I have bought a x 1000 oil immersion objective (Karl-Zeiss) but when I calibrated the lens (stage micrometer / ocular eyepiece micrometer technique) I did not get a 1:1um (mathematically should be so) but 1 real um occupied 1.17um on the ocular viewed image, or in other words 1um in the viewed ocular is less than 1um. That means the viewed magnification is not x1000 (if so, then 1um in the stage would be equivalent to 1um in the optical) but less, around x 800. Have you also the same issue and thought?
Stated magnification versus real magnification
- Steve_mt
- Erledigt
Es gibt 56 Antworten in diesem Thema, welches 11.375 mal aufgerufen wurde. Der letzte Beitrag () ist von Steve_mt.
-
Hello, Steve!
That's odd.
Maybe there's a problem with the ocular lenses? If the fabricate of those (or of the microscope itself) ist different, there may be slight differences.
Thus i did not observe such a problem when putting a Zeiss 1000x objective to another microscope...LG; Pablo.
-
Hi there,
just do a bit physics. The nominal magnification is valid for an exactly positioned object and environment. Whenever you move the object here and there, or adjust the ocular to your eyes - the magnification is also slightly changed. This is unavoidable. And yes, the different refraction index of oil in comparison to air contributes as well.
Much appreciated you checked this!
Best regards,
Bernd
-
Hello Steve,
for me the big difference in magnification looks strange.
I do not know, which microscope you are using.
Are you sure, that your binocular or trinocular tube does have magnicfication 1x ? Sometimes they have a higher magncification factor, perhaps 1,2x, that could explain bigger image in the ocular.
Best regards
Günter
-
Hello Steve,
that is the objective from FluorescensMicroscops.com, isn't it?
You have an infinity objective, and unlike the 160 tube length objectives the infinity ones often do only fit in the very microscope version it was made for. So you can normally not use an infinity objective from Zeiss in a microscope from Olympus, just as an example. What microscope do you have and which tube length does it have? I bought a Zeiss 80x infinity objectiv for dry use and tried it on my Olympus BX40 - no chance, doesn't work, bad luck ......
Another idea is that this is probably a objective for fluorescens microscopy and may be it works only properly with a fluorescens equipement?
Oil with wrong refraction index will result in unsharp view, but doen't affect the viewed magnification (at least not that much), and neither does a movement of the object.
all the best,
Andreas
-
Alles anzeigen
Hi there,
just do a bit physics. The nominal magnification is valid for an exactly positioned object and environment. Whenever you move the object here and there, or adjust the ocular to your eyes - the magnification is also slightly changed. This is unavoidable. And yes, the different refraction index of oil in comparison to air contributes as well.
Much appreciated you checked this!
Best regards,
Bernd
But then the 630x objective at same conditions (except not oil) does not suffer from any discrepancy.
-
Alles anzeigen
Hello Steve,
that is the objective from FluorescensMicroscops.com, isn't it?
You have an infinity objective, and unlike the 160 tube length objectives the infinity ones often do only fit in the very microscope version it was made for. So you can normally not use an infinity objective from Zeiss in a microscope from Olympus, just as an example. What microscope do you have and which tube length does it have? I bought a Zeiss 80x infinity objectiv for dry use and tried it on my Olympus BX40 - no chance, doesn't work, bad luck ......
Another idea is that this is probably a objective for fluorescens microscopy and may be it works only properly with a fluorescens equipement?
Oil with wrong refraction index will result in unsharp view, but doen't affect the viewed magnification (at least not that much), and neither does a movement of the object.
all the best,
Andreas
-
Alles anzeigen
Hello Steve,
that is the objective from FluorescensMicroscops.com, isn't it?
You have an infinity objective, and unlike the 160 tube length objectives the infinity ones often do only fit in the very microscope version it was made for. So you can normally not use an infinity objective from Zeiss in a microscope from Olympus, just as an example. What microscope do you have and which tube length does it have? I bought a Zeiss 80x infinity objectiv for dry use and tried it on my Olympus BX40 - no chance, doesn't work, bad luck ......
Another idea is that this is probably a objective for fluorescens microscopy and may be it works only properly with a fluorescens equipement?
Oil with wrong refraction index will result in unsharp view, but doen't affect the viewed magnification (at least not that much), and neither does a movement of the object.
all the best,
Andreas
Hi Andreas, I bought it from ebay and there is one like it here:
Zeiss Plan-NEOFLUAR 100x/1.30 Oil Objective
I was told infinity objectives made by Zeiss should work on Zeiss microscopes so I had a budget and this objective looked really good. However I am a bit disappointed with the resolution, and often the lens has to touch the cover slip to have focus. I don't know if, If it does work well for transmitted light application.
Maybe u r right re used ONLY for fluorescent microscopes, but websites selling the exact obj are saying that it could be used both for light and florescent applications ! As far as I know, such a specific lens should be colour coded . where black it means for transmitted light
Zeiss Plan-NEOFLUAR 100x/1.30 Oil Objective
I also have this objective : Zeiss Plan Neofluar 100x/1.30 Oil Pol Microscope Objective Lens 440483 for sale online | eBay
-
Dear Steve,
my knowledge about this optical problems is limited. But I will transfer this problem to the microscopy forum, which usually provides very good help. It usually is in German language, but I will send you the results.
all the best,
Andreas
-
Hallo,
ich glaube nicht so recht daran, dass das Objektiv eine so deutliche Veränderung im Abbildungsmaßstab liefert.
- War es vorher wirklich 1:1 ablesbar?
- Ist das Messokular das gleiche wie vorher?
- Ist die Messskala im Okular die gleiche? (Es gibt so viele verschiedene Skalen)
- Ist die Strichplatte im Messokular verrutscht?
- Objektmikrometer richtig herum eingelegt?
Am einfachsten ist es, die beiden 100er Objektive nebeneinander einzuschrauben und direkt zu vergleichen.
Freundliche Grüße
Peter
-
Alles anzeigen
Dear Steve,
my knowledge about this optical problems is limited. But I will transfer this problem to the microscopy forum, which usually provides very good help. It usually is in German language, but I will send you the results.
all the best,
Andreas
Thanks - but have I posted in the microscopy section already? I start thinking what happens without oil immersion ...and also if users here calibrate the magnification (for measuring) compensated for oil immersion! ! !
-
Hallo Steve,
ich glaube, du hast die falsche Strichplatte im Okular (reticule different). Es gibt viele verschiedene!
Ich würde direkt bei Zeiss nachfragen, welche Strichplatte die empfehlen und ob die Umrechnung beim 100er Objektiv 1:1 ist.
Deine Okulare sind 10x?
Freundliche Grüße
Peter
PS: Oder du kaufst dir gleich ein "richtiges Mikroskop" von Olympus.
Bei meinem Mikroskop ist das mit 1:1 Standard.
Es kann auch ein wenig variieren (+- 2%) aber nicht 17%.
-
Hello Steve,
I misunderstood and was thinking your former 100x objective gave 1:1 and now the new one is 1:1,7.
So this is of course another kind of problem.
I second Peters opinion that the problem is the measuring scale in the eye piece.
You should have the same unusual multiplication factors also in the other magnifications, means 1:4,25 with the 40x objective (instead of 1:2,5) and 1:17 with the 10x objective (instead of 1:10) - correct?
all the best,
Andreas
-
this morning tried the calibration without oil and I got 96-97 units for 100um (everything same setup but no oil on stage). The focusing and sharpness was quite good actually! That makes 100/97 = 1:1.04 which is a good match.
Replies:
I second Peters opinion that the problem is the measuring scale in the eye piece. >> Same eyepiece reticule for all objectives (which gives expected values)
You should have the same unusual multiplication factors also in the other magnifications, means 1:4,25 with the 40x objective (instead of 1:2,5) and 1:17 with the 10x objective (instead of 1:10) - correct? >>> For the other 'air' objectivesI get a close value to the expected magnification.
Your eyepieces are 10x?
Yes E-Pl 10
Or you can buy a "real microscope" from Olympus right away.
You need real money too!
-
Hi Steve, the magnification of immersion objectives is always stated with oil, coz it is designed to be used with, coz oil allows higher magnification. What n has your oil? n ~1,5.
Best regards, Bernd
-
Hi Steve,
The objective cleary states 'oil' on it's label, so it should be used with oil only. The objective also states planar, but your photos are really distorted.
the ebay link you posted shows two different objectives, one for infinite optics and one for 160mm tubes. best copy the full label of one correct objective (probably labelling an infinite sign) and of the new one - the important part is not visible on the picture.
The Axioscope 20 should be infinite, is it?
Wolfgang
-
The Axioscope 20 should be infinite, is it?
Yes, it is!
-
The Axioscope 20 should be infinite, is it?
Yes, it is!
Sorry folks - My microcope is AxioLab RE not Axioscope 20
-
The Axioscope 20 should be infinite, is it?
Yes, it is!
Sorry folks - My microcope is AxioLab RE not Axioscope 20
