Olympus UIS DIC

[houstontx]

Here is my dilemma,

I have:
BX51
U-D6BDRE M26 DIC nosepiece
U-DICTS
U-DPA20 & U-DPA40
UPlanAPO 20x
UPlanAPO 40x with correction collar

Problem - No DIC effect when lower polarizer inserted at crossed polar/maximum extinction.

Possible root cause - I am using M26 to RMS adapters on the nosepiece. This leaves a few mm of spacing within the adapter (objective is too low). I am planning on buying some flangeless adapters see ebay item 154248248635 such that the objective back focal plane is in proper position. Also the nosepiece dimensions itself may be too large and designed for BD + U-DICR...trying to get maximum flexiblity out of one microscope body and finding it just might not be doable (without the proper U-D6RE nosepiece). The objectives are the older (do not show UIS2) objectives, Does this all sound logical?

Thanks,

[Scarodactyl]

An m26 DIC nosepiece is designed for epi DIC. I know the epi and transmitted sliders are the same size so it's all mechanically compatible but the rest of the optical layout might not be right(?)

[PeteM]

The metallurgical turret messing up spacing sounds likely to me as well.

FWIW, when I couldn't find a second turret affordably (I want one dry DIC, one oil immersion DIC with some lower mag finders) but kept seeing the U-D6REM showing up at a third to half the price I took a chance on one.

It's ugly, but the underside doesn't show and the bit of exposed gear on the objective side is to the back once mounted (and also doesn't much show). These work fine in manual mode once you remove the motor, gears, etc.
.
.

[houstontx]

Pete,

Great suggestion I'll keep an eye out for the motorized versions. I do have an AX70 with proper transmitted nosepiece to test with next week just to confirm its not mismatch between prism and objective...

[Macro_Cosmos]

Where does the analyser go? Fluorescence arm?
That turret will not work if your adaptor adds any length to the objective. DIC prisms are made to match the objective's back focal plane, adding or subtracting the distance between the objective and the DIC slider does not allow the light rays to combine properly.

[houstontx]

Well I mounted the objectives onto my AX70 with normal BF RMS objective turret and no luck with DIC, images look similar to the BX51. According to the U-UCD8 manual those should be the correct prisms for the objectives, but now I have my doubts. Also I notice when adjusting the lower polarizer for maximum extinction with u-dicts inserted (both at BP1 and normal prism positions, no change), i don't see the black diagonal bar, just a general lowering of light. This suggest there is no analyzer, but I was under the assumption the U-Dicts does not require an analyzer, in the literature it seems to not need one (as opposed to the U-DICT which is integrated into the slider).

I do have a slot for a U-AN or U-PO in the fluorescence turret and will try that next, but it will sit a couple inches above the U-DICTS. I just still don't understand how the U-DICT is supposed to work in a BX frame with no upper analyzer slot...Thank you for all the comments thus far.

[Pau]

This must be the problem: UDICTS needs an analyzer over it. UDICT also does although it can be inserted into the round space over the prism (U-ANT or just a 25mm polarizer like I do)

[Scarodactyl]

Ohhh yeah. That will do it.

[houstontx]

Well I think that must be why the U-DICT seems to be more desirable and typically more expensive than the U-DICTS, i thought it was due to the "sensitive colors" it can achieve but more likely you won't need another intermediate tube to accommodate the analyzer. In all the literature it looks like the analyzer is not necessary and my past experience is with the BH2 era DIC where the analyzer is incorporated into the slider. Lesson learned. The bright side is maybe the dream of having a bx51 that can do both transmitted and reflected light using the M26 adapters is still a go...

[Macro_Cosmos]

DIC is just a special case of polarised light. The condenser prism splits the light rays and the nosepiece one combines it. The analyser is crossed with the polariser, being a necessary component to form the final image as it permits the passing of some elliptically polarised light and blocks out the rest. That is how pseudo-3D images are generated. Without the analyser, you will at best get some kind of oblique effect.

Is your analyser the AX-AN? If you only have the U-PO type, it will not fit properly, angled incorrectly, and rotated incorrectly. You will have to manually cross the polarisers, instead of relying on the white dot. The U-DICTS is necessary for BFP1 objectives, some of which are pretty good (UPlanXApo 40x oil immersion).

[houstontx]

Hi there, the analyzer is the U-AN, which is smaller in diameter than the AX-AN and does not fit in the slot correctly, theres no satisfying "click" and it can be pushed in too far. However, the strong black diagonal interference bar is visible and the DIC effect is quite good now.

Next step is to mount everything back onto the BX51 frame later today including the U-RLA+U-AN with BD nosepiece and adapters...fingers crossed...

[Macro_Cosmos]

Hi there, the analyzer is the U-AN, which is smaller in diameter than the AX-AN and does not fit in the slot correctly, theres no satisfying "click" and it can be pushed in too far. However, the strong black diagonal interference bar is visible and the DIC effect is quite good now.

Next step is to mount everything back onto the BX51 frame later today including the U-RLA+U-AN with BD nosepiece and adapters...fingers crossed...

I suppose you can design and 3D print a tray to adapt the thinner and smaller U-AN to the AX standard. I wanted to do that until I finally found an AX-AN360.
Olympus' normal DIC style is strong contrast at 60x and below, you will need to fiddle around a lot. Zeiss and Nikon's DIC is more balanced and typically more appealing, a balance between contrast and resolution. Leica has the highest contrast which can get wild.

Anyway, good luck with the setup. I went through all this a couple years ago and the results were worth it!
FYI, there is a 6 place nosepiece with insert for auction on eBay, could be a good deal. I will not be placing a bid if you want it.

[houstontx]

Yes 3d printing a tray would definitely work...Well I mounted everything back onto the BX51 and DIC works great. This means I now have a frame that can do both transmitted and reflected DIC (I still need BD objectives and U-DICR slider of course).

One issue is the U-RLA needs a spacer to increase height when the lamphouse is attached, thus further magnifying the image. I think I will have to remove the lamphouse when not using reflected light to avoid having to use the spacer.

Speaking of 60x... I have a UIS UplanFL 60x Oil Iris 1.25na. I think the correct prism to use is the U-DPO60S, however a I am also being told the U-DP60 is the correct prism. From the U-UCD8 manual it shows UPlanFl60x comes in a dry, an OI and OI3 verion, Would you happen to know which is correct?

Thanks,

[Scarodactyl]

That shouldn't magnify the image.l in an knfinity system unless I am misreading. Where is the spacer added?

[PeteM]

. . . Speaking of 60x... I have a UIS UplanFL 60x Oil Iris 1.25na. I think the correct prism to use is the U-DPO60S, however a I am also being told the U-DP60 is the correct prism. From the U-UCD8 manual it shows UPlanFl60x comes in a dry, an OI and OI3 verion, Would you happen to know which is correct?

Thanks,

I was/am confused as well. But I already had a U-DP100 (and no space for another prism in the condenser). Tried it, and found it provided a reasonably even field to my not-overly-fussy eyes. If you happen to have one already (they're fairly common compared to the others) might give it a try?