Canon 5d mkII to Orthoplan?!

[MicroLux]

Hi everybody!

I would like to be able to take pictures through my Orthoplan with trinocular head.

I’ve got the original camera Orthomat and wonder if it is possible (and doable) to use the optics from the Orthomat?!

Or if I should go for a set up with an eyepiece and relay lens and tube? If so, do I need to worry about getting the 170mm photo ocular and ocular tube, or if I can mix with parts for 160mm?

Any input is appreciated!

[Pau]

Hi MicroLux welcome to the forum!

I’ve got the original camera Orthomat and wonder if it is possible (and doable) to use the optics from the Orthomat?!

I am not sure although I think so, but you would need to disassemble the Orthomat. If doable without ruining the optics, the lower set of lenses might work as an eyepiece while the upper set might act like a camera lens.

Did you see this adaptation of the (of course different) Vario Orthomat?
viewtopic.php?p=51793#p51793
You can find some more info if you search "Orthomat" in the forum

Or if I should go for a set up with an eyepiece and relay lens and tube? If so, do I need to worry about getting the 170mm photo ocular and ocular tube, or if I can mix with parts for 160mm?

This likely would be the easier route, both systems are optically compatible*
- If you use 170 tube and 170 eyepiece you're OK
- If you use 160 tube and 160 eyepiece you will get better parfocality if you raise the eyepiece 2mm (adding a ring or by other method)
- If you use 160 tube and 170 eyepiece raise the eyepiece 10mm
- Don't use 170 tube and 160 eyepiece: it will be placed too high...or you would need to cut the tube
*the distance from the end of the tube to the primary image is 10mm in 160 DIN and 18mm in Leitz 170 standard.This is the reason why 170 eyepieces have a thinner upper part as shown in your fourth image (actually mine)

About afocal, take a look at
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?p=99265

[MicroLux]

Thanks Pau for you informative input.
I will read the post you linked to and I will search the forum for more information.

[MicroLux]

I just bought this unit from a friend. I think this is what’s called KAVAR.
Realised just now that this will only work with an eye piece (okular).

Tried with one of my GW 12,5x and it seemed to work.
So I just ordered a Periplan 10x on ebay.

[Pau]

Nice find.
The problem is that the KAVAR is designed for Leica ragefinder cameras and you may have difficulty to adapt it to Canon.
According Wikipedia the flange focal distance is 28.80 mm in Leica screw mount and 27.80 mm in Leica M-mount while Canon EF is 44mm. To get it parfocal you'd need to modify the upper part* of the adapter to shorten it, not sure if it is doable without major surgery. Adapting a mirrorless camera seems easier.
You don't need the lateral viewfinder or the photometer so removing them if doable could be convenient.

At least you have the lower part (for 170 eyepieces, of course)

*The one from the knurled ring upwards

Some more info at: https://www-mikroskopie--forum-de.trans ... tr_pto=nui

[MicroLux]

Thanks again Pau for valuable information!
Since I can use the eye piece holder, buying the KAVAR was not totally wasted money (79€). Will look for a tube 404207
Like this one:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Leica-Leitz-Wi ... 632-2357-0

[Peter M. Macdonald]

You do not need to perform any surgery to get the KAVAR working perfectly with a Canon camera. I have been using an un-modified KAVAR for years with my Orthoplan and a variety of Canon cameras.

The version which I have came with a Leica adaptor to enable it to interface with a Leica 35 mm camera. This was the Leica screw mount. That adaptor could be unscrewed. That left a screw thread onto which I was able to screw a T2 canon adaptor, bought for next to nothing on ebay. That took care of mounting the camera.

There is a spring loaded adjustable lever on the side of the KAVAR. This seems to make small adjustments to the height of the eyepiece which is in the KAVAR. It can be moved until the camera is parfocal with the viewing eyepieces. The only problem with it is that the lever position does not seem to be lockable. So the second addition, after the T2 adaptor, was a small wooden toothpick. A piece out of the middle of it was just the right thickness to hold the lever in the correct position. You may have to play around until you find something which is just the right size for your setup. Once you have it in place, it need not be moved again.

I found that it was easiest to work out where parfocality lay by taking a live feed from the camera to a computer monitor. It really did not take long to get it set up.

Peter

[Pau]

Peter,
Thanks for posting your experience, this will be very good news for MicroLux

From the pictures at https://www-mikroskopie--forum-de.trans ... #msg258929 I supposed that the T-mount screw was bundled with the more recent (?) "universal camera adapter" pictured under the KAVAR.

Could you post a picture of the KAVAR showing that thread?

[MicroLux]

You do not need to perform any surgery to get the KAVAR working perfectly with a Canon camera. I have been using an un-modified KAVAR for years with my Orthoplan and a variety of Canon cameras.

Hi Peter!
Thanks! That is great news! I’ve already got an adapter from the KAVAR threads to Canon mount. So I just have to fiddle a little with that adjustable focal lengt!

[MicroLux]

The version which I have

Is this the same version as the one you have?
When looking in the device while moving the lever, I’m not sure what it adjusts. Looks to me that it just open and closes the pass through the KAVAR…
Klick on the instagram link below.

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CWkyU34lah ... hare_sheet

[Pau]

It seems to move the beamsplitter prism, this could be to direct the light to the camera vs to the finder...or maybe to the photometer port. The best situation could be if the prism would be completely removed from the light path to the camera, although it doesn't seem the case.

[MicroLux]

It seems to move the beamsplitter prism, this could be to direct the light to the camera vs to the finder...or maybe to the photometer port. The best situation could be if the prism would be completely removed from the light path to the camera, although it doesn't seem the case.

It looks to me as if the prism moves so that a connected exposure meter gets a little light to measur the exposure…?