Difference between two Nikon Apo Plan 4x NA 2.0?

Davids · Post by **Davids** » Sat Dec 03, 2016 8:43 am

Looking on Ebay there are a number of Nikon Apo Plan 4x NA 2.0 available. I'm confused as to what the difference is between this objective:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/NIKON-PLAN-APO- ... SwFdtXyF1m

and this objective:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-Microscop ... Sw41xXOmEk

Has anyone ever used the former?

Thanks!

David

Ichthyophthirius · Post by **Ichthyophthirius** » Sat Dec 03, 2016 9:28 am

Hi David,

The first one is very odd! The second one is a CFN lens (late 80s, early 90s), with high NA and corrected for FN 26.5 ("ultra-widefield").

The first one is also for 160 mm tube length but it was produced very recently (2013). I didn't even know that Nikon is still producing such microscopes. If nobody here knows this objective series, you should call your local Nikon Instruments representative (as it's a current product).

The label says "CF Plan Apo" which originally looked like this http://www.ebay.com/itm/192006861410 (70s-80s). This is clearly different and must have some kind of special purpose.

Regards, Ichty

harisA · Post by **harisA** » Sat Dec 03, 2016 10:17 am

Never seen the first one.A quick look at a nikon price list from 2013 shows no matches.

ChrisR · Post by **ChrisR** » Sat Dec 03, 2016 11:02 am

It hardly looks physically big enough to be a 40mm f/2.0 lens !

Cactusdave · Post by **Cactusdave** » Sat Dec 03, 2016 12:50 pm

I'm not convinced this is a Nikon lens. There's no Nikon logo on the lens barrel and nothing other than the CF designation on the 'packing envelope' to suggest Nikon either. The objective resembles some Nikon 160mm lenses, but doesn't look right for a planapo as Chris has noted. The front glass doesn't look wide enough and it looks recessed. I'm luck enough to have Leitz and Zeiss 160mm Planapo X4s. They all have a much bigger front element which is hardly recessed at all. The later 160mm Nikon X4 planapo looks like this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-PlanApo-4 ... 2081157468 , which superficially resembles the lens in the first listing, but there's no getting around the lack of Nikon on the barrel. So what is it? No idea. The envelope says made in Japan, otherwise I might have thought it was a straight forward fake.

JohnyM · Post by **JohnyM** » Sat Dec 03, 2016 12:58 pm

There is "nikon japan" label on the lens. It's RMS screw.
I belive e100 microscopes were orginally made with RMS CF 160mm lenses, then Nikon changed them to CFI45 RMS BE lenses. Wouldnt think that they will make PlanApo lenses for e100 class scopes tho.

Cactusdave · Post by **Cactusdave** » Sat Dec 03, 2016 1:04 pm

Well spotted! There's a tiny bit of an 'N' showing on the edge of the last image. I guess it could be the lens shown in the link in my previous post rather badly photographed. Nice lens in that case.

JohnyM · Post by **JohnyM** » Sat Dec 03, 2016 1:04 pm

Gee... 3rd photo. Its much faster to check photos / read description on ebay, than type a post here.

Cactusdave · Post by **Cactusdave** » Sat Dec 03, 2016 1:16 pm

That's all fine except I was referring to the first listing in Davids post where the word Nikon is cryptic to say the least. http://www.ebay.com/itm/NIKON-PLAN-APO- ... SwFdtXyF1m

Charles Krebs · Post by **Charles Krebs** » Sat Dec 03, 2016 3:36 pm

FWIW....
The seller (item 222332707697) has had a number of these on Ebay the last few months. I purchased one to replace the 4/0.13 CFN Plan Achromat that came on my inverted Diaphot. While it is different in appearance from the CFN Apo I have seen pictured on other Ebay auctions (and in the CFN brochure I have) it definitely has the Nikon "feel" and construction quality. It is clearly marked Nikon, "Japan" and has a serial number. On the microscope, doing side-by-side comparisons, it is clearly much brighter, sharper and more highly color corrected than the CFN 4/0.13 I have (which is really a pretty decent plan achromat objective). It was definitely a "keeper" for me.

I'll add a picture of the label from the one I received. It too shows a 2013 manufacturing date (but different month and day).

I can offer no other information about it, only conjecture. Since Nikon regularly makes optics that are used in other manufacturers hardware. Perhaps they had a "client" that needed a supply for whatever reason.

lothman · Post by **lothman** » Sun Dec 04, 2016 5:35 am

seller doesn't ship to abroad and it is not possible to ask him a question

lehmberg · Post by **lehmberg** » Fri Mar 31, 2017 8:11 pm

I also bought one of those 4xCF 160/.2 new lenses made in 2013, and though it was counterfeit, but not so: I contacted Nikon with photos of the objective and box and a screen grab from an old 1989 brochure of APO objectives, and they said:

"That is a very old Nikon CF Plan Apo 4x objective. The picture from brochure he sent was of CF N Plan Apos which came out later. The original CF Plan Apos were introduced early 1980's and were updated to N Plan Apo series - maybe late 1980's -1990 and then these were replaced by CFi60 version in 1996. That particular objective, if the box is right, was made in 2013. Nikon remanufactured this objective 2012 to 2014 for a particular OEM customer who may have sold off excess inventory.

Not counterfeit for sure."

So Mr. Krebs was right.
RVL

ray_parkhurst · Post by **ray_parkhurst** » Sat Apr 01, 2017 7:40 am

How much compromise is made by using this objective without cover slip?

Ichthyophthirius · Post by **Ichthyophthirius** » Sat Apr 01, 2017 9:44 am

Hi Ray,

Spherical aberration would be the main problem when using an objective without cover glass. Spherical aberration for a given objective (here: dry) only depends on the NA. Up to NA 0.30 you should see no degradation of a widefield image.

For this one, with NA 0.20, the widefield image should not be effected by the absence of the cover glass. However, exact parfocality with other objectives is lost (I suspect that doesn't matter for you

).

Regards, Ichty

Ultima_Gaina · Post by **Ultima_Gaina** » Wed Apr 05, 2017 12:54 pm

lehmberg wrote:I also bought one of those 4xCF 160/.2 new lenses made in 2013, and though it was counterfeit, but not so: I contacted Nikon with photos of the objective and box and a screen grab from an old 1989 brochure of APO objectives, and they said:

"That is a very old Nikon CF Plan Apo 4x objective. The picture from brochure he sent was of CF N Plan Apos which came out later. The original CF Plan Apos were introduced early 1980's and were updated to N Plan Apo series - maybe late 1980's -1990 and then these were replaced by CFi60 version in 1996. That particular objective, if the box is right, was made in 2013. Nikon remanufactured this objective 2012 to 2014 for a particular OEM customer who may have sold off excess inventory.

Not counterfeit for sure."

So Mr. Krebs was right.
RVL

So is it fair to expect the same performance as the "traditional" Nikon Plan Apo 4x 0.20?