"...can't we all just get along" (Rodney King, LA Riots 1992?)

For me, the problem is that it is far too easy to go from informed opinion (by using all three I can say that, for me, the ergonomics and lenses of my Kiev 4a and Contax III work far better than the Lieca CL) to treating that opinion as fact that somehow applies to everyone. That kind of noise is easy to find at certain other web sites. I'd much rather continue to get the useful tips, tricks, advice and humor that are common here.

I ain't gonna sing diddly though and you all are glad for that. You may not know it, but trust me, you are... :D

William
 
You sure said it, Gordon -- this is supposed to be about fun...and it is!!! :D

Natalia, you're every bit as sweet as any Southern Belle! Thank you and everyone else that contributed a kind word -- we're a lucky bunch here!
 
Honu-Hugger said:
Chendayuan,
Those are a set of AO Spencer's presently on the scope. I also have some B&L Micro-Tessars and some Zeiss Luminars that I use primarily with my SL66 (Steve Grimes makes mounts for me), and occasionally with an Alpa body but if you're going for broke with macro you may as well go 2-1/4" instead of 35mm. I just got some macro work in Velvia back of a Christmas Cactus in bloom that originally belonged to my great-grandmother; I'm having a print made for my Mom and Dad now.
Click to expand...

AO yes, it ring the bell. I only used once or twice. most Olympus/Leica/Zeiss/Nikon. Well I will not start another who si the king of microscopy war, but the king probabely go to Olympus. Now, If your eyepiece is 10x and objective is 2x the total magnification is 20x roguhly 20x30 inch, That's the lowest of a good microscopy. may be the higest can can use on a 35mm film.
 
Honu and Chenda, - i made some "enlargements" of negative film with a microscope and a digital camera. Fun project. I attach one here below, from delta3200, magnifyed approx. 42X (screen versus size on negative, on a screen with 1024pix *vertical* res.) . Funny to see the grains in this size.
ANother one ishere.
 
Very cool, Pherdi. That makes for a really interesting effect, nice work nicely done!
I Still think about your Contax loss -- so sorry :mad: :mad: :mad: Any thoughts of replacing it, any leads? If I develop an inferiority complex and feel the need to "switch sides" you'll be the first to know -- you could catch me in a weak moment :D
 
As long as this has shifted over to Microscopes;

Has Zeiss put the DeepView system microscope back onto the market? I saw one demo'd at work almost 2 years ago and placed an order, only to be told it had been pulled and that they had to redesign the optics and software. The brochure is still on the website, but no one has called looking for the $75K order. We have a variety of Olympus and Zeiss scopes; everyone is mad at Nikon for going over to a non-standard lens mount. You think Nikon would have been the last to abandon a standard mount; I can use my RF Telephoto Lenses on the D1x.

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567BE0045ACF1/Inhalt-Frame/46025057B1264A74C1256CDB003D3447
 
Last edited:
I stuck extensively with Nikon for more than thirty years largely because of their dedication to their mount. Just as I was considering Canon/Nikon in the seventies Canon brought out the F1 and I remember so many Canon users feeling betrayed at the mount change. At the time I thought all things were equal otherwise between Nikon and Canon so I went with Nikon. I still had the Alpa 9d that my Dad gave me, but I couldn't afford lenses for it :D Plus, Nikon and Canon had huge telephoto lenses and motor-drives and all that other stuff that's so important to young aspiring wanna-be photogs! :D Now I have an Alpa/Nikon converter and I'm haunting eBay buying back all my favorite Nikkors :mad: :D :bang: (calls for a mix of faces).
 
Nikon made good Photography lens but not microscopy, Germany Zeiss is the better one, Japnese goes to Olympus
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom