Search the web
Sign In
New User? Sign Up
Microscope · Microscopy as a hobby or profession.
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Want your group to be featured on the Yahoo! Groups website? Add a group photo to Flickr.

Best of Y! Groups

   Check them out and nominate your group.
Having problems with message search? Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.

Messages

  Messages Help
Advanced
Infinity corrected or finite microscope a better choice for taking   Message List  
Reply | Forward Message #27723 of 53095 |
Re: Infinity corrected or finite microscope a better choice for taking photos?

David,

The statement made was correct, the upper telescope has an objective
with a focal length corresponding to that of the optical tube length
of a fixed tube length microscope to the second image plane. As with
any telescope, it can be focused to infinity or to any intermediate
distance. However, in forming the image, the overall correction for
spherical aberration will only be correct for the upper focal length
for which the objective is computed. An 'infinite tube length
objective' is a normal objective with correction elements to render
the image plane at infinity, rather than at a fixed distance from the
back focal plane. As with a normal objective, I can use it with
different focal lengths in the upper telescope, which will give me
different magnifications. But the primary aberations will only be
corrected with a telescope of the correct focal length. So the effect
of different telescope focal lengths is the same as that of a
microscope with a draw tube, the correction for spherical aberation
will be degraded either side of the optimum.

Cheers,

Merv

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "David Sykes" <killspammers@b...>
wrote:
>
> Merv wrote:
>
> >the focal length being that necessary to provide the magnification
> marked on it with a fixed tube length.
>
> Merv, that is not strictly correct correct.
> The focal length for any given magnification is determined by the
> focal-length of the tube-lens.
>
> A x100 infinity-objective with a focal-length of 1.8mm is used with
> a tubelens of 180mm focal-length.
>
> >If I interpose a second telescope, set for the correct tube length
>
> There is no such thing as adjusting a telescope for a particular
> 'tube-length'.
>
> If the objective is focused to infinity, any optical-system also
> focused to infinity will image it.
>
> While playing-around adding C-mounts to the CVS camcorders, I had to
> make a collimator that projected a test-target to infinity.
> I adjusted it by attaching an infinity-focused webcam and altering
the
> lens-target separation until sharp-focus was achieved.
>
> I then pointed my film SLR at it and the microprism and split-image
> confirmed the image was at infinity.
>
>
> > the Olympus final tube length is 180mm
>
> That is the focal-length of the tube-lens, whose position is such as
> to focus the image at the correct point in the eyepiece tube.
>
>
> David Sykes
>







Tue Nov 29, 2005 9:48 pm

mervhob
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email

Forward
Message #27723 of 53095 |
Expand Messages Author Sort by Date

I'm tossing around the idea using a Canon EOS to take photos but I don't have a clue whether I would be better off trying to find an older trinocular...
osculate35
Offline Send Email
Nov 5, 2005
12:27 pm

HI R, The older Zeiss and Leitz scopes, around 1955 and later, give great photo results and have objectives corrected for 160mm and 170mm tubes. A trinocular...
mlieber507@...
mlieber507
Offline Send Email
Nov 5, 2005
1:26 pm

What is a Canon EOS? Is it a film camera or is it a digital SLR camera? If it is a film camera, you should try to get a used scope with the appropriate setup...
gregor_o
Offline Send Email
Nov 6, 2005
12:38 am

Hi, Both infinity corrected and finite tube lenght (160mm. 170mm, 210mm) all work well with components designed for the system. From the point of view of using...
Aaron
nghy_1
Offline Send Email
Nov 6, 2005
4:53 am

Aaron is correct, there is no practical advantage as far as taking photographs is concerned with infinite tube length optics. The upper part of the optical...
mervhob
Offline Send Email
Nov 6, 2005
1:50 pm

Whoops, that should be R. M. Allen, 'Photomicrography', D. Van Nostrand and Co. Inc. New York, Toronto and London, 2nd edition 1958. The plates in the back are...
mervhob
Offline Send Email
Nov 6, 2005
7:13 pm

... infinite tube length objectives cannot be used on different icroscopes.<< I know I'm being dense, but what does upper tubelength have to do with the...
Steve Neeley
psneeley2003
Offline Send Email
Nov 27, 2005
5:36 pm

Steve, Aaron, and Merv, I am generally a purist and would rarely, if at all, recommend making a "Cobb Salad" out of an objective set. However, in business, you...
Gregg Kleinberg
microscopeman1
Offline Send Email
Nov 27, 2005
6:30 pm

Gregg, Merv gave a masterful explanation . . . best I've seen . . . and the first time I thought I really understood. But then I realized that he had 'proven'...
Steve Neeley
psneeley2003
Offline Send Email
Nov 27, 2005
10:26 pm

... There is no doubt about that, but what about correction of aberrations ? If all aberrations are corrected in the objective, that is fine, otherwise it is...
David Sykes
microfunguy
Offline Send Email
Nov 27, 2005
10:43 pm

David Sykes wrote: a theoretical statement, just ignore. I have not read forum posts for a while and this has obviously been discussed. I happen to have an...
David Sykes
microfunguy
Offline Send Email
Nov 27, 2005
11:00 pm

Steve, Gregg, It is not often I am called 'masterful', except by the cat! With infinite tube length objectives you can consider them as a very short telescope...
mervhob
Offline Send Email
Nov 29, 2005
12:55 pm

... marked on it with a fixed tube length. Merv, that is not strictly correct correct. The focal length for any given magnification is determined by the ...
David Sykes
microfunguy
Offline Send Email
Nov 29, 2005
5:43 pm

... That is the focal-length of the tube-lens, whose position is such as to focus the image at the correct point in the eyepiece tube.<<< Just to restate my...
Steve Neeley
psneeley2003
Offline Send Email
Nov 29, 2005
6:47 pm

... only that my reply was not directed at your question :-) David Sykes...
David Sykes
microfunguy
Offline Send Email
Nov 29, 2005
7:50 pm

True, but thank you anyway....
Steve Neeley
psneeley2003
Offline Send Email
Nov 29, 2005
7:58 pm

David, The statement made was correct, the upper telescope has an objective with a focal length corresponding to that of the optical tube length of a fixed...
mervhob
Offline Send Email
Nov 29, 2005
9:48 pm

Hi Merv, you lost me as well. I do understand that when using the objective different from the calculated projection distance, sferical abberation is...
rvanwezel
Offline Send Email
Nov 30, 2005
12:57 pm

Hi Rene, As I said earlier, infinite tube length is a bit of a misnomer, transferred tube length (TTL) would have been a better description. The upper...
mervhob
Offline Send Email
Nov 30, 2005
10:28 pm

... I can appreciate that some infinity microscope systems could be designed that way, and indeed are. However, I do not believe it always applies. The Nikon...
David Sykes
microfunguy
Offline Send Email
Nov 30, 2005
2:47 pm

Steve, Gregg, It is not often I am called 'masterful', except by the cat! With infinite tube length objectives you can consider them as a very short telescope...
mervhob
Offline Send Email
Nov 29, 2005
1:00 pm

Hi Gregg, I am an experimentalist at heart. If it reallly works, fine. The disconnect is bewteen the generalizations given and the specifics of the...
Aaron
nghy_1
Offline Send Email
Nov 28, 2005
1:49 am

Hello Steve, As David S. suggests, ideally the field lens should match the objective for proper operation. I am not sure what, if any, corrections are made...
Gregg Kleinberg
microscopeman1
Offline Send Email
Nov 28, 2005
1:05 am
Advanced

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines - Help