Beiträge von Steve_mt

  • Stated magnification versus real magnification

    So sorry for the confusion and enigmatic situation we have here, but now I understand that the problem is only mine :(

    Please note that I do not have any issue with the other objectives, only the x100 oil immersion ones.


    To start and solve the issue, the first question is whether my AxioLab RE is finite(160mm) or infinite. The non-oil objectives came with the microscope (great optics) and they have the infinity sign so


    [Q1] can we safely assume that the Axiolab RE is an infinite microscope??? I think so!


    Answers:


    Wolfgang says: If your microscope body is infinite, never use lenses without the ∞ sign.

    All my objectives have the ∞ sign. The old oil immersion is 160mm and not the one being tested. Maybe this model can't take x100 objectives?? I doubt it!


    Peter asks: You have infinite and finite objectives on the same microscope!

    And they all work well for a strange reason - but the one being tested has the infinity sign.


    - We don't know what your microscope looks like or what attachments you have. [Answer: link below]

    - We don't know what kind of eyepieces you have. [Answer: Zeiss E-PL10]

    - We don't know what kind of reticle you inserted. There are different! [Answer: Standard reticle eyepiece from eBay, I don't think it is the problem]

    - We don't know where you inserted the graticule. [Answer: Stage micrometre]

    - We don't know what oil you use and how you use it. [ Answer: Small drop oil on the stage micrometre and mount. No coverslip ]


    [Q2] If there is something wrong with the graticule, eyepieces, reticule.... would the symptom show also on the x630 and x400 objectives?


    What's left is the oil to blame perhaps! I don't know anything about its origin, but bought 50mls from Lab supplies who give it in a plastic container.


    Really lost now what's the problem??? The speculations of infinity eyepieces on finite microscope is not the issue.

    The microscope body is like this (objectives different but they are also with infinity sign):


    Carl Zeiss Trinocular Microscope Axiolab | eBay



    [Q3] Do you think that the oil-immersion objectives (∞) do not match my microscope ???

  • Calycella citrina and a pale Calycella citrina ?

    On a fallen small branch of an Olive tree, I spotted some tiny bright yellow ascomycetes which I rolled (ie the entire branchlet) in Aluminum foil and collected it home . Three days later I went to examine the branch and I found two ascomycetes now - (1) the yellow Calycella and (2) another population similar in size to it but gray to mouse gray. Are these some new growth of decolourised specimens of Calycella (because perhaps they where in the dark?)


    and also, is C. citrina confirmed from these photos or there are closely related species to be considered (hence I need to run a full micro? )

  • Cortinarius sp. ? under Cistus (and Thymus) from calcareous soil


    Dear Uwe,


    I heard nothing from Unite, so giving them the fair chance to reply, and they did not, I am OK to move on with you. This is the first time to send material for DNA sequencing, hence where should I send the sample to you UWE? - I send you PM as requested

  • Cortinarius sp. ? under Cistus (and Thymus) from calcareous soil


    Dear Uwe,


    I herad nothing from Unite, so giving them the fair chance to reply, and they did not, I am OK to move on with you. This is the first time to send material for DNA sequencing, hence where should I send the sample to you UWE? - I send you PM as requested

  • Stated magnification versus real magnification

    Would be nice if someone can test the same procedure and calibrate the measurements with oil and without oil for the x100 objective and see if there are same results. Because if one measures spores under oil immersion and applies a 1:1 scale, there might be some 15% error in the measurements!!!! --- or is it just me here with this anomaly ?!?!

  • Stated magnification versus real magnification

    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.:saint:

    You need real money too!

  • ​ Diderma sp. (hemisphaericum?) on leaves of Juglans and other deciduous trees

    hilmgridd , dont worry about the English, what's important is that we communicate .... (although I couldn't get the joke about the egg lol!). I attach two more photos of this Diderma species from a previous collection which was more typical (well-developed stipe) for you to admire. Yes it is a lovely slime mold looking like tiny satellite radar discs.

    Agreed eith LG Ulla, the species is not specific to Juglans (I found it earlier on carob leaves and Rubus ulmifolius decaying stalks) but I think it requires a lot of humidity and likely a thick layer of leaf detritus.

  • Stated magnification versus real magnification

    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! ! !

  • Stated magnification versus real magnification

    Hi there,


    I don't really believe that the lens delivers such a clear change in the image scale.

    - Was it really readable 1: 1 before?

    No, always 1:1.17 (oil mount)


    - Is the measuring eyepiece the same as before?

    Eyepiece original of microscope (Zeiss Axioscop 20) but reticule different.


    - Is the measuring scale in the eyepiece the same? (There are so many different scales)

    yes


    - Has the graticule slipped in the measuring eyepiece?

    No


    - Is the microscope micrometer inserted the right way round?

    \yes, if not the numbers of the micrometer will be inverted and I would know


    The easiest way is to screw in the two 100 lenses side by side and compare them directly.



    Peter, maybe you are misinformed, but the lens always gave this 1:1.17, that is, it was not like it was giving 1:1 and now all of a sudden 1.1.17. If I remember the previous x100 objective did the same.


    regards

    Peter



    I wonder if you guys have your x100 objective giving 1:1 or 1:>1? when using oil (that is you put a drop of oil on stage micrometer)

  • Stated magnification versus real magnification


    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

  • Stated magnification versus real magnification

  • Stated magnification versus real magnification

    But then the 630x objective at same conditions (except not oil) does not suffer from any discrepancy.

  • Welche Pilze sind das?

    nobi_†: So true, but then a genus name is already very good for newbies .


    @ Fungi : Agree with the above, there are quite some Psathyrellaceae in the bunch. For better expectations, ideally you post species pre post and take several pics from different angles including scent. In several other fora or social media you want be helped from such a photo.