Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] olympus vs leica
From: thibault collin <tc-lnc@u-picardie.fr>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 12:17:13 +0100

Hey, go for the famous Olympus IMT-2 inverted microscope!!
Thib.


At 11:58 25/02/1999 +0000, you wrote:
>Mitch wrote:
>> My wife is a microscopist and deals with Leica <on topic>, Zeiss, 
>> Olympus and other major optical vendors on a very regular basis 
>> (one of her optical microscopes cost $160K; she also uses electron
>> microsopes, but that's another discussion and much higher cost).  
>
>> In her field (according to her), Olympus has made great strides 
>> towards parity with the big boys.  She has said on occasion, that 
>> with some 'scopes the major differences are not with the optics, 
>> but with the hardware features the 'scope provides.  She says Leica
>> and Zeiss still have the edge optically, but Olympus is getting to 
>> be a very strong contender.
>
>I am also a microscopist, and I think your wife is spot-on in every
>particular. In fact, I'd say that the Olympus inverted microscope
>base is the best designed and executed platform currently on the
>market, and that their optics equal those of Nikon. The difference
>between Leica/Zeiss and Olympus/Nikon still exists in some areas, 
>but it diminishes with each passing year.
>
>There is about as much variation between samples of a particular 
>objective from a given company as there is between comparable 
>objectives from different companies.
>
>I'd choose an Olympus research 'scope in a flat second.
>..........................................................................
>Alexey Merz | URL: http://www.webcom.com/alexey | email: alexey@webcom.com
>            | PGP public key: http://pgp5.ai.mit.edu/ | voice:503/494-6840
>
>