It should work just fine on 190mm, although the magnification will be lower - at
that low NA it is fairly flexible on tube length. Er, NCG design? Bit mystified
by that comment (or need to reboot memory function....)

Cheers,

Merv


--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@...> wrote:
>
> Whoa! Thanks Merv. I'll fire it up on the Zetopan in EPI at 190 tl for a look
see. Do you think it's likely a NCG design?
>
> Frez
>
> --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Frez,
> >
> > This is a 1 1/2" objective for 250mm (10") tube length with an NA 0.06 and
was originally made for the Vickers Projection Microscope. Magnification on the
ten inch tube would be 6.6 times. Probably made in the late 1930s - 1940s,
previous to the introduction of the M55 with infinite tube length objectives.
Would work well on any American or British 'long tube' microscope!
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Merv
> >
> > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This Cooke Troughton & Simms objective surfaced in a box-o-stuff. Does
anybody know what power 1 1/2 would be and is anyone at all familiar with this?
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/photos/album/947034199/pic/list
> > > It's the first pic.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Frez
> > >
> >
>

No Cover Glass

Thanks

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> It should work just fine on 190mm, although the magnification will be lower -
at that low NA it is fairly flexible on tube length. Er, NCG design? Bit
mystified by that comment (or need to reboot memory function....)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Merv
>
>
> --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> >
> > Whoa! Thanks Merv. I'll fire it up on the Zetopan in EPI at 190 tl for a
look see. Do you think it's likely a NCG design?
> >
> > Frez
> >
> > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Frez,
> > >
> > > This is a 1 1/2" objective for 250mm (10") tube length with an NA 0.06 and
was originally made for the Vickers Projection Microscope. Magnification on the
ten inch tube would be 6.6 times. Probably made in the late 1930s - 1940s,
previous to the introduction of the M55 with infinite tube length objectives.
Would work well on any American or British 'long tube' microscope!
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Merv
> > >
> > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This Cooke Troughton & Simms objective surfaced in a box-o-stuff. Does
anybody know what power 1 1/2 would be and is anyone at all familiar with this?
> > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/photos/album/947034199/pic/list
> > > > It's the first pic.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Frez
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Thanks Frez, bit slow on the uptake on that one! With the low magnification and
NA, it is not going to care much about cover glass thickness - it should work
very well. The objectives for the Vickers Projection Microscope were very good
designs, in particular the high drys and the oil immersions. Being 250mm tube
length, they needed far less steep curvatures in the elements and corrections
were excellent. Only Reichert produced metallurgical objectives as good, for
much the same reason.

Cheers,

Merv

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@...> wrote:
>
> No Cover Glass
>
> Thanks
>
> --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > It should work just fine on 190mm, although the magnification will be lower
- at that low NA it is fairly flexible on tube length. Er, NCG design? Bit
mystified by that comment (or need to reboot memory function....)
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Merv
> >
> >
> > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Whoa! Thanks Merv. I'll fire it up on the Zetopan in EPI at 190 tl for a
look see. Do you think it's likely a NCG design?
> > >
> > > Frez
> > >
> > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi Frez,
> > > >
> > > > This is a 1 1/2" objective for 250mm (10") tube length with an NA 0.06
and was originally made for the Vickers Projection Microscope. Magnification on
the ten inch tube would be 6.6 times. Probably made in the late 1930s - 1940s,
previous to the introduction of the M55 with infinite tube length objectives.
Would work well on any American or British 'long tube' microscope!
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Merv
> > > >
> > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > This Cooke Troughton & Simms objective surfaced in a box-o-stuff. Does
anybody know what power 1 1/2 would be and is anyone at all familiar with this?
> > > > >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/photos/album/947034199/pic/list
> > > > > It's the first pic.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Frez
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Just in case you get crazy view Frez it may be a 1.5mm objective ie circa 100x.
I've never seen a CTS objective marked like that but some manufacturers did in
the dim and distant past.

John

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks Frez, bit slow on the uptake on that one! With the low magnification
and NA, it is not going to care much about cover glass thickness - it should
work very well. The objectives for the Vickers Projection Microscope were very
good designs, in particular the high drys and the oil immersions. Being 250mm
tube length, they needed far less steep curvatures in the elements and
corrections were excellent. Only Reichert produced metallurgical objectives as
good, for much the same reason.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Merv
>
> --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> >
> > No Cover Glass
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > It should work just fine on 190mm, although the magnification will be
lower - at that low NA it is fairly flexible on tube length. Er, NCG design? Bit
mystified by that comment (or need to reboot memory function....)
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Merv
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Whoa! Thanks Merv. I'll fire it up on the Zetopan in EPI at 190 tl for a
look see. Do you think it's likely a NCG design?
> > > >
> > > > Frez
> > > >
> > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Frez,
> > > > >
> > > > > This is a 1 1/2" objective for 250mm (10") tube length with an NA 0.06
and was originally made for the Vickers Projection Microscope. Magnification on
the ten inch tube would be 6.6 times. Probably made in the late 1930s - 1940s,
previous to the introduction of the M55 with infinite tube length objectives.
Would work well on any American or British 'long tube' microscope!
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > >
> > > > > Merv
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This Cooke Troughton & Simms objective surfaced in a box-o-stuff.
Does anybody know what power 1 1/2 would be and is anyone at all familiar with
this?
> > > > > >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/photos/album/947034199/pic/list
> > > > > > It's the first pic.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > Frez
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Hi John,

It couldn't possibly be a 1.5mm objective - the front element is far too large.
The markings are unusual, but probably date from the end of the Projection
Microscope era in the late 40s, early 50s. The form suggests a classic Lister
achromat. However, I have never seen a CTS objective of that era with this
particular configuration - brass lacquered body with nickel housing for the
front element - this would make it early rather than late - a bit of a mystery!

Cheers,

Merv

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "John" <a.johnw@...> wrote:
>
> Just in case you get crazy view Frez it may be a 1.5mm objective ie circa
100x. I've never seen a CTS objective marked like that but some manufacturers
did in the dim and distant past.
>
> John
>
> --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Frez, bit slow on the uptake on that one! With the low magnification
and NA, it is not going to care much about cover glass thickness - it should
work very well. The objectives for the Vickers Projection Microscope were very
good designs, in particular the high drys and the oil immersions. Being 250mm
tube length, they needed far less steep curvatures in the elements and
corrections were excellent. Only Reichert produced metallurgical objectives as
good, for much the same reason.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Merv
> >
> > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > >
> > > No Cover Glass
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It should work just fine on 190mm, although the magnification will be
lower - at that low NA it is fairly flexible on tube length. Er, NCG design? Bit
mystified by that comment (or need to reboot memory function....)
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Merv
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Whoa! Thanks Merv. I'll fire it up on the Zetopan in EPI at 190 tl for
a look see. Do you think it's likely a NCG design?
> > > > >
> > > > > Frez
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Frez,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is a 1 1/2" objective for 250mm (10") tube length with an NA
0.06 and was originally made for the Vickers Projection Microscope.
Magnification on the ten inch tube would be 6.6 times. Probably made in the late
1930s - 1940s, previous to the introduction of the M55 with infinite tube length
objectives. Would work well on any American or British 'long tube' microscope!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Merv
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This Cooke Troughton & Simms objective surfaced in a box-o-stuff.
Does anybody know what power 1 1/2 would be and is anyone at all familiar with
this?
> > > > > > >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/photos/album/947034199/pic/list
> > > > > > > It's the first pic.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > Frez
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

The front element is about 13.5mm diameter.

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi John,
>
> It couldn't possibly be a 1.5mm objective - the front element is far too
large. The markings are unusual, but probably date from the end of the
Projection Microscope era in the late 40s, early 50s. The form suggests a
classic Lister achromat. However, I have never seen a CTS objective of that era
with this particular configuration - brass lacquered body with nickel housing
for the front element - this would make it early rather than late - a bit of a
mystery!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Merv
>
> --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "John" <a.johnw@> wrote:
> >
> > Just in case you get crazy view Frez it may be a 1.5mm objective ie circa
100x. I've never seen a CTS objective marked like that but some manufacturers
did in the dim and distant past.
> >
> > John
> >
> > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks Frez, bit slow on the uptake on that one! With the low
magnification and NA, it is not going to care much about cover glass thickness -
it should work very well. The objectives for the Vickers Projection Microscope
were very good designs, in particular the high drys and the oil immersions.
Being 250mm tube length, they needed far less steep curvatures in the elements
and corrections were excellent. Only Reichert produced metallurgical objectives
as good, for much the same reason.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Merv
> > >
> > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > No Cover Glass
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It should work just fine on 190mm, although the magnification will be
lower - at that low NA it is fairly flexible on tube length. Er, NCG design? Bit
mystified by that comment (or need to reboot memory function....)
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > >
> > > > > Merv
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Whoa! Thanks Merv. I'll fire it up on the Zetopan in EPI at 190 tl
for a look see. Do you think it's likely a NCG design?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Frez
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Frez,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This is a 1 1/2" objective for 250mm (10") tube length with an NA
0.06 and was originally made for the Vickers Projection Microscope.
Magnification on the ten inch tube would be 6.6 times. Probably made in the late
1930s - 1940s, previous to the introduction of the M55 with infinite tube length
objectives. Would work well on any American or British 'long tube' microscope!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Merv
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This Cooke Troughton & Simms objective surfaced in a
box-o-stuff. Does anybody know what power 1 1/2 would be and is anyone at all
familiar with this?
> > > > > > > >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/photos/album/947034199/pic/list
> > > > > > > > It's the first pic.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > Frez
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Hi Fez :-) That does sound rather large for 100x!

Personally I'm not at all sure it's even possible to tie down exactly what cts -
vickers etc have produced in the past even though it was a relatively short time
ago. There is an archive that was set up arround the time vickers was raided etc
by BA Systems. It's here but a isn't a fat lot of use.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=193-vickers&cid=0&kw=vic\
kers%20instruments#0

There is a brief history here. Interesting to note the "profitable" aspect. Some
of their products continued in the USA.

http://www.york.ac.uk/library/borthwick/research-support/vickers-instruments/

:-) The date of the closure is well into the period where certain elements in
the UK seemed to be determined to eradicate any form of manufacture there. I
added the smile because it roughly coincides with the time I was sent on a
course that explained why. IT started in the late 60's.

John

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@...> wrote:
>
> The front element is about 13.5mm diameter.
>
> --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi John,
> >
> > It couldn't possibly be a 1.5mm objective - the front element is far too
large. The markings are unusual, but probably date from the end of the
Projection Microscope era in the late 40s, early 50s. The form suggests a
classic Lister achromat. However, I have never seen a CTS objective of that era
with this particular configuration - brass lacquered body with nickel housing
for the front element - this would make it early rather than late - a bit of a
mystery!
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Merv
> >
> > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "John" <a.johnw@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Just in case you get crazy view Frez it may be a 1.5mm objective ie circa
100x. I've never seen a CTS objective marked like that but some manufacturers
did in the dim and distant past.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Frez, bit slow on the uptake on that one! With the low
magnification and NA, it is not going to care much about cover glass thickness -
it should work very well. The objectives for the Vickers Projection Microscope
were very good designs, in particular the high drys and the oil immersions.
Being 250mm tube length, they needed far less steep curvatures in the elements
and corrections were excellent. Only Reichert produced metallurgical objectives
as good, for much the same reason.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Merv
> > > >
> > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > No Cover Glass
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It should work just fine on 190mm, although the magnification will
be lower - at that low NA it is fairly flexible on tube length. Er, NCG design?
Bit mystified by that comment (or need to reboot memory function....)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Merv
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Whoa! Thanks Merv. I'll fire it up on the Zetopan in EPI at 190 tl
for a look see. Do you think it's likely a NCG design?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Frez
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Frez,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This is a 1 1/2" objective for 250mm (10") tube length with an
NA 0.06 and was originally made for the Vickers Projection Microscope.
Magnification on the ten inch tube would be 6.6 times. Probably made in the late
1930s - 1940s, previous to the introduction of the M55 with infinite tube length
objectives. Would work well on any American or British 'long tube' microscope!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Merv
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This Cooke Troughton & Simms objective surfaced in a
box-o-stuff. Does anybody know what power 1 1/2 would be and is anyone at all
familiar with this?
> > > > > > > > >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/photos/album/947034199/pic/list
> > > > > > > > > It's the first pic.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > > Frez
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Hi Frez,

I checked up on my Vickers Projection Microscope literature, and the VPM never
had a 1 1/2" objective in the 1950s - the standard was 1 1/3" NA 0.1. So maybe
it was for something else CT&S with 250mm tube length....

Cheers,

Merv

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@...> wrote:
>
> The front element is about 13.5mm diameter.
>
> --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi John,
> >
> > It couldn't possibly be a 1.5mm objective - the front element is far too
large. The markings are unusual, but probably date from the end of the
Projection Microscope era in the late 40s, early 50s. The form suggests a
classic Lister achromat. However, I have never seen a CTS objective of that era
with this particular configuration - brass lacquered body with nickel housing
for the front element - this would make it early rather than late - a bit of a
mystery!
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Merv
> >
> > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "John" <a.johnw@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Just in case you get crazy view Frez it may be a 1.5mm objective ie circa
100x. I've never seen a CTS objective marked like that but some manufacturers
did in the dim and distant past.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Frez, bit slow on the uptake on that one! With the low
magnification and NA, it is not going to care much about cover glass thickness -
it should work very well. The objectives for the Vickers Projection Microscope
were very good designs, in particular the high drys and the oil immersions.
Being 250mm tube length, they needed far less steep curvatures in the elements
and corrections were excellent. Only Reichert produced metallurgical objectives
as good, for much the same reason.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Merv
> > > >
> > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > No Cover Glass
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It should work just fine on 190mm, although the magnification will
be lower - at that low NA it is fairly flexible on tube length. Er, NCG design?
Bit mystified by that comment (or need to reboot memory function....)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Merv
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Whoa! Thanks Merv. I'll fire it up on the Zetopan in EPI at 190 tl
for a look see. Do you think it's likely a NCG design?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Frez
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Frez,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This is a 1 1/2" objective for 250mm (10") tube length with an
NA 0.06 and was originally made for the Vickers Projection Microscope.
Magnification on the ten inch tube would be 6.6 times. Probably made in the late
1930s - 1940s, previous to the introduction of the M55 with infinite tube length
objectives. Would work well on any American or British 'long tube' microscope!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Merv
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This Cooke Troughton & Simms objective surfaced in a
box-o-stuff. Does anybody know what power 1 1/2 would be and is anyone at all
familiar with this?
> > > > > > > > >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/photos/album/947034199/pic/list
> > > > > > > > > It's the first pic.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > > Frez
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Thanks again.

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Goldsand" <egoldsand@...> wrote:
>
> "Thanks for the information Gene. How do you propose to measure the
> transmission characteristics of your liquid-filled light guides?"
>
>
>
> Using equipment I have here largely from Jobin Yvon
>
> Probably the Triax 180 outfit.
>
>
>
> I don't have to get an accurate "absorbance" scan so I don't need to take a
> reference.  I will simply use an similar sized aperture to measure the
> source energy and ratio it with the energy transmitted by the cable.  I have
> a lamphouse that takes these cables (an exfo XCite with a dead ballast.
> There is a xenon 100 or 180 watt lamp in the same reflector that will drop
> right in.  It is an ozone free model so it only goes down to the short 200
> nm range.
>
> But that is shorter than the HXP Xcite bulb.  Probably shorter than the
> liquid light guides too.
>
>
>
> The best way to transmit medium and short UV is with mirrors.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "John" <a.johnw@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Fez :-) That does sound rather large for 100x!

Hey, it could have been a long forgotten optical experiment that had 90%
spherical aberration and kaleidoscopic CA. :)

It looks pretty average in a scope.

Thanks for the links
Frez

> Personally I'm not at all sure it's even possible to tie down exactly what cts
- vickers etc have produced in the past even though it was a relatively short
time ago. There is an archive that was set up arround the time vickers was
raided etc by BA Systems. It's here but a isn't a fat lot of use.
>
>
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=193-vickers&cid=0&kw=vic\
kers%20instruments#0
>
> There is a brief history here. Interesting to note the "profitable" aspect.
Some of their products continued in the USA.
>
> http://www.york.ac.uk/library/borthwick/research-support/vickers-instruments/
>
> :-) The date of the closure is well into the period where certain elements in
the UK seemed to be determined to eradicate any form of manufacture there. I
added the smile because it roughly coincides with the time I was sent on a
course that explained why. IT started in the late 60's.
>
> John
>
> --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> >
> > The front element is about 13.5mm diameter.
> >
> > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi John,
> > >
> > > It couldn't possibly be a 1.5mm objective - the front element is far too
large. The markings are unusual, but probably date from the end of the
Projection Microscope era in the late 40s, early 50s. The form suggests a
classic Lister achromat. However, I have never seen a CTS objective of that era
with this particular configuration - brass lacquered body with nickel housing
for the front element - this would make it early rather than late - a bit of a
mystery!
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Merv
> > >
> > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "John" <a.johnw@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Just in case you get crazy view Frez it may be a 1.5mm objective ie
circa 100x. I've never seen a CTS objective marked like that but some
manufacturers did in the dim and distant past.
> > > >
> > > > John
> > > >
> > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks Frez, bit slow on the uptake on that one! With the low
magnification and NA, it is not going to care much about cover glass thickness -
it should work very well. The objectives for the Vickers Projection Microscope
were very good designs, in particular the high drys and the oil immersions.
Being 250mm tube length, they needed far less steep curvatures in the elements
and corrections were excellent. Only Reichert produced metallurgical objectives
as good, for much the same reason.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > >
> > > > > Merv
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No Cover Glass
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It should work just fine on 190mm, although the magnification will
be lower - at that low NA it is fairly flexible on tube length. Er, NCG design?
Bit mystified by that comment (or need to reboot memory function....)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Merv
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Whoa! Thanks Merv. I'll fire it up on the Zetopan in EPI at 190
tl for a look see. Do you think it's likely a NCG design?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Frez
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi Frez,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This is a 1 1/2" objective for 250mm (10") tube length with an
NA 0.06 and was originally made for the Vickers Projection Microscope.
Magnification on the ten inch tube would be 6.6 times. Probably made in the late
1930s - 1940s, previous to the introduction of the M55 with infinite tube length
objectives. Would work well on any American or British 'long tube' microscope!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Merv
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > This Cooke Troughton & Simms objective surfaced in a
box-o-stuff. Does anybody know what power 1 1/2 would be and is anyone at all
familiar with this?
> > > > > > > > > >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/photos/album/947034199/pic/list
> > > > > > > > > > It's the first pic.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > > > Frez
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

I have a diagnostic instrument coupler (HRP-100-ENG12)that is made to mount a
Sony 1/2" 3CCD camera (bayonet mount, 38mm) and I was trying to switch to a dSLR
camera. I havent bought a camera yet and was wondering if there is an adapter
which I havent been able to find on the internet or if there was a camera that
would allow for a easier transition?

Hi,

I'm working on tweeking up an AO Series 10 'scope with a 1036A Substage
Illuminator and have two related questions.

The 45 degree bending mirror has come loose, but fortunately is intact:

Does anybody know what cement to use to re-attach the mirror? The old
cement is sparingly soluable in Acetone so I'm dealing withy clean plated
metal and clean glass. The bond will be very lightly stressed.

Alse, the mirror mount is supported with three compression springs at the
corners of a roughly Isoceles triangle. Does any know how to reset the
adjustment after the mirror is reattached? I had to undo the screws to
remove the piece to access the mirror.

Thanks,

-John

===================

John:
Amazing...I had the exact same problem. The mirror came slap off and I was
really worried I would not be able to glue it back....I started with a thick
glue from Walmart, that claimed to be able to glue glass. It worked fine! I will
bet it does not last the 50-60 years the original did but we won't be around to
worry, and maybe something else more critical will go before that :)
I find this interestiong I will BET the scopes we have are within a year of
manufacture, and like automotons they "fall" in rows....Not like people/medical
failures.
With Respect
Seth Malovany MT AMT


--- On Sat, 6/23/12, J. Forster <jfor@...> wrote:


From: J. Forster <jfor@...>
Subject: [Microscope] AO Series 10 Illuminator Questions
To: microscope@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, June 23, 2012, 11:44 PM


Hi,

I'm working on tweeking up an AO Series 10 'scope with a 1036A Substage
Illuminator and have two related questions.

The 45 degree bending mirror has come loose, but fortunately is intact:

Does anybody know what cement to use to re-attach the mirror? The old
cement is sparingly soluable in Acetone so I'm dealing withy clean plated
metal and clean glass. The bond will be very lightly stressed.

Alse, the mirror mount is supported with three compression springs at the
corners of a roughly Isoceles triangle. Does any know how to reset the
adjustment after the mirror is reattached? I had to undo the screws to
remove the piece to access the mirror.

Thanks,

-John

===================



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Seth,

I'm not surprised. My serial number is 893xxx.

I was thinking of a thin smear of clear RTV or a solvent release glue like
Ambroid or Duco cement. Possibly even rubbery co0ntact cement.

IMO, either epoxy or Eastman 910 (superglue) would be an unwise choice.

Best,

-John

====================


> John:
> Amazing...I had the exact same problem. The mirror came slap off and I was
> really worried I would not be able to glue it back....I started with a
> thick glue from Walmart, that claimed to be able to glue glass. It worked
> fine! I will bet it does not last the 50-60 years the original did but we
> won't be around to worry, and maybe something else more critical will go
> before that :)
> I find this interestiong I will BET the scopes we have are within a year
> of manufacture, and like automotons they "fall" in rows....Not like
> people/medical failures.
> With Respect
> Seth Malovany MT AMT
>
>
> --- On Sat, 6/23/12, J. Forster <jfor@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: J. Forster <jfor@...>
> Subject: [Microscope] AO Series 10 Illuminator Questions
> To: microscope@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, June 23, 2012, 11:44 PM
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm working on tweeking up an AO Series 10 'scope with a 1036A Substage
> Illuminator and have two related questions.
>
> The 45 degree bending mirror has come loose, but fortunately is intact:
>
> Does anybody know what cement to use to re-attach the mirror? The old
> cement is sparingly soluable in Acetone so I'm dealing withy clean plated
> metal and clean glass. The bond will be very lightly stressed.
>
> Alse, the mirror mount is supported with three compression springs at the
> corners of a roughly Isoceles triangle. Does any know how to reset the
> adjustment after the mirror is reattached? I had to undo the screws to
> remove the piece to access the mirror.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -John
>
> ===================
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

John:
The stuff I got was something like Duco. I am in Romania right now but will be
going home in a week, so I can't look at the scope or the glue and see the name
of the glue or the number ....it was in a greenish toothpaste tube...ha ha ha
ha...If you can wait, I'll be able to give the exact details and I WILL look at
the serial number when I get back.
With Respect
Seth Malovany MT AMT

--- On Sun, 6/24/12, J. Forster <jfor@...> wrote:


From: J. Forster <jfor@...>
Subject: Re: [Microscope] AO Series 10 Illuminator Questions
To: Microscope@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, June 24, 2012, 12:00 AM


Hi Seth,

I'm not surprised. My serial number is 893xxx.

I was thinking of a thin smear of clear RTV or a solvent release glue like
Ambroid or Duco cement. Possibly even rubbery co0ntact cement.

IMO, either epoxy or Eastman 910 (superglue) would be an unwise choice.

Best,

-John

====================


> John:
> Amazing...I had the exact same problem. The mirror came slap off and I was
> really worried I would not be able to glue it back....I started with a
> thick glue from Walmart, that claimed to be able to glue glass. It worked
> fine! I will bet it does not last the 50-60 years the original did but we
> won't be around to worry, and maybe something else more critical will go
> before that :)
> I find this interestiong I will BET the scopes we have are within a year
> of manufacture, and like automotons they "fall" in rows....Not like
> people/medical failures.
> With Respect
> Seth Malovany MT AMT
>
>
> --- On Sat, 6/23/12, J. Forster <jfor@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: J. Forster <jfor@...>
> Subject: [Microscope] AO Series 10 Illuminator Questions
> To: microscope@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, June 23, 2012, 11:44 PM
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm working on tweeking up an AO Series 10 'scope with a 1036A Substage
> Illuminator and have two related questions.
>
> The 45 degree bending mirror has come loose, but fortunately is intact:
>
> Does anybody know what cement to use to re-attach the mirror? The old
> cement is sparingly soluable in Acetone so I'm dealing withy clean plated
> metal and clean glass. The bond will be very lightly stressed.
>
> Alse, the mirror mount is supported with three compression springs at the
> corners of a roughly Isoceles triangle. Does any know how to reset the
> adjustment after the mirror is reattached? I had to undo the screws to
> remove the piece to access the mirror.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -John
>
> ===================
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>




------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sounds like the tube length you are using is wrong Frez. Might also be problems
with the eyepiece. Lacking a vickers or cts eyepiece a 170mm tube length
periplan is likely to be a closish match but it may still give some chromatic
aberration - not that your likely to look at diatoms with it.

As far as I know tube length will either be 160mms or 10ins as Merv mentioned. I
have only actually physically seen 160mm cts scopes. These all used short
objectives. Vickers also did some infinite tube scopes. Not sure about cts. I
have seen one on ebay. It had 1.4na optics and a fork lift truck would be handy
for moving it around. Another was less well equipped. Both came complete with a
bench.

John

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "John" <a.johnw@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Fez :-) That does sound rather large for 100x!
>
> Hey, it could have been a long forgotten optical experiment that had 90%
spherical aberration and kaleidoscopic CA. :)
>
> It looks pretty average in a scope.
>
> Thanks for the links
> Frez
>
> > Personally I'm not at all sure it's even possible to tie down exactly what
cts - vickers etc have produced in the past even though it was a relatively
short time ago. There is an archive that was set up arround the time vickers was
raided etc by BA Systems. It's here but a isn't a fat lot of use.
> >
> >
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=193-vickers&cid=0&kw=vic\
kers%20instruments#0
> >
> > There is a brief history here. Interesting to note the "profitable" aspect.
Some of their products continued in the USA.
> >
> >
http://www.york.ac.uk/library/borthwick/research-support/vickers-instruments/
> >
> > :-) The date of the closure is well into the period where certain elements
in the UK seemed to be determined to eradicate any form of manufacture there. I
added the smile because it roughly coincides with the time I was sent on a
course that explained why. IT started in the late 60's.
> >
> > John
> >
> > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > >
> > > The front element is about 13.5mm diameter.
> > >
> > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi John,
> > > >
> > > > It couldn't possibly be a 1.5mm objective - the front element is far too
large. The markings are unusual, but probably date from the end of the
Projection Microscope era in the late 40s, early 50s. The form suggests a
classic Lister achromat. However, I have never seen a CTS objective of that era
with this particular configuration - brass lacquered body with nickel housing
for the front element - this would make it early rather than late - a bit of a
mystery!
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Merv
> > > >
> > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "John" <a.johnw@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Just in case you get crazy view Frez it may be a 1.5mm objective ie
circa 100x. I've never seen a CTS objective marked like that but some
manufacturers did in the dim and distant past.
> > > > >
> > > > > John
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks Frez, bit slow on the uptake on that one! With the low
magnification and NA, it is not going to care much about cover glass thickness -
it should work very well. The objectives for the Vickers Projection Microscope
were very good designs, in particular the high drys and the oil immersions.
Being 250mm tube length, they needed far less steep curvatures in the elements
and corrections were excellent. Only Reichert produced metallurgical objectives
as good, for much the same reason.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Merv
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > No Cover Glass
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It should work just fine on 190mm, although the magnification
will be lower - at that low NA it is fairly flexible on tube length. Er, NCG
design? Bit mystified by that comment (or need to reboot memory function....)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Merv
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Whoa! Thanks Merv. I'll fire it up on the Zetopan in EPI at
190 tl for a look see. Do you think it's likely a NCG design?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Frez
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "merv" <merv.hobden@>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi Frez,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > This is a 1 1/2" objective for 250mm (10") tube length with
an NA 0.06 and was originally made for the Vickers Projection Microscope.
Magnification on the ten inch tube would be 6.6 times. Probably made in the late
1930s - 1940s, previous to the introduction of the M55 with infinite tube length
objectives. Would work well on any American or British 'long tube' microscope!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Merv
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Frez" <dtetreault61@>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > This Cooke Troughton & Simms objective surfaced in a
box-o-stuff. Does anybody know what power 1 1/2 would be and is anyone at all
familiar with this?
> > > > > > > > > > >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/photos/album/947034199/pic/list
> > > > > > > > > > > It's the first pic.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > > > > Frez
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reminder of the microscope group services.

To find moderators and owner: In the left frame Members>Moderators
Or:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/members?group=mod

For Sale - Wanted - For Trade - Etc.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/database
contains references to books and a "Wanted or Offered" section for members to
buy, sell or trade microscope items and services.

Images

There is also a photos section with a 30 megabyte capacity.
http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/lst
It's purpose is the posting of pictures in .gif or .jpg format

Book Marks

Bookmarks is a section for posting links to micro related web sites,
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/links
and the database

Files

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Microscope/files/
Has files of interest to the group and some images.

Please use these services freely.

Hi Smelly (are you sure you want to be addressed using that name?)

Apparently, the DI Video F-mount adaptor (HRP-100) provides a field of view
that is designed for a 1" CCD video camera.  You will also need to consider
the DLSR sensor size and distance from the internal HRP-100 lens.  Too close
will cause vignetting (at least) or too far may cause focus problems.
Ideally, you would want a DLSR with a 1" sensor (Google DLSR Camera Sensor
sizes) that is located at exactly the same distance as the Video CCDs.  That
distance may be gotten from the Camera spec sheet?

Randall

-----Original Message-----
From: Microscope@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Microscope@yahoogroups.com]On
Behalf Of smellyboy55
Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 2:46 PM
To: Microscope@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Microscope] Looking to switch from 3CCD to dSLR


I have a diagnostic instrument coupler (HRP-100-ENG12)that is made to mount
a Sony 1/2" 3CCD camera (bayonet mount, 38mm) and I was trying to switch to
a dSLR camera. I havent bought a camera yet and was wondering if there is an
adapter which I havent been able to find on the internet or if there was a
camera that would allow for a easier transition?



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

Hi John,

I have used and still prefer an adhesive that remains semi flexible to allow
for differential thermal expansion of the mix of materials involved.  One
very good one is sold under the name "Lexol" and also under the name "Goop".
It is thermally stable (at Illuminator temperatures) and can be thinned by
toluene or xylene.

Randall

-----Original Message-----
From: Microscope@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Microscope@yahoogroups.com]On
Behalf Of J. Forster
Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 8:45 PM
To: microscope@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Microscope] AO Series 10 Illuminator Questions


Hi,

I'm working on tweeking up an AO Series 10 'scope with a 1036A Substage
Illuminator and have two related questions.

The 45 degree bending mirror has come loose, but fortunately is intact:

Does anybody know what cement to use to re-attach the mirror? The old
cement is sparingly soluable in Acetone so I'm dealing withy clean plated
metal and clean glass. The bond will be very lightly stressed.

Alse, the mirror mount is supported with three compression springs at the
corners of a roughly Isoceles triangle. Does any know how to reset the
adjustment after the mirror is reattached? I had to undo the screws to
remove the piece to access the mirror.

Thanks,

-John

===================



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

Good morning - my grandfather passed away and we inherited his antique
microscope, serial beginning 338xxx which seems to peg it around 1938 from what
I'm seeing online.  It's in great shape, the enamel has dots and spots and it
could all use a good polishing to be sure.  Is this valuable and desired?  The
three lenses on it say:  A=0.25 10:1, A=0.65 45:1, and A=1.25 90:1.

I'd love to know if this is something to be cherished and kept for our
grandkids, or something worth selling for $50 at a garage sale.  I'm clueless
and would love some insight.  Thanks!

If you google lens mounts you will find most of the flange distances for dslr's
on the wiki. The wiki also has info on the size of the various dslr sensors. You
might find a 4/3 type fits in fairly well but do check. Micro 4/3 has the
shortest flange distance but may only be available in the interchangeable lens
cameras that aren't dslr's. Maybe worth considering given the number of people
that bought dslr's of the type that provide live view.

You may also find the flange distance for your bayonet fitting on the wiki if
it's used on other types of camera - eg cine etc.

It's probably worth noting that generally a 1ins ccd or video sensor of any type
will have a diagonal of about 2/3 of the stated size. :-) All goes back to the
actual sensed area of various sizes of vidicon tubes. That just relates to the
diagonal. Height x width may not be square.

John

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "Randall Buck" <rbuck@...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Smelly (are you sure you want to be addressed using that name?)
>
> Apparently, the DI Video F-mount adaptor (HRP-100) provides a field of view
> that is designed for a 1" CCD video camera.  You will also need to consider
> the DLSR sensor size and distance from the internal HRP-100 lens.  Too close
> will cause vignetting (at least) or too far may cause focus problems.
> Ideally, you would want a DLSR with a 1" sensor (Google DLSR Camera Sensor
> sizes) that is located at exactly the same distance as the Video CCDs.  That
> distance may be gotten from the Camera spec sheet?
>
> Randall
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Microscope@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Microscope@yahoogroups.com]On
> Behalf Of smellyboy55
> Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 2:46 PM
> To: Microscope@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Microscope] Looking to switch from 3CCD to dSLR
>
>
> I have a diagnostic instrument coupler (HRP-100-ENG12)that is made to mount
> a Sony 1/2" 3CCD camera (bayonet mount, 38mm) and I was trying to switch to
> a dSLR camera. I havent bought a camera yet and was wondering if there is an
> adapter which I havent been able to find on the internet or if there was a
> camera that would allow for a easier transition?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>

Hi lousrandy,
  It has mostly to do with what someone is willing to pay.  If it is in great
shape your chances to sell to a collector increase.  If I were you I would post
pictures with an link and let folks take a look.
Dan

--- In Microscope@yahoogroups.com, "lousrandy" <live@...> wrote:
>
> Good morning - my grandfather passed away and we inherited his antique
microscope, serial beginning 338xxx which seems to peg it around 1938 from what
I'm seeing online.  It's in great shape, the enamel has dots and spots and it
could all use a good polishing to be sure.  Is this valuable and desired?  The
three lenses on it say:  A=0.25 10:1, A=0.65 45:1, and A=1.25 90:1.
>
> I'd love to know if this is something to be cherished and kept for our
grandkids, or something worth selling for $50 at a garage sale.  I'm clueless
and would love some insight.  Thanks!
>

Of the versions that Diagnostic Instruments makes, the Sony Bayonet is the
toughest to adapt to. With the arrival of EVIL(Electronic Viewfinder
Interchangeable Lens) cameras their C mount type couplers have IMO renewed
value.  But  adaptations for a Sony Bayonet to anything else whether C mount
or directly to EVIL camera are expensive.



I have not done a comprehensive search but the ones I saw on ebay were about
$250.  Since your DI adapter is a 1.00x  it might be worth using.

Don't buy a DSLR , buy an EVIL camera.  All the mirror mechanism will do is
cause vibration problems.  Get an EVIL camera with a small sensor.



You will want to select one that has a minimum of double the pixels of your
3 ccd  camera which will not be difficult.



http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Century-Nikon-Mount-to-Sony-1-2-Inch-CCD-Bayonet
-Mount-Optical-Adapter-/350525816213?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Century-Nikon-Mount-to-Sony-1-2-Inch-CCD-Bayone
t-Mount-Optical-Adapter-/350525816213?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item519cf77
d95> &hash=item519cf77d95



http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Century-2-3-Bayonet-Mount-to-C-Mount-Adapter-Bay
o-to-C-Adapters-/350566927707?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item519f6acd5b



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Since sellers usually don't know the exact age of old instruments, I suggest
you Look it up on eBay under "Antiques, Science & Medicine (Pre-1930),
Scientific Instruments, Microscopes & Lab Equipment".  I.e., go to eBay
categories and select "more" under "Antiques" then keep clicking the above
subcategories.  Look for a comparable item.

You might also try the "Business Industrial" category and search for Leitz,
etc

Randall

-----Original Message-----
From: Microscope@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Microscope@yahoogroups.com]On
Behalf Of lousrandy
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:36 AM
To: Microscope@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Microscope] Inherited 1930's Leitz Wetzlar microscope. Would
love info, value, etc.


Good morning - my grandfather passed away and we inherited his antique
microscope, serial beginning 338xxx which seems to peg it around 1938 from
what I'm seeing online.  It's in great shape, the enamel has dots and spots
and it could all use a good polishing to be sure.  Is this valuable and
desired?  The three lenses on it say:  A=0.25 10:1, A=0.65 45:1, and A=1.25
90:1.

I'd love to know if this is something to be cherished and kept for our
grandkids, or something worth selling for $50 at a garage sale.  I'm
clueless and would love some insight.  Thanks!



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

Nitrocellulose lacquer based cement would be what I would try.  You could
also try  hot melt glue or even sealing wax providing that the distance from
the lamp is such that there is not much heat and the lamp wattage is low.
Some sealing wax has a very high melting point, higher than

radiation from the lamp would heat to.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 
The overarching issue here is that it is impossible to make any meaningful
comments on the scope without seeing it, observing its condition, seeing what
accessories are with it, and what model it is.
 
Best,
Don
 


________________________________
From: Randall Buck <rbuck@...>
To: Microscope@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 11:31 AM
Subject: RE: [Microscope] Inherited 1930's Leitz Wetzlar microscope. Would love
info, value, etc.




Since sellers usually don't know the exact age of old instruments, I suggest
you Look it up on eBay under "Antiques, Science & Medicine (Pre-1930),
Scientific Instruments, Microscopes & Lab Equipment".  I.e., go to eBay
categories and select "more" under "Antiques" then keep clicking the above
subcategories.  Look for a comparable item.

You might also try the "Business Industrial" category and search for Leitz,
etc

Randall

-----Original Message-----
From: Microscope@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Microscope@yahoogroups.com]On
Behalf Of lousrandy
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:36 AM
To: Microscope@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Microscope] Inherited 1930's Leitz Wetzlar microscope. Would
love info, value, etc.


Good morning - my grandfather passed away and we inherited his antique
microscope, serial beginning 338xxx which seems to peg it around 1938 from
what I'm seeing online.  It's in great shape, the enamel has dots and spots
and it could all use a good polishing to be sure.  Is this valuable and
desired?  The three lenses on it say:  A=0.25 10:1, A=0.65 45:1, and A=1.25
90:1.

I'd love to know if this is something to be cherished and kept for our
grandkids, or something worth selling for $50 at a garage sale.  I'm
clueless and would love some insight.  Thanks!



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

What about Permatex, high temperature (silicon) gasket maker.  As it
cures, it only emits acetic acid for a few hours.  I would consider
using the flexible type.

Fred


On Sun, 2012-06-24 at 12:31 -0500, Gene Goldsand wrote:
>
> Nitrocellulose lacquer based cement would be what I would try. You
> could
> also try hot melt glue or even sealing wax providing that the distance
> from
> the lamp is such that there is not much heat and the lamp wattage is
> low.
> Some sealing wax has a very high melting point, higher than
>
> radiation from the lamp would heat to.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>

Years ago....   MANY years ago... a co-worker attached a small mirror,
about 1.5" OD x 1/4" thick, to an aluminum bracket as an autocollimating
theodolite target. The shrinkage and bond strength were sufficient to
distort the mirror and render it was unusable.

The AO mirror is under 1/16" thick.

Best,

-John

==================


> What about Permatex, high temperature (silicon) gasket maker.  As it
> cures, it only emits acetic acid for a few hours.  I would consider
> using the flexible type.
>
> Fred
>
>
> On Sun, 2012-06-24 at 12:31 -0500, Gene Goldsand wrote:
>>
>> Nitrocellulose lacquer based cement would be what I would try. You
>> could
>> also try hot melt glue or even sealing wax providing that the distance
>> from
>> the lamp is such that there is not much heat and the lamp wattage is
>> low.
>> Some sealing wax has a very high melting point, higher than
>>
>> radiation from the lamp would heat to.
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

"Fred Lieberman" wrote

> What about Permatex, high temperature (silicon) gasket maker.  As it
> cures, it only emits acetic acid for a few hours.  I would consider
> using the flexible type.
>

I would be very careful with anything that releases Acetic Acid fumes around
precision instruments.

I once saw some used in an underwater camera housing.  The damage the fumes
did was dreadful.

Obviously, not enough time was allowed - nor enough venting to eliminate the
fumes.

OK - this is about the worst possible case being totally sealed - and
possibly the curing and venting was hurried.


Peter  Smith.

Hello all;

I have an old AO  820 microtome (Black) that I am refurbishing. Inside the top
cover is a glued-in sheet of instructions that, regrettably, is old, brittle,
stained, and so dark as to be unreadable.

I wonder if anyone has such a microtome and if they might be able to supply a
photograph of this document.

I intend to print it, laminate, and affix it inside the cover.

Thank you, in advance, for your consideration

Sincerely;

Karl Wyant