Mitutoyo Telecentric objectives

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: Pau, rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S.

1of1snowflakes
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2019 3:30 pm

Mitutoyo Telecentric objectives

Post by 1of1snowflakes »

My dad has these two objectives that he was going to send me. 5x and 10x

Image

I know they are older - he said they are in mint condition and unused. Are they similar to these here:

https://www.edmundoptics.com/f/mitutoyo ... ves/12907/

any thoughts on whether it will work with a tube lens similarly to my regular Mitutoyo M Plan APO 10? My APO 10 model I got online has some issues with the finish on the side of the lens facing the camera. It still works, but since my dad has these for me I figured why not. And also, how does a finite work differently than an infinite for camera microphotography? Do I have to use at a certain tube length compared to not for the APO 10?

RobertOToole
Posts: 1618
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Mitutoyo Telecentric objectives

Post by RobertOToole »

1of1snowflakes wrote:My dad has these two objectives that he was going to send me. 5x and 10x

Image

I know they are older - he said they are in mint condition and unused. Are they similar to these here:

https://www.edmundoptics.com/f/mitutoyo ... ves/12907/

any thoughts on whether it will work with a tube lens similarly to my regular Mitutoyo M Plan APO 10? My APO 10 model I got online has some issues with the finish on the side of the lens facing the camera. It still works, but since my dad has these for me I figured why not. And also, how does a finite work differently than an infinite for camera microphotography? Do I have to use at a certain tube length compared to not for the APO 10?
I tried something similar from Mitutoyo, maybe the same type but later models and the news isn't good, they vignetted and overall the IQ was not very good. The eBay seller allowed returns so they went back.

The pair I tried was setup as finites.

Some Mitutoyo objectives from the QV scope use a 100mm system tube, the other normal series uses 200mm.

I would try it with a 100mm TL and go from there. Don't listen to me, you should try them yourself. The reason I recommend the TL is that in my experience, coverage is usually a little bit better, sometimes much better when setup in a stacked configuration.

Just followed the link and the objectives on the Edmunds site are the exact lenses that I tried.

Best,

Robert

Scarodactyl
Posts: 479
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:26 am

Post by Scarodactyl »

Mitutoyo makes a lot of different products, including lenses for optical comparators which have somewhat less demanding needs. I did try a zooming one from them, a 10x-50x, IQ wasn't super amazing but I do regret returning it. If your dad has them then trying them doesn't seem that risky, but I wouldn't expect m plan apo type performance. But heck, who knows? I look forward to hearing how they do.

Lou Jost
Posts: 4644
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

I have the Mitutoyo 3x and 20x telecentric measurement scope objectives. They are finite lenses. Yours don't look exactly like mine. They might be older versions of them, but I suspect that they are indeed comparator objectives rather than microscope objectives.

RobertOToole
Posts: 1618
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

Lou Jost wrote:I have the Mitutoyo 3x and 20x telecentric measurement scope objectives. They are finite lenses. Yours don't look exactly like mine. They might be older versions of them, but I suspect that they are indeed comparator objectives rather than microscope objectives.
Hi Lou,

The link to Edmunds has the current versions that are the same that I tried.

Lou Jost
Posts: 4644
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Yes, Robert, that's what mine look like too. Part number starts with 375, though there is another different objective set that also starts with 375.

Macro_Cosmos
Posts: 995
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:23 pm
Location: Sydney

Post by Macro_Cosmos »

Adding to the discussion of QV-Objectives,

I've tried the Mit QV-Objective lenses with ~100mm tube lenses and 200mm tube lenses, here's the findings.

QV-Objective 5x and 2.5x, HR version.

100mm...
Schneider Xenon-Sapphire (95mm, F3.9, 0.23x optimum): Very sharp centre, abysmal corners.
Schneider Apo-Digitar 120mm: Very sharp overall, but field heavy curvature, lots of distortion outside of DX circle.
Nikon 70-200 F2.8 FL (newest): Mechanical vignetting
Laowa 105mm STF: Same as above

200mm...
ITL-200 Thorlabs (Nikon) tube lens: Nearly as sharp as 10x M Plan mit
Nikon 70-200 FL: Mechanical vignetting
ITL-200 Retro: Nearly as sharp as 10x M Plan Mit

They do very well when extended, using 200mm tube lens on FX. 100mm... not so much, there's always weirdness, be prepared to crop! It would presumably be ideal for DX or 1-inch sensors. These QV-Objectives have very high NA comparatively to M Plan Apos, they are a good contender despite some earlier posts' findings.

Best thing is their telecentricity, if that's something one is after.

1of1snowflakes
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2019 3:30 pm

Post by 1of1snowflakes »

Macro_Cosmos wrote:Adding to the discussion of QV-Objectives,

I've tried the Mit QV-Objective lenses with ~100mm tube lenses and 200mm tube lenses, here's the findings.

QV-Objective 5x and 2.5x, HR version.

100mm...
Schneider Xenon-Sapphire (95mm, F3.9, 0.23x optimum): Very sharp centre, abysmal corners.
Schneider Apo-Digitar 120mm: Very sharp overall, but field heavy curvature, lots of distortion outside of DX circle.
Nikon 70-200 F2.8 FL (newest): Mechanical vignetting
Laowa 105mm STF: Same as above

200mm...
ITL-200 Thorlabs (Nikon) tube lens: Nearly as sharp as 10x M Plan mit
Nikon 70-200 FL: Mechanical vignetting
ITL-200 Retro: Nearly as sharp as 10x M Plan Mit

They do very well when extended, using 200mm tube lens on FX. 100mm... not so much, there's always weirdness, be prepared to crop! It would presumably be ideal for DX or 1-inch sensors. These QV-Objectives have very high NA comparatively to M Plan Apos, they are a good contender despite some earlier posts' findings.

Best thing is their telecentricity, if that's something one is after.
Could you define telecentricity? I am still new to using objectives and do not know the term. I am using a Micro 4-3 camera the EM1 mark 2. So not full frame or APCS...will that help with the need to crop?

Lou Jost
Posts: 4644
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Macro_cosmos, these HR objectives seem like just slightly modified normal objectives. I don't see that these are worth much, except possibly for their telecentricity. You can make one yourself, put a 10x Mitu on a 100m tube lens and viola, you have the "HR" 5x lens. It will also be telecentric on a small sensor since, as we know, the ordinary 10x is essentially telecentric even on a large sensor

RobertOToole
Posts: 1618
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

1of1snowflakes wrote:
Could you define telecentricity? I am still new to using objectives and do not know the term. I am using a Micro 4-3 camera the EM1 mark 2. So not full frame or APCS...will that help with the need to crop?

Been waiting for a chance to use this illustration :D

Edited the image for clarity.

Image
Last edited by RobertOToole on Mon Jan 27, 2020 1:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21139
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

RobertOToole wrote:Been waiting for a chance to use this illustration :D
Nice illustration.

The language sounds odd, like it was prepared by a non-native-English author.

It's also a little misleading, since the key thing about a telecentric lens is that all of its chief rays are parallel to the optical axis, not just a single chief ray as suggested by the text.

What's the source?

--Rik

RobertOToole
Posts: 1618
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

rjlittlefield wrote:
RobertOToole wrote:Been waiting for a chance to use this illustration :D
Nice illustration.

The language sounds odd, like it was prepared by a non-native-English author.

It's also a little misleading, since the key thing about a telecentric lens is that all of its chief rays are parallel to the optical axis, not just a single chief ray as suggested by the text.

What's the source?

--Rik
Hi Rik,

Meant to crop out the text, but I was too fast for my own good. The info is from a machine vision site, I think it might have been a Japanese site honestly, I just liked the illustrations.

Edited the photo.

That's what I get for multitasking during my own work hours! :shock:

Best,

Robert

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic