extension ring (size TBD)
1 Focuser ????
1 M42-M26 adapter

If I am reading the "How to attach..." article correctly I need 200mm between the objective and sensor (see attached image).

Anything else?

Thanks.

Image

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 5142
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

If I am reading the "How to attach..." article correctly I need 200mm between the objective and sensor
No, what you need is:
rjlittlefield wrote:The amount of extension that you need is whatever makes your tube lens focus at infinity, when the objective is not mounted. It won't be exactly 200 mm, even if you're using a tube lens with focal length 200 mm.
The distance between objective and tube lens can be varied (this is one of the actual reasons for infinite design), although some range of distances can work better than others in function of the lens design you're using as tube lens
Pau

Macro Photog
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 11:45 am

Post by Macro Photog »

Pau,

Thanks for the reply. To ensure I understand, below is a restatement of what I think you and Rik are saying.

1. With a tube lens (in this case a Raynox) my tube can be any length and work.

2. There are some distances between the tube lens and objective that are more optimal than others.

Am I understanding this correctly?

If #2 is correct, how do I solve for the optimal tube lens - objective distance for this specific lens other than experimentation?

Thanks

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 5142
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

Well, I'm not sure to understand you well,

1. With a tube lens (in this case a Raynox) my tube can be any length and work

No, you must find the right distance for the tube lens alone to focus it to infinite, test it focusing on a distant objet (like with a normal camera taking lens focused to infinite) But you can also find that distance for each Raynox at pages showing other members setups using them.
That distance is not critical with low power objectives but is with high magnification ones

2. There are some distances between the tube lens and objective that are more optimal than others.

Yes, but again you can profit of the experience of other members setups
Pau

Macro Photog
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 11:45 am

Post by Macro Photog »

Pau,

Thanks

ChrisR
Site Admin
Posts: 8557
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:58 am
Location: Near London, UK

Post by ChrisR »

Oh look there's an elephant.
Has nobody else spotted it?


SL200, not SL50 ?

http://www.edmundoptics.eu/microscopy/i ... ves/56072/
Chris R

Macro Photog
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 11:45 am

Post by Macro Photog »

Fantastic find! Its even an SL. I would love to test drive one of these. Unfortunately I have not been "discovered" yet so my funds are lacking, however, I expect a full report back when you have had a chance to run yours through the paces :). As usual I would expect you go go for the volume discount of 500 euros per (minimum six). Its always good to have a few spares. BTW...when you put the other five on ebay let me know. How does $2,000 sound for an opening bid?

Best

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 20987
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

ChrisR wrote:SL200, not SL50 ?
That one is new to me.

Can't say that I'm very attracted to it, though. NA 0.62 for €10951.50 in the 200X, versus NA 0.55 for €2621.50 in the 50X, both at 13 mm WD. That's a lot of money for only a little more resolution. True it's 4X higher magnification, but that's a lot cheaper to get with a couple of good 2X teleconverters mounted on the camera.

--Rik

Charles Krebs
Posts: 5859
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
Contact:

Post by Charles Krebs »

Macro Photog,

In you initial post you describe your objective as "a Mitutoyo M Plan 50 SL APO", but the image in a subsequent post shows a 200/0.62 objective.

Is the image the objective you have and intend to use, or do you actually have a 50X?

Macro Photog
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 11:45 am

Post by Macro Photog »

Charles,

Good catch! The lens I purchased had been withdrawn from the ebay listings. I was in a hurry and as a short cut I copied the heading from what I thought was another 50X ad. I haven't had time to verify it but I do think the headline I copied went with this picture. Anyway, I went back and found the listing for mine:

Mitutoyo M Plan Apo SL 50x ULWD Objective, it is on its way to me. I can't wait to how it influences my work.

Also mine is in much better shape than the one I posted

EDIT: I reread your message after Charles and ChrisR caught the mistake first!
Last edited by Macro Photog on Sat Apr 23, 2016 5:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic