Hey guys, I made a comparison of the following microscope lenses: Lomo 4 0,12 160/0 Lomo 3,7 0,11 CZJ Semiplan 3,2 0,10 160/0 My equipment: CZJ Monocular Microscope (1931) Nikon D3400 (APS-C) Mitutoyo Cold Light Source The Setup was exactly the same for every lens. Order is always: Lomo 4 / Lomo 3,7...

Thanks for your reply!
I couldn‘t find raw stats of the Nikon M plan 20 0,35 210/0 SLWD, but I found some for the Nikon M plan 20 0,40 210/0 ELWD.
At the moment I lean towards the ELWD, which seems to be used more in photomacrography.

Hey guys, has anyone compared e.g the Nikon M Plan 20 0,40 210/0 ELWD with the Nikon M Plan 20 0,35 210/0 SLWD ? I know that the working distance of the SLWD is much longer, but what is about image quality? Sadly they are expensive and therefore I don‘t want to buy both of them. Thanks and kind rega...

You‘re welcome

that is my impression, too. But for a final conclusion I have to test it on more subjects.
Nevertheless the Lomo 4 0,12 seems to be a very good objective for macrophotography.
I‘m glad I bought it (Lomo 4 0,12-> 32,99$ vs Lomo 3,7 0,11->79,99$

They both look good at this magnification, but we would need to see 100% crops of each to judge them properly. And maybe with minimal sharpening rather than automatic sharpening. You are totally right. I cropped the center and the bottom left corner. Compressed via irfan, no sharpening. 1 Lomo 3,7 ...

74 waspjirfan.jpg 79 waspirfan.jpg The first image was made by the Lomo 3,7. I used 74 single pictures and an exposure time of 1.3 The second image was made with the Lomo 4. I used 79 single pictures and an exposure time of 1.0 The Lomo 4 is more light sensitive and so I had to reduce the exposure ...

Thank you 😊 Very nice shots, the blue in the second shot, how did you get that shade? This was actually the „natural outcome“ with inside the camera white-balance. Stronger light changed the soft pink/purple tone in this bright violetish blue. Here a comparison picture with the same settings despite...

Hey guys, i had my first darkfield experience days ago. I only have old random equipment and made the darkfield via a plastic-inlay made by an 3D-printer. Works pretty nice and is cheap. I get more and more in love with photographing diatoms and hope you like it:) Zeiss Jena microscope (1931) Nikon ...

Hey!

Thanks a lot for the Info. I will post a stack and single shots with both objectives. The Lomo 4 already arrived (not yet tested), but I‘m still waiting for the Lomo 3,7.
Hope to get it within the next time.

Kind regards,
Simon

Hey,

thanks to both of you! I bought both and will show the results within the next days.

Kind regards,
Simon

Hey,

has anyone experience with the Lomo 4 0,12? Is it as good as the Lomo 3,7 0,11?

Kind regards,

Simon

Very nice!!!

I‘m excited what bug will hatch.

best regards,
Simon

I have two Lomo 3.7x objectives, and one was better than the other, but in that case both were very good, even the "less good" one was still very good. This happens for all brands, though some more than others, and especially objectives and lenses bought on eBay. The proportion of bad lenses is gre...

Lomo definitely had some quality issues. I read about this multiple times...I opened a thread by myself about series deviation (Nikon M 5 0.1). I only own a Lomo Plan 9 0.20 and my copy works fine (still not as good as the ZeissJena 8 0.20) and has no quality issues.

Kind regards,
Simon

Hello Miljenko, you posted that some time ago but I still wanted to thank you for this superb objectives test! It helped me a lot. The Zeiss Jena Semiplan 3,2 seems to be a bit overrated. In Germany it is still a hyped stacking objective (along with the Semiplan 6,3 which seems to be a lot better). ...