 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / Optics / October 2007Zeiss Universal Or Leitz Othoplan...Which One Would You Buy?
I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz Othoplan. Which one would you buy and why? I have been searching for information for both scopes and have found very little. Any suggestions as to where one can find more information on these scopes? Also...how easy and affordable are other lighting options (phase, DIC, fluorescence, polarized light) to find for these scopes considering that they are older scopes? Thanks TMT > I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz > Othoplan. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > TMT You bring up a good point, these are old 'scopes. Finding good quality stuff to add to both of these can be quite hard. If you were a scientist, I'd discourage buying one of these, there is no central site to buy stuff. Now as an amateur, it could be worth it. These are two great microscopes, which ever one you pick, you'll be satisfied. Just a couple of points. Make sure that the repair guy you use knows these instruments. They can be quirky and weird, they do need maintenance. If you screw one up, no parts. If your repair guy is good then wonderful, these devices are really precise. As to which one, I'd pick either. Which ever one does the job is the one you should buy. Thanks, Kevin Cunningham SMS > I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz > Othoplan. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > TMT > I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz > Othoplan. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > TMT Personally, I'd go whichever is in better condition and has better specified optics. If they are in equally good condition, I'd go for the Zeiss. There is more zeiss stuff about secondhand, though it appears that the US market seems to expect very inflated prices. Also, Zeiss stuff tends to be more interchangeable between models. I am very envious!! Can I have the other one!! hj On Oct 21, 12:02 pm, UKOncol...@aol.com wrote: > > I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz > > Othoplan. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Well that is what is making the decision of buying which one hard...they both are set up for brightfield/phase and both have the top line apo objectives. It seems to really just the question...Zeiss or Leitz? That and how easily could one expand them to fluorescence and DIC in the future? TMT > On Oct 21, 12:02 pm, UKOncol...@aol.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > TMT TMT, In my professional estimation your better of with the Zeiss for one good reason, there were more of them made. When both or these were made Zeiss was no. 2 seller in America while Leitz was no. 4. Your more likely to get Zeiss accesories than Leitz. Now, you might be right next door to were all Leitz parts are stored but, by and large, your more likely to find Zeiss stuff rather than Leitz. Stuff, in general, is hard to find. Thanks, Kevin Cunningham SMS > > On Oct 21, 12:02 pm, UKOncol...@aol.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Thanks Kevin....my thinking is similar. The stands I have been offered have most of what I can think I might need in the future but for fluorescence and DIC. While I have little interest in fluorescence at the present, I do see myself wanting DIC in the future. TMT I have used both, and the Zeiss Universal is a great instrument. But optically and mechanically, the one I worked with was not too different from "lesser" models, it was just bigger and with more functions. In contrast, the Leitz Orthoplan with its super wide field eyepieces gave tremendous views, and with really smooth, effortless operation. It felt like I had one of the deluxe models of Mercedes Benz in my driveway after I had become used to Volkswagens. You can really appreciate why they were so expensive when new (and worth every cent). Greg > I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz > Othoplan. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > TMT Thanks for the replies. Where would one find detailed documentation on these scopes? There is little to be found on the Web. Also of these two scopes, which one is more likely to be able to be fitted for DIC and fluorescence? Accessories for older scopes are getting harder to find all the time. Thanks TMT Tools, you can see some interesting reviews of the Orthoplan and Zeiss Photomic version of the Universal in Micscape magazine, see their article library at http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/indexmag.html Can't help with maker documents, maybe Gordon will get them eventually. I agree that DIC and Fl accessories are getting rare now. Greg > Tools, you can see some interesting reviews of the Orthoplan and Zeiss > Photomic version of the Universal in Micscape magazine, see their [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > eventually. I agree that DIC and Fl accessories are getting rare now. > Greg Thanks Greg...Micscape seems to be the only place for information and the articles there have been invaluable. its a damn shame considering the quality, history and profits those stands represent that more is not out there. You would think the respective companies would have some pride in their past and have a detailed website available....that past can sell future scopes when packaged properly. I am also surprised that those in the repair/user segment haven't stepped up to the plate and done a website or two. If I spent a major part of my life working with some of the finest manufactured goods in the world I would not want to see that information lost. Do you know if Micscape has ever considered a website that would showcase various microscopes and their accessories? The need is obviously there. Those interested in old tools have done something about the loss of information..... http://www.lathes.co.uk/page21.html Note that this is located in England....the home of Micscape. TMT > Thanks Greg...Micscape seems to be the only place for information and > the articles there have been invaluable. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > TMT I can't find the relevant link, but I've downloaded copies for a lot of the variants of the Universals in pdf format. I think they were from an official Zeiss site in Germany. IIRC, it required a bit of slogging through a library to locate them, but they were there within the past year or so. I believe there may be a link to that site in Gordon's very useful site: http://www.couger.com/microscope/links/gclinks.html I've got copies of the polarized, DIC, standard, etc. documents. Got some Leitz as well, but all that is at home, and I'm not... Fluorescence? Methinks you set your sights very high indeed! (This from a guy who wants to make thin sections of local rocks by hand. Pot, Kettle. Black. <g>) Joe > > Thanks Greg...Micscape seems to be the only place for information and > > the articles there have been invaluable. [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Thanks for the link. It would seem that the Orthoplan docs are the tougher ones to find...which again just amazes me considering the importance of that stand. Make thin sections of local rocks by hand? Tell us more. I am off and on helping some friends in this area....there is almost nothing available for mineralogical sample preparation for the amateur. Any information would be appreciated. I sure wish someone would do a series for Micscape on the subject (hint, hint). TMT > Thanks for the link. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > TMT I checked for my Leitz docs; all I have is a history of the Orthoplan, by Mike Andre, which I probably copied from the Micscape site, and a scanned pdf of a manual for an Ortholux (transmitted & incident). I obtained a monograph from the British Postal Microscopical Society on hand preparation of thin sections. Maybe by next spring I will have recovered enough to start trials of the techniques. Most of the required supplies are carborundum/diamond of various grits, a special thermal adhesive with the proper RI that is pretty expensive for the minimum order (which is more than enough for a lifetime of this work), and a buttload of elbow grease. Maintaining the sample parallel to the grinding plate is also essential. You also need to know at least one primary mineral constituent of the sample (e.g., quartz), and gauge the final thickness by repeatedly checking for the proper interference color between crossed polars & retarder plate. After I get a handle on the technique, I will definitely write up something for those interested. I was advised that if I join a local mineral club, I would have access to the geology dept. equipment of the local university, so my hand preparation experiments may be short-lived. I feel I've gotta try it at least once, though. If I hit the lottery, maybe I can buy the equipment, which the last time I checked, was only about $14,000 for a turnkey system, new. Hadn't seen it at Harbor Freight yet. (A 4" wet-blade trim saw from HF, etc. is a key piece for the rough starter slab, though.) I'll keep you posted, but don't hold your breath. Joe > > Thanks for the link. > [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Joe, Thanks for looking for the Orthoplan docs. A parts and pricing list is the useful of most docs...that way you know what goes with what. Microscope companies have never been known for their documentation efforts. I will be very interested in seeing what you write up...as I said there is little available in the literature.. I agree that the equipment cost for thin section mineralogical prep is high. I have been trying to work that angle by redirecting used equipment from the local rock clubs to the people I am trying to help. TMT > I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz > Othoplan. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > TMT Okay...it is starting to look like getting accessories for the Orthoplan...or for that fact any Leitz is a major pain. And of course no documentation has surfaced for the Orthoplan. Could someone who knows tell me what options were available for the Orthoplan? Like what eyepieces, objectives, condensors and lighting options. And if you know something on how DIC was implemented, I would like to hear about that too....there is nothing out on the Web. It would be interesting to see how Leitz approached that application versus Zeiss. Thanks TMT > > I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz > > Othoplan. [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > TMT First every possible thing you could add to a microscope was available for this 'scope. Beautiful NPL fluorite objectives, apos, really nice eyepeices, etc. However Nomarski wasn't, they used a system called Smith T, it worked similarly but it was a pain to add. The genius of Nomarski was its simplicity. Smith T works but it is more complex. Fluorescence was gorgeous. Of course the original filters probably won't work or work well, replace them with Thanks, Kevin Cunningham SMS > > > I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz > > > Othoplan. [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Thanks Kevin for the information. I will look into the Smith T. I see that the Orthoplan uses larger eyepieces than what I am used to seeing...30mm? Can this scope use other maker's stereo eyepieces? TMT > > > > I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz > > > > Othoplan. [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > TMT Just in general you should never, ever do that, you don't know were they've been. No, but eyepieces are a part of the 160mm tube length system. Since Abbe's time some makers have fixed some optical problems in the eyepiece and some in the objective. This is purely a manufacturers decition. Its far, far better to get the manufacturers eyepieces. Thanks, Kevin Cunningham SMS > > > > > I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz > > > > > Othoplan. [quoted text clipped - 72 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Understood....that has been what I have learned also. Other than knowing the model number of the eyepieces that were meant for a scope, how else can one tell that you have the proper eyepieces? And without proper documentation which is usually the pricing list, you don't have the model number. And of course part of my previous discussion has been not being able to find documentation. Now my kids know why I am losing my hair. ;<) In reality, I have seen numerous scopes using different eyepieces than what the manufacturer meant for them. Some work..kind of ;<)...and some don't work...and then the user blames the manufacturer for a faulty product. Has anyone ever formulated a rule of thumb of whose do work and whose do not? I also note that the Orthoplan I have been offered is a 170mm tube length. I assume that there are 160mm and 170mm versions of the Orthoplan considering that length of production and that Leitz changed from 170mm to 160mm tube length? Another question...I was just looking at an Ortholux II and noticed that the objective turret looks similar to the Orthoplan objective turret...are they interchangeable? (Again keeping in mind the 160mm/ 170mm issue.) TMT > > > > > > I have an opportunity of buying either a Zeiss Universal or a Leitz > > > > > > Othoplan. [quoted text clipped - 108 lines] > > TMT TMT, The good news is all manufacturers made a limited line of eyepieces. The most used ones, the standard 10X ones worked in all their compound instruments. Now, all manufacturers made super wide field, these are easy to figure out since there a lot bigger, about 30mm rather than 23mm. Using another manufacturers eyepieces is just dumb, at best it doesn't work well and at worst it doesn't work. Just to make it fun the Leitz 170mm standard wasn't actually 170mm, it was actually 162mm. If push comes to shove I'd use a 170 on a 160, particularly if the objective was a high power, short fl lens. There won't be a lot of problems with a 2mm tube length difference. Leitz made 170 and 160mm eyepieces, the 160mm had a slightly longer middle piece, again as long as the two eyepieces were the same. The real problem is the age, objectives keep getting better and better. Thanks, Kevin Cunningham SMS |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.