PREVIEW YG Archive - 2006 - January-June +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28160 From: W M Date: Sun Jan 1, 2006 3:14 am Subject: Re: [Microscope] Problem with Leica Wild M3Z On many stereomicroscopes with achromatic objectives the center appears to be in focus and have slighter greater magnification than at the edges. This is the effect that "plano" objectives solve. They have the ray tracings of the lens focusing in the same plane so the image appears flat. Sometimes increasing the magnification reduces the effect or using a iris diaphragm - neither is a "solution" to the problem. Some manufacturers do not offer alternate lenses for their microscopes and provide a plano-objective with the microscope - but usually at a slightly elevated cost because of the extra glass and engineering that goes into the lens. The total microscope may be less than the Leica/Wild but for other reasons. Hope this helps. Wayne +------------ 28161 From: Microscope@yahoogroups.com Date: Sun Jan 1, 2006 3:57 am Subject: File - services.txt Reminder of the microscope group services. For Sale - Wanted - For Trade - Etc. +------------ 28162 From: Massimo Date: Sun Jan 1, 2006 6:15 am Subject: Re: [Microscope] Happy New Year All Thank you, and the same to you and all of the ML, Massimo "Aaron" ha scritto: > My best wishes to you all!! +--------- 28163 From: "ukgoldsmith" Date: Sun Jan 1, 2006 9:24 am Subject: Re: Zenith MBS-10 Ray and Gordon Thank you both for making things clearer for me. My microscope will be used mainly for watch work where magnifications in the region of 40 times or less are required. The following link has an image of a small watch wheel under magnification using this equiment which may help demostrate its possibilities. Click on the MBS-10 link: http://au.geocities.com/dushang2000/ Regards Alan +-------- 28164 From: "georgesbasement" Date: Sun Jan 1, 2006 12:26 pm Subject: Re: Calculating tube length for a B&L Research I metallograph Hello Microscopists ! This is an update on my progress. I was trying to calibrate my old B&L Research I bench metallograph with a Sony Mavica digital camera fitted out with an Optem 1.0X video adapter and a Kodak MDS Universal Adapter, which will reproduce nicely the entire visual filed seen either through the binocular eyepiece tube or at the visual port of the metallograph with the binocular viewer removed. I revisited the Research I's viewing port ... and then I remembered B&L's advice that one should just use low-magnification eyepieces in the binocular viewer because the visual magnification is 2.5 times the photographic magnification. Oh, oh. That would place the overall magnification of a 4 by 5 inch print way beyond the maximum usable magnification of 1000 times the numerical aperture. That is, 650X for a 40X objective, 850X for the B&L's 58X, 0.85 NA objective, etc. So I abandoned the idea of making a monocular tube for the viewing port. Instead, I've been concentrating on the photographic port. I find that I can make the Kodak MDS 100 digital camera parfocal with the binocular viewer by using a 5X plain eyepiece or a 5x hyperplane eyepiece, each with about two inches added to the usual tube length. The images come out at the 1000XNA limit, and the parfocality seems to be maintained with at least two objectives of widely differing magnification. It's just the extra-long tube length that bothers me. I'll probably go ahead and make a suitable adapter to hold the MDS 100 and the 5X eyepiece and try the setup out for a while. I did find that there is less pincushion distortion with the low-magnification eyepieces than with higher magnifications. Another plan would be to obtain a 0.38X video adapter so as to reduce the image size on the MDS 100's tiny CCD ... with no eyepiece at all, the magnification ends up way too large ! When I try a 1.0X video adapter, I also end up with excessive magnification. However, those video adapters are rather pricey ... George Langford http://www.georgesdbasement.com/ +------------ 28165 From: Gordon Couger Date: Sun Jan 1, 2006 1:59 pm Subject: Microscope Today I am late reporting that Back issues: of *MicroscopyToday: are on line from the *Microscope Society of America: . There is a six month embargo after the date it is published on the magazine before it becomes open access to the public. Starting with the November 2004 issue the magazine have high resolution images with text that can be searched prior to that they appear to be scanned copies of the magazine. This makes Microscope Today available to everyone that has an Internet connection no matter were they are. Microscope today is another publication that is always looking for articles to print. I have published one or two there. If you are looking for a way to get exposure to the professional world of microscopy in North America this is a very good vehicle to use to accomplish that end. Phil Oshel the editor of Microscope Today aggressively seeks material for the magazine and If you want to work in the field of microscopy Microscope Today is a good way to get name recognition. They make every effort to put Modern Microscopy in the hands of every microscopist in the USA, Canada and Mexico where it is free. Subscription cost is $50 to the rest of the world. It is trade magazine that is not a peer reviewed journal that is supported by advertising. As trade journals go the editors do a very good job making a good magazines that has good articles and timely information on many subjects not just the usual write ups of the advertisers products that you see in many trade magazine. It fills a niche often overlooked in science today for a place to publish procedures, methods and other things that don't fit in the classical peer reviewed journal but still are vitally imporant to accomplishing the task. For instance two pages are genially experts from the MSA email list http://microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/ it is open to all. It is does not cover very much on light microscopy but it can be a great deal of help for difficult questions. Microscope Today still has a good deal work in it on light Microscopes and has reticently been purchased by the *Microscope Society of America* it is published every other month, If anyone whats Phil Oshel's contact information you can reach him on the Microscope Today's web page or I will be glad to send it to by private email. I just don't want to post it here for the spam harvesting robots to gleen. Gordon +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29102 From: Don Williams Date: Wed Mar 1, 2006 1:44 am Subject: Re: [Microscope] OT: Threading glass tubing Before you start you'd better make sure it was glass and not silica. Threading silica is not too difficult, but plain glass -- Pyrex or Duran -- might be difficult. Water is a good idea. In my laboratory we used alcohol in an atomizer attached to the tool post. The diamond wheels we used came from Germany, but I can't remember the manufacturer. We got them through Siemen's in Berlin. All the people I knew there have retired. Don W +-------- 29103 From: Don Williams Date: Wed Mar 1, 2006 1:43 am Subject: Re: [Microscope] Re: Disaster "scitech200" wrote: > If anyone is "too busy" to backup valuable work -- well sooner or > later.... The absolutely vital stuff is all backed up. The worst aspect of this accident is that of about 100 programs installed only 6 work. The important ones Photoshop CS, Microsoft Office and so on can all be reinstalled but there are dozens that were downloaded and no longer available. Sygate Personal Firewall is one -- Symantec have gobbled the company. I can't remember where most of them came from, or even what all of them were. But when I want to do something that needs one I'll remember. But all the pictures and videos that I was working on have gone. How did it happen? Well I'll tell you: As usual (once a month or so) I started the Windows Update Program. It hung. Now I realize that this happened after logging on to the Microsoft Update Server had already taken place. I waited a long time -- cup of tea and biscuits -- and I also went outside to fill the bird feeders. In the end I had to boot. Windows XP Pro started but would not allow me to log on (there are no passwords and never have been) when I clicked the 'Don Williams' it logged me on and off in less than one second. I contacted Microsoft by phone in Helsinki -- they had no solution. One suggested editing the Documents and Settings. I did this and tried everything else including trying to start in safe mode. This worked once after which it simply wouldn't go there. I reinstalled XP Pro and it started the same way, refusing to let me in. I did this four times. Well -- one thing led to another, and another, and another. I think most of us have an idea of how bad things can get. I was unable to get past the logon screen. I installed Windows 2000 on another drive. I tried to salvage 'My Documents', where all the new Pentax Pictures were (RAW, Converted and the rest) including my daughter's wedding and 'My Videos' with all the latest Webcam stuff . I was working on the wedding but have a Picassa2 CD slide show anyway. My Documents was gone with the address book POP3 email and the rest. I used GetDataBack to salvage what was left -- very little -- and moved it to another drive. So there you have it. Not mechanical. Not electronic. Not a power failure. Not really human error either. This mess was caused by a glitch in Microsoft's Updating Servers that did something to Windows before hanging up my PC. There will always be a period between backups. For me this had to be long because of the expenses involved. This will change in a few days after I've installed the big drive and improved the redundancy factor. Now I have to start a juggling act -- I hate this -- moving files back and forth to empty the drive which will be replaced *without making any mistakes.* Every time a drive is taken out they change IDs and this can be very dangerous. So all my drives have descriptive names such as 'Old Drive E' (G:) and so on. Don W +--------------- 29104 From: "J. Forster" Date: Wed Mar 1, 2006 2:30 am Subject: Re: [Microscope] OT: Threading glass tubing "Don Williams" wrote: > Before you start you'd better make sure it was glass and not silica. > Threading silica is not too difficult, but plain glass -- Pyrex or Duran > -- might be difficult. I can pick any glass I want for the replacement. It's a room temperature application. I had planned on plain ordinary soda-lime tubing. > Water is a good idea. In my laboratory we used > alcohol in an atomizer attached to the tool post. The diamond wheels we > used came from Germany, but I can't remember the manufacturer. We got > them through Siemen's in Berlin. All the people I knew there have retired. I only need to do this once. Do you think I could use a small Dremel type grindstone (pre mounted wheel)? They will easily go into the TP grinder. Another possibility might be to use a brass or steel wheel and some paste grit. Do you think that would work? I suspect a diamond wheel would be quite expensive. Thanks, -John +-------- 29105 From: Don Williams Date: Wed Mar 1, 2006 3:16 am Subject: Re: [Microscope] OT: Threading glass tubing I'm guessing the angle of the thread is about 60 degrees? You could try a very fine Dremel wheel but you'd have to run it at 30 000 rpm or more and take terribly small cuts and use plenty of water. A copper wheel and diamond paste or an alumina slurry might work, but would make a dreadful mess. Diamond threading wheels are available and are not as expensive as you might think. Don W +------- 29106 From: "david barriball" Date: Wed Mar 1, 2006 3:32 am Subject: Re: [Microscope] OT: Threading glass tubing John You can get diamond wheels from (TOOLZONE) one inch diameter 6 for £4.50 they are half a mm app.. do google david +---------- 29107 From: "Gordon Couger" Date: Wed Mar 1, 2006 4:13 am Subject: Re: [Microscope] OT: Threading glass tubing They sell these cheap diamond wheels for a Dremmle tools; http://cgi.ebay.com/ item 7592389313 http://cgi.ebay.com/ item 7595336542 I would mount the Dremmle tool so the shaft is in the close to the same axis to the compound and set the disk up like shone in the 7X10 group http://f6.grp.yahoofs.com/.. or the 60 degree setting that I know works. I cut camera filter treads and microscope threads with a slightly modified cut off tool that take seconds to grind and work for inside and outside thread. The Inside is a bit odd but it works. It should work better with grinding wheel taking very shallow passes. Flood controlling is always but a wet sponge or a drip from a IV tube will work. Start whit plenty of glass the first run may be discouraging as you the feed my need to be .005 inches per pass and that is beyond most lathe's capability with out experiences steady hand at the controls working on the best part of the bed. As long as the disk doest bind in the root of the thread there should be no problems and the curter can be canted to sot that. Gordon +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31083 From: AW Date: Thu Jun 1, 2006 12:44 am Subject: RE: [Microscope] AO microscope on ebay Gordon, One day at a time ; ) Archie +-------- 31084 From: "Gordon Couger" Date: Thu Jun 1, 2006 2:55 am Subject: Re: [Microscope] Scope selection guidelines and specs "Jim Bosley" wrote: > We've had some lengthy discussions about "which scope?"... Jim, The inexpensive brand name scopes built in the Pacific Rim are little more than high graded junk with a better name on them. The name, freight, & handling to the dealer costs more that a toy store scope. The brand name place will charger you for set up. Most do it carefully it the real quality control that they have. Scopes form the Pacific Rim, China, possibly Russia and the eastern European states will step up to that bar in quality and produce what their customer wants. The first crack has formed in low prices of China they took the first step of long journey form a currency pegged to the US dollar to a free trading currency. They will be forced to put more value in their producing or when we industrialize Africa they will wreck China's economy as China is Japan's. Of course Japan is falling on their swords as fast as they can but not doing something about all the bad debt they carry. Gordon +--------- 31085 From: Daniel Holloway Date: Thu Jun 1, 2006 9:00 am Subject: Re: Nikon CF Plan APO 200X / 0.90 Infinity/0 Hello leefnn99, I have a Nikon E200 and am very pleased with it. It came with an infinity E Plan spring loaded 100x oil immersion objective. I can't say if the scope you are looking at has one but you can ask. Are you sure CF160 is an infinity objective? Maybe you are looking at the objectives for the older Nikon tube length. I don't think they will work on the E200. Dan +------------- 31086 From: Daniel Holloway Date: Thu Jun 1, 2006 9:05 am Subject: Re: Nikon CF Plan APO 200X / 0.90 Infinity/0 Thanks for the reply Gordon I don't think this objective one that I would use. Dan +----- 31087 From: Daniel Holloway Date: Thu Jun 1, 2006 9:17 am Subject: Re: Nikon CF Plan APO 200X / 0.90 Infinity/0 Hello again leefnn99, The Nikon E200 was made for medical and veterinary offices. The scope is substantial and comes with excellent optics. No, it is not a Leica, but unless you are planning to do some serious research, it is a high quality microscope. I you would like to see some pictures taken thru the Nikon E200 go to my website http://home.mchsi.com/~dl.holloway/ . The images I see are crisp and clear and photograph well. Contact me offline if you need to know more about what you should pay, etc. Dan +-------- 31088 From: Daron Edie Date: Thu Jun 1, 2006 9:39 am Subject: Parfocal distance I was wondering if anyone on the group knew what other manufacturers used a parfocal distance of 33 mm? I recently received the two Lomo objectives I bought on ebay, the first is defiantly a LOMO 9x Plan, in perfect condition which I am very happy with. This objective has replaced my 8x which was defiantly not a flat field. The other objective is a 20x and is not marked with any manufacturers name. I am very happy with it but it was not quite parfocal with the others and required a shim which I constructed from a fibre washer. It is working well but I assume that adding a washer to it meant that the parfocal distance was slightly less than 33 mm. I know that JIS objectives are something like 36 mm and the standard for RMS are 45 mm but I don't recall seeing any others that were 33 or close to that measurement. It doesn't really matter as I say I am happy with it but I was wondering who could have made it? My current collection now consists of a 9x, 20x, 40x and a 90x and they seem to give a good coverage of magnifications, I also picked up a spare turret and I am busy looking for phase objectives to populate it with. I don't think I'll ever stop perusing ebay. Regards, Daron +----------------------------------------------------------------------------------