Nikon D90,Zeiss Universal Microscope

[the mechanic]

Hello!I'm new ,here and ask patience.I'm a photographic prodigal and am thrilled to find this site where film still seems to be a medium of choice.I thought digital had killed it.All my cameras use film and I'm addicted to the stink of photo chemistry.My outfit is Nikon,with two F2's and an F3.Lenses range from 15 to 500 mm.My preferred focal lengths are wide angle,with the exception of an 85mm for portraits.I recently purchased three lenses to round out the outfit-including the 15.The others were a 35mm f/1.4 Nikkor and an 85mm f 1.4 Zeiss.The Zeiss to replace tried and true 85mmf/1.8 Nikkor.I chose the Zeiss over an 85mm f/1.4 Nikkor.Though I've used and loved my Nikons,I've always hankered for Zeiss optics as being just a shade sharper or more contrasty.At any rate,it's first rate glass and just FEELS nice in my hand.I'm an unabashed gear hound,and have a strong preference for equipment that is solid and well built,as well as optically superior.I've owned and used many makes and types of camera over the past 35 odd years.I'll shoot with anything to get the shot and have even hand held speed graphics and an RB series D Graflex(4X5 SLR).My recent foray into digital was a resounding failure.I bought a reconditioned Nikon D90 online from a reputable dealer,but the focusing screen was out of plane and I couldn't bring any of my lenses to infinity focus.The screen on the thing was dismal at any rate-tiny and dim.The camera is obviously designed to be focused through the LCD monitor,which to me is clumsy and disorienting.I won't buy one of those again!(I shipped it back for refund).I do find digital the way to go for color,however.The control you have over the process is so much greater with digital,and i'll eventually buy a compact digital for the limited amount of color I do-as well as for routine throwaway shots for eBay ads and such.One other use would be for photomicrography,which is another passion.I'm a devotee of the now venerable Zeiss Universal microscope-I own three,with one more on the way.I'm hoping here to touch upon hearts and minds,as I find the photomicrogrhaphy community to be sparse and rather cryptic.there are societies out there,but memberships are expensive and the members themselves are less indulgent of people like myself who need more information than they're willing to give,and are just plain gear noggins.I can exchange tech talk with the best of them-I just need to find people who like to TALK!I would like to know,for instance,just exactly what are the best objectives and techniques to obtain the sharpest images,regardless of subject.The emphasis here is on high numerical aperture glass(both objective and condenser),but does anyone with experience have preferences?A related area is in the line of specimen preparation-preferred types of microtome(is an ultramicrotome the ultimate necessity?) and has anyone tried Polyethylene glycol as a bulking agent for mushrooms?This,because I'm an amateur mycologist,as a matter of fact,and one of my favorite portrait subjects is mushrooms-using Micro-Nikkors,as well as the microscope.This is a voice in the dark-and I'm calling YOU!

[Contarama]

Welcome to the forum! I have several Zeiss Jena scopes that I dilly dally with including one made for bloodwork that is quite a set of equipment. I think I made a thread with pics of it once upon a time here in this forum.

I know absolutely zilch about photo micrography but I would love to be able to set up my zeiss camera on my zeiss scope. Currently if I want to take a pic of something I am viewing with the microscope I just use my P&S sony which seems to work remarkably well. One great thing about this method is I can make an mpeg movie!

[the mechanic]

Thanks for the reply.I'm a bit of a tyro concerning this subject myself,but there are a variety of ways to tether your camera to the scope.I would need to know the configuration of your device.Is it,for example,a simple monocular type with a horseshoe base-or,perhaps,a binocular type.There are a number of possibilities,depending upon vintage and intended use.The scopes of which I spoke in the thread are older units of relatively advanced design-large,heavy research instruments.I prefer these as they are rigidly built and are designed to accept cameras of various types and formats-up to 4X5.Let me know what you have and I may be able to recommend a mount that would satisfy your needs.If you like,I will also recommend some reading-such as Kodak publication #P-2"Photography Through the Microscope" by John Gustave Delly.This pub is probably all you need to get started and covers pretty much all you need to know to get first rate results with the gear you have available.The language isn't overly technical and his presentation is solid and to the point.There are also online resources,including the Zeiss website,among others.I'll make this brief,but you get the message.If you simply look under headings like "microscopy societies" there will be something which you may find interesting.The U.K. is big on these,though there are American ones,too.I'll stop for now,but, please post me again.

[Contarama]

I found the thread I posted some of my equipment to...the piece in question is the heavy duty one...this set sports both binocular and monocular attachments...a very serious scope...I also have a monocular one that I believe is a Nazi era piece and is also cased and a pretty complete set...the scopes are how I was introduced to Zeiss glass.

Here is the thread...
http://www.ziforums.com/showthread.php?t=247&highlight=zeiss+jena

You'll find that I own a few Nikon cameras too (someday I WILL have a F2!) if you look at some of my threads!

[Brian]

The last microscope purchase that i started was for a Zeiss "Deep-View" system that was pulled off the market. Too bad- it had potential. Basically it used a "phase-plate" to stack digital images to give an extremely deep field of view.

I switched projects, have not kept up with it. Have any of the new scope manufacturer's revisited this type of photography?

[the mechanic]

This reply to those of both "Contarama" and Brian-I do have a pretty extensive selection of old scopes,though I never really set out to become a collector.Most of these are American made B&L and A.O/Spencer.AS with "Contarama",I became acquainted with Zeiss through my scopes after acquiring a Standard 16 Epifluorescence unit through a camera swap in 1983.Prior exposure was mainly through cameras such as Rolleiflex with Zeiss optics,as well as my ever continuing reading on the subject of photography.Zeiss and Leitz both,in the earlier part of the last century partnered with the various Japanese optics manufacturers,which eventually became quite competent in their own right.Therefor the plentitude of good Japanese optics which fit Zeiss and Leitz cameras.I'll cut this short,as I've got to go to work,but I truly appreciate your interest and would certainly like to keep this discussion going.A great many cameras have passed though these hands over the past 35 or so years,and I have memories of most.I've used,collected and "doctored" them.I'm pretty thoroughly acquainted with Leitz,Nikon, and Canon and have owned and used most others.Lets keep it going!Thanks-Greg. P.S.-I'm not going to dodge the microscope questions,but these require time and space.I'll discuss what I know!

[Contarama]

Occasionally I attend meetings of local aquarium clubs and I also follow a few aquarium oriented web forums. It seems digital optics have taken over in the aquarium world like it has in the photography world...including the microscope stuff. Aquarium people for the most part are using digital scopes a person like me using old mechanical stuff is getting rare believe it or not. I would love to know about the mid 30's Contax cameras in general and their associated microscopy gear in particular...I bet those cameras are cool... :)

[the mechanic]

Contarama-as I understand it,the term "digital optics" is a misnomer.Though optics may have been specially developed to accommodate digital imaging, the basic laws of optics haven't changed and conventional "analogue" optics will still cast an image onto a digitally sensitized plane.Digital imaging is becoming common,but film is still used when the result must be enlarged and which must convey the greatest information.I've expressed my feeling that,while B&W imaging is best done on film-and B&W is my expressive medium of choice-,color is handled best digitally,since the medium is immediate and the image can be manipulated to enhance color fidelity much more easily than with film.I'm not a purist-just pragmatic.This said,I still prefer manual over digital.The "antiques " of which you speak are still of great utility.Optical scopes are still being produced,while there is a flourishing trade in used optical scopes and accessories.I just "won"over eBay a used good condition Zeiss 63X 1.4 N.A. oil immersion Planapochromat for a little over $850.00 against 25 or so other bidders worldwide.This is a particularly hot piece of glass,but I watch these things regularly and this stuff really sells!You've not adequately described your own scopes to me-I'd be interested to know exa

[Contarama]

They say a picture is worth a thousand words!

These are shot with a Sony P&S sporting a Zeiss lens...

I love my scopes...I guess I need some Contax cameras (of the old kind)...I suppose all of this old stuff is set up for screw mount...I have some more objectives and subjectives and some other pieces I have no clue as to what they are exactly about...I'll post some more pics soon...

First pic is case of Monocular/binocular medium research scope made for blood work I wager lit by the ancient scope light which still works and gets really hot! haha :)

Third pic note that the stand is set up binocular fashion...note the monocular...this scope is a bit different than the rest...the tube is of a different length than a lot of Zeiss Jena monocular scopes at least and that affects the objective and subjective optical stuff (at least I think!) totally different stands too as you will discern if you compare the scope in these pics to the one in the next post...

[Contarama]

This one is so similar yet so different...note the metal control knobs...different than the previous scope...a bakelite stage and bakelight subjective cases...serial number is 275987...unit is in excellent condition and everything is intact tools etc...they both need some serious cleaning and loving care...

And I have yet another that is early early I think because it is sporting a bit more brass...

The most beautiful scope I have ever seen was a 19 teens Leitz black brass and glass kit with fine wood box and all kinds of original accessories in very fine/fine condition @ $600...it was exquisite and 600 was probably a bargain...

[Contarama]

I would really like to know what these things are and just exactly why you'd use them...

[the mechanic]

C-you show me some very beautiful scopes.I'd be interested in knowing exactly what glass you have.The glass of the time these were made was likely either achromat or apochromat.Achromatic lenses were corrected for two wavelengths and were sharp in the center,however,they weren't corrected for flatness of field,so images tended to become fuzzy at the edges.This is cured in the DR by cropping out the unnecessary detail.Apochromats were corrected for three wavelengths and were designed from the earlies times to achieve theoretical limits to image sharpness.Image edge falloff,however,is still a problem with these.The falloff problem is cured by using flat field objectives,which come in both achromatic and apochromatic designs.These were specially designed for photomicrography and give good sharpness across the field of view.For visual microscopy,non-flatfield is fine.They can be used foe photography with image cropping.The designator for flatfield is Plano-or Plan-and will precede the type(planachro or planapo).There are several other types now,but these are the main ones we concern ourselves with for the present.Other designs have been developed over the years which are more technique specific-save this for later.$600.00 was a very good price!Greg.

[the mechanic]

C-the glass slide with the two indentations is a deep well slide for putting droplets of,say, pond water so that microorganisms may be viewed using transmitted(substage) lighting.Any transparent liquid can be used,and any sort of suspension can be viewed-it's up to your imagination.You could,for instance,watch salt or sugar dissolve.Try viewing a drop of aquarium water.The two dark(black?)discs with two holes in them look like double masks.These would be used as permanent dry mount for diatoms(a favorite subject among amateur microscopists).Take a clean slide.Place one mask in the center,aligning the holes as you please-in alignment with the long axis would probably look best.Use an adhesive such as white shellac to permanently affix mask to slide.Sprinkle loose diatoms into indentations formed by the holes.Don't pile them in-just a light sprinkle.Place a round coverglass over this,using the same adhesive to seal the glass in place.Coverglasses are extremely thin and fragile-if the diatoms are above the top of the holes, the glass will probably crack.#2 coverglasses are best for most uses.The other two objects in the upper right are too dark and poorly defined to make out,so I'll not speculate.Show me an enlargement of just one,since both seem to be the same.The same applies to the thing that looks like a buggy whip-better picture and some describing.I have to ask your and Brian's advice here-these short notes back and forth are fun,but would I be serving better to post a more lengthy thread?I'm very new to this,and I'm not in any way an expert in digital media,but I have a fair amount of experience with optics of many sorts and would enjoy chatting back and forth with anyone interested!

[Contarama]

Thanks for the conversation sir it is an interesting topic to me...

I do have a Aplanat 1.4 condenser but it is in rough shape. I don't even think it is really usable but who knows someone may be able to clean it up? I have a couple of other 1.2 condensers...I'll get a list of my eye pieces and objectives up soon...

Those "other two" pieces in the pics ^ are some type of eyepiece shades or something for the binocular get up...they are marked l and r...left and right???

[Contarama]

And man I have a lot to learn about early Contax cameras I guess!

What kind of film and shutter speed would one use for photomicrography using these old Zeiss Jenas and Contax I or maybe II cameras?

[Brian]

The Contax cameras have a Bayonet mount, which Nikon adapter for their cameras. It is a wonderful camera, but not the easiest to use. The Leica Thread Mount is still alive, easy to use on the Leica M series, including the M8 and M9. I have an adapter that allows Contax RF bayonet mount lenses to be used on Leica's.

[the mechanic]

This is the I don't know how manyeth time Ive tried to post this reply-here goes one more-reply to Contarama:Thanks for the invite-I don't know if I did it right,but I accepted the request.The condenser you show is definitely worth restoring,as it's a high numerical aperture designed to be used with apochromatic objectives with equally high N.A. designed for oil immersion.It will work fine with lower N.A. objectives as well,but numerical aperture will be limited to the smallest N.A. in the image path.If it hasn't been dropped and isn't broken in any other way,it's worth restoring.Choice of films for photomicrography are determined by technique,available illumination,and preference.Kodak used to make photomicrography film-# 2483-which used the older E-4 process and was very high contrast.Technical Pan was recommended for B&W.They no longer make # 2483-I don't know about Technical Pan,but Ektachrome 100,process E-6,is a popular choice and will provide excellent results if properly handled.Exposure is most effectively determined using a meter.There are meters designed specially for use with scopes, but you should be able to adapt any good handheld meter to the task.I looked back at your thread about your scope and saw the "L. and R." thing you were talking about.I'm not sure, but they may act as a simple comparator.I've never seen them before.You express interest in owning older Contaxes.If you intend to use them,please be advised the their shutters are notorious for failure and are difficult or impossible to repair.The vertically traveling focal plane shutters on these use a brass tambour (rolltop desk) style curtain tied together with silk(synthetic?) ribbons.The ribbons break or stretch and the shutters jam easily.Later models,I think,are about as bad.I had the misfortune of getting a Contax II A with this problem,and could not fix it.

[the mechanic]

This is a belated reply to Brian's Question about the "Deep View" system-I've not seen or heard of this particular setup,but I believe there are others out there.There is a website for a group who call themselves "The Photomicrography Group", I believe,and one article posted there was by one of their group who is a precision instrument maker(as a machinist,I aspire to this!).The article was about how he built just such a beast.Very interesting,and,for me,inspiring!Just want to add a word concerning interchangeability of lenses.Nikon started out as a Zeiss clone,and their lens mounts,flange to focal plane distance and rangefinder coupling were all the same as Contax.Contax owners who couldn't afford Zeiss lenses bought Nikon glass for their cameras.The earliest Nikons were of questionable quality.The first Nikon was the Nikon I which came out in 1948.Nikon itself was first formed in 1917 as a combination of three optical firms.In 1936 they began tagging their lenses Nikkor and they were being made with Leica screw mounts.The Nikon S came out in 1951,along with the 50mm f/1.4 ,the 85mm f/1.5 and the 250mm f/4 Nikkors.1954 was the year that Leitz introduced the M3,Canon introduced the IVsII and Nikon came out with the S 2-which was quite competitive quality-wise with the rest.I'm not as familiar with Zeiss at this point in time,as they were absorbed by the Soviets as war reparations and were broken up-Leitz escaped this fate,as well as the West German divisions of Zeiss.I've owned a few R.F Nikons-the S2 and the SP,along with the 105mm Nikkor(in both Nikon/Contax mount and Leica screw mount),a Leica screw mount 28mm f/3.5 Nikkor and a Zeiss 21mm f/4.5 Biogon.All lenses mentioned produced extremely sharp images and I loved using them.I miss them!The S2 was the first high quality camera put out by Nikon,with cloth horizontally traveling focal plane shutter.The SP was their first to use a titanium foil HFP shutter.

[Contarama]

I am very grateful for the information you have posted above gentlemen! I need to make a list of eyepieces and objectives that I have because I have a bunch of them. I have been looking at various ancient Contax Contarex Nikons Leicas etc and their lenses and other gear. Fascinating stuff! I really would like to be able to couple my scopes and my cameras...who knows I could maybe make some wild abstract prints with the Gimp or something crazy like that!

I need one of these and a working black Luftwatte Contax... :)

http://www.oklahomawildbunch.com/teach/Contax-Miflex.jpg

[Contarama]

What the heck is that little metal rod with a piece of piano wire hanging from it??? Does one use it to cut slices of onion for saurkraut and microscope viewing??? LOL

Mech...if you need to write an essay expressing your ideas about Zeiss optics that is fine with me sir...

Please take advantage of the gallery photo option and add some of your pics...and yes the friend request deal worked thanks man!...welcome to a very cool german glass forum inhabited by some special people who are great folks...

[the mechanic]

The last microscope purchase that i started was for a Zeiss "Deep-View" system that was pulled off the market. Too bad- it had potential. Basically it used a "phase-plate" to stack digital images to give an extremely deep field of view.

I switched projects, have not kept up with it. Have any of the new scope manufacturer's revisited this type of photography?

Brian-I sent reply to this last night,but started thinking and doing a little research online.The reply about the layering technique of which you speak is relevant,and worth a Google,but also try the Nikon microscopy website and look for confocal microscopy.Confocal allows "Deepview"micro imaging via laser scanning and is used to obtain very sharp images of thick sections as well as with live specimens.Nikon has a sense of the importance of its own place in history and supplies a wealth of information about the history of its optics and instrumentation,including cameras and lenses.According to the site,as a matter of fact,the confocal microscope was invented in 1955 by Marvin Minsky and he obtained the first patent in the year of my own birth-1957.The technology didn't become practical until digital imaging became practical(sometime in the '70's).Confocal is,fundamentally,light microscopy taken to higher limits of resolution.I'm interested in the possibility of converting a light microscope for confocal use-I don't know how practical that would be,but it's a thought.Confocal is a kind of intermediate between light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy(TEM).You get greater effective resolution,as well as greater effective magnification and can work with live specimens with much simpler to use and less expensive equipment(than TEM).As I learn morer about working with electronics,this becomes a more promising persuit.This is all well explained on the 'site-Greg.

[Contarama]

List of eyepieces

pair of 5.5X
pair of 7X Mobimi
pair of 10X Mobimi
pair of K 15X Mobimi
single 10X big eye opening
single 10X smaller eye opening
single 7X
single 90mm long tube eyepiece very low magnification

List of objectives

older brass stuff
40 .65 D.0.17 nr. 44263
8 0.2 A nr.50187
2mm n.A.1.4 Homogene Immersion Tubus 160mm nr.1463

chrome/silver stuff

8 0.20 nr. 158817
HI 90 1.25 nr. 167211
40 0.65 0.17 nr. 165581
(black) 3 nr. 33286
HI 90 1.25 1/12" nr. 58896
40 0.65 0.17 D nr. 70719
8 0.20 nr. 80712

Serial Nr. of my scope bases

Nr. 252256
Nr. 253028
Nr. 275987

I probably need to get rid of some of this stuff!

[the mechanic]

C-You have eye lenses for various purposes.The Mobimi eyepieces,I thought,were designed for photography-but yours come in pairs for binocular viewing.The monocular tube is for doing photomicrography,for which you only need a single eyepiece.Of the singles, the one with the large exit pupil is probably the better corrected for photo use.At any rate,the 90mm long low power one is probably a Barlow lens for magnifying the back focal plane of the objective when setting the scope up for Kohler illumination.Kohler illumination is used for most of the basic techniques, such as brightfield and phase contrast.From what I've seen of your stuff,you don't have any basic phase gear.The objectives will require some interpreting.Generally the objectives will be stamped with at least the magnification and the numerical aperture.Other information often included will be coverglass thickness and drawtube length.Oil immersion objectives will be marked as such,but the designations vary.Oil may be spelled out in English or German(Oel),or the term homogenious immersion may be spelled out-or abbreviated HI.These all mean the same thing-OIL.WE can get into the varieties of oil later.Phase contrast objectives are stamped Ph,in addition to the rest of the information.If an objective is not specifically designated for oil immersion,or for use with any other immersion media,it should be used HIGH AND DRY.Never use non immersion objectives wet-the medium will get inside the lens and it will be ruined!Most of your objectives appear to be Achromats,with the exception of the 2mm,which has a very high N.A.(1.4 is about as high as they get)which indicates to me that it is probably an Apochromat.2mm is approximately65-80 X.Of course,to obtain the full effect of the high N.A.,the condenser must be of the same N.A.(which you already have),oil must be applied to both, the surface of the condenser as well as the top of the slide,and the illumination must be critically set up.Whoever was using this scope was serious about photomicrography.They could have had more stuff,but what you have there will do a lot!Let me give a breakdown of one of your objectives to give you an idea-I'll use one of the 40X.The magnification is given,followed by numerical aperture of.65.then the coverglass thickness is given in mm as .17-which translates into a number 1 1/2 coverglass(.16-.19mm).then the drawtube length is given as 160mm.Most modern objectives are corrected for 160-170mm drawtube length-though,not all.Some may be corrected for as much as a 200mm drawtube.This will be printed on the objective.The draw tube is no longer used in modern light microscopes,as the corrections are made optically within the tubehead of the scope.Yours,I believe,has a drawtube within the monocular tube and will be marked with graduations.when setting up for viewing or photography,keep in mind that the tube must be drawn out to proper length to get the best possible resolution from your setup.You have some very nice gear.It would be a shame to let it go for a little of nothing.Photomicrography may not be your thing at the moment,but my own experience has been that what you have in hand is far more valuable to you than what you wish you might have.I don't know your particular circumstances,but that Nikon F2 will always be out there,somewhere,but you'll never replace the scopes.I'd sit on them and try to come up with cash for the camera.As far as a camera to use on the scopes,as I've said,any simple rig will give fine results-simply impose a shutter between a box with a film transport(if using roll film)and an extension tube or bellows to allow placing the film plane at the proper distance from the eyepiece.I'll close for now-Greg.

[Brian]

Those are beautiful. My one collectible piece- a Nikon auto-collimator with mirror, all in wooden boxes. 1950s vintage. The NKT logo is on the reticule as you look through it.

[the mechanic]

Brian-I don't know where the"beautiful"came from-unless you were referring to C's scopes(I completely agree!),but,the mention of the auto collimator is interesting.I don't understand the process very well,other than being the process of bringing an optical "train" into alignment.This is something I'd really like to understand,as I buy used equipment which is shipped from who knows where and has probably been banged around a bit-you get the picture!Yours sounds like a nice piece of gear.I wonder if it's usable.