Augusto,

I don't know the particulars of Zeiss lamp houses. Do you have manuals with
pictures? Are all the lenses and mirrors present? Do you have the proper power
supply and proper lamp for that lamphouse? Also, if you can reverse the lamp
without breaking it, try that. It would be good to wear goggles for eye
protection when working with the lamp, and perhaps gloves and an apron.

Fred

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "usher_1958" <sciarra_augusto@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Fred, this is a used lamphouse, i have insert it as by Zeiss instruction,
the only doubt is that I put the lamp in a proper way, for example, the fuse tip
should be placed to the side or after the opening of the lamp socket ?
> I have inserted it laterally, although the last type of lamphouse for AXIOPHOT
is not provided of the lead outlet and the wire loop to align it to the lamp.
> So it was performed by placing the lamp in parallel to the longitudinal size
of the radiator.
> It 'right this way of proceeding?
>
> Thanks at all for replyes.
>
> Augusto.
>
>
> --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "fred.hebard" <Fred@> wrote:
> >
> > Rene,
> >
> > It sounds like there is some sort of problem in the lamphouse, such as the
bulb not inserted properly or a missing collector, etc. Is this a new Zeiss
lamphouse or a used one?
> >
> > Fred
> >
> > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "usher_1958" <sciarra_augusto@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Kevin, Renč and Fred, I try to better answer your questions as
possible.
> > > There is no UV filter in place with the HBO 50W.
> > > There is no BG39 filter between lamphouse and filter block.
> > > The block filter used contains two set of dualband filter.
> > > 1. Green-Red emission (EXC. centered to 480 e 560nm,
> > > EMI. 528 e 630nm)
> > > 2. Blue-Reed emission (EXC. centered to 389 e 530nm,
> > > EMI. 460 e 570nm)
> > >
> > > Fluorochromes used are following : Achridin Orange, Rhodamine, Eosin
> > >
> > > Soon i will buy DAPI to excite 389nm.
> > > For alignment of the lamp I followed the ZEISS structions manuals but I
can not focus the light source because it does not seem to see any image at a
distance of 2-3 meter coming by the illuminator.
> > > Then aligns the cone of light by removing a objective from the nosepiece
as instructed, but even here I can not see the light source image.
> > > Why this happens?
> > > Could this be the reason for the insufficient yield of the lamp?
> > >
> > > Many thanks for your replies.
> > >
> > > Best regards.
> > >
> > > Augusto.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "fred.hebard" <Fred@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Augusto,
> > > >
> > > > Do you have a BG38 filter between the lamphouse and filter block? That
will cut out deep red from being transmitted, increasing contrast considerably.
It also would be effective for the halogen lamp.
> > > >
> > > > I assume you are using the correct lamphouse, collector, etc for the HBO
source and that you have aligned the lamp? You should have moved the straight
lamp image just below the center of the field of view and the mirror image just
above; also focused the image properly.
> > > >
> > > > And I assume you are using a filter block, or are they individual
filters and a separate dicroic mirror?
> > > >
> > > > Fred
> > > >
> > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "rvanwezel" <r.van.wezel@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Augusto, sorry to bump in, what's the UV-filter you have in place
with the HBO-50W?? The HBO lamp gives of course a line spectrum, and you might
miss the intense lines with the wrong filter.
> > > > >
> > > > > Just checking,
> > > > > René
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "usher_1958" <sciarra_augusto@>
wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hallo David, many thans for your reply, the Micscape article on LED
is very interested, but, I too, I began my experience with fluorescence building
specifically for the Zeiss lamphouse a power LED source.
> > > > > > The result was quite satisfactory but less than that obtained with
the halogen 100w, at least in the wavelength used by me.
> > > > > > I was wondering if with a 100W HBO could have better results and if
it would be possible to use the same power source and lamphouse with a HBO 100W
lamp.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for any replies.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Augusto.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "pennine56" <pennine56@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "usher_1958" <sciarra_augusto@>
wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hallo, this is the first time that I write on this mail list,
but I read your messages very often.
> > > > > > > > I have the hobby of microscopy for several years and having
experienced a number of techniques, in this moment I'm looking for fluorescence.
> > > > > > > > I started using as light source a 5W blue or green LED, FITC and
TRITC filters, the results were quite satisfactory, but the problem was that to
change the filter set I had to change the lamphouse.
> > > > > > > > I had two lampouse, one with Blue LED exc. to about 460 nm, the
other with green LED exc. to about 550nm.
> > > > > > > > I tried to solve the problem using a 100W halogen lamp, and I
must say that the results were truly amazing, the intensity compared to the LEDs
was increased significantly and especially I was not forced to change teh
lamphouse.
> > > > > > > > The problem however was that the halogen 100w was not very well
in the violet and UV band. I am so convinced to use, with many sacrifices by
buying on EBAY, an HBO 50W illuminator and lamphouse.
> > > > > > > > I installed everything following the directions and I had a
surprise, the light intensity was below the 100W halogen,
> > > > > > > > Do you have any opinion on that? Some of you have had my own
experience? How can a powerful HBO 50W, recommended as light source for
fluorescence microscopy on my AXIOPHOT, is less than the 100W halogen.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thank you all for any replies and sorry for the length of the
message.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Augusto.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello Augusto
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Have you considered an LED cassette design to avoid the lamp
changeouts. There's an article in this month's Micscape http://www.micscape.org
describing such a homemade design for a Leitz Ploemopak by Laurent Delvoye for
fluorescence work. Something similar may suit the Zeiss head.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Another useful graph for lamp output v. wavelength is in the Leitz
manual below. They plot 75, 100 and 200W mercury cf a 100W halogen so could
roughly judge where a 50W mercury would sit.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.science-info.net/docs/leitz/1Fluor_Micro.pdf
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This shows a tenfold higher intensity at 400nm for a 100W mercury
cf a 100W tungsten which agrees approx with Fig 5 of Kevin's link as they've
mutiplied the tungsten line by 10x. So surprised in the UV area away from the
spikes that you're not seeing a benefit of the mercury arc.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As a fellow venturer in this area (for visible light
autofluorescence of plant and animal material ie broadband excitation not
exploiting spikes in lamp output), I get about 4 stops improvement in exposure
on a DSLR camera between a 100W epi halogen and 100W epi mercury arc. But given
modern DSLRs have such good high ISO, upping the ISO a few stops and doubling
exposure avoids the need for the mercury lamp for photo work.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > High NA objectives can also have a big effect as the textbooks
note that brightness is to fourth power of their NA for epi work. So using say a
25/0.65 objective if available rather than a 25/0.4 gives 7x brighter image on
paper.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > with regards
> > > > > > > David
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>