Contents:

Physical and geometric optics of the microscope and their implications for practice.

Note:

This booklet is intended as a freely accessible primer in microscopy for educational purposes or self-study. Text and figures may be multiplied provided this is not done commercially. High-school levels of mathematics and physics are perfectly sufficient and not really required, even.

As the text is also aimed at self-study and many amateurs will wish to use a "vintage" microscope and/or are of an experimental inclination, this situation is also taken into account. The corresponding text is in italics, like this. Keywords are in blue, warnings and crucial points are in red.

 
Chapters
1. Introduction
2. A Brief History
3. Components
4. Basic Microscopy
5. Geometric Microscope Optics
6. Physical Optics in Microscopy
7. Illumination
8. Special Microscopy Techniques
 
 
 
 

     1. INTRODUCTION

The fallacy
For about 350 years, the telescope and the microscope have enlarged human concepts more than any other scientific tool. However superficially, the Macrocosm and Microcosm are now part and parcel of our life - from Star Trek adventures to anthrax bacillus letters. Yet both the telescope and the microscope have always suffered from the fallacy that their contribution is thought to consist of  "magnification". The first step towards any understanding of what you're trying to achieve by using a telescope or microscope is to get rid of this fallacy once and for all. We'll limit the discussion to the microscope here, but for the telescope the situation is wholly comparable because both instruments are subject to the physical laws of optics.

That magnification does not automatically yield additional information should be self-evident now we widely use PC's for images. Simple image-processing software offers the "zoom" tool, but blowing up a picture will merely result in a very coarse-grained image that contains no additional information. The aim of using a microscope is not to magnify an image, but to see finer details in the image. This fundamental difference is clear from Fig. 1, two images of the scales on the wing of a mosquito. Magnification is identical, the left picture was taken with a toy microscope, the right picture with a laboratory-type instrument.

Inferior optical quality is not the only factor that can lead to poor images, as shown in Fig. 2, pictures of the diatom Pleurosigma angulatum. Both were taken with the same set of optics, the difference in quality is exclusively the result of poor and correct microscope handling respectively.

The performance of the microscope is expressed as its "resolving power", the ability to separate ("resolve") fine details.
 

Diatoms in microscopy
Diatoms are microscopic plants ("algae") consisting of a single cell surrounded by an exoskeleton consisting of silica. The silica walls have a complex ultrastructure, which in many species consists of a very regular pattern of perforations. Fig. 3 shows the image of Gyrosigma sinense in the light-microscope (LM) and the ultrastructure of this diatom in the Scanning-Electron Microscope, "SEM". In the LM the image is much less detailed and is reduced to a series of "dots" arranged in straight lines crossing at an angle of 90º . The fineness and regularity of this pattern of "dots" in the LM are the reason why diatoms have been valuable test objects for assessing the quality of the microscope image since about 1850. Diatoms can be regarded as a highly representative example of "a microscopic object", so that we will often refer to them. Diatom slides are available commercially, see the Internet.


 

      «««« »»»»


 

2.  A BRIEF HISTORY


The invention of the microscope was not sufficiently documented in its time to permit a definitive conclusion as regards date and inventor, but the first illustration of a recognizeable microscope dates back to 1625 (Fig. 4). In the 17th century, "compound" microscopes consisting of a combination of lenses in two groups: objective (close to the object) and eyepiece (what you look through) were used by many observers, but the image quality was poor - comparable to Fig. 1, left.

There was an alternative: the "simplex" microscope consisting of a single lens, like the magnifiers that are still in use, but of much higher power. This was the type of instrument used by Anthonie van Leeuwenhoek around 1700 and at the same magnification, this yielded a much better image than did the compound microscope then. Fig. 5 shows the image quality obtainable with a "simplex" microscope (or "high-power magnifier") which I made myself. The disadvantage of this type of microscope is that it's almost impossible to work with: like Leeuwenhoek's crude gadget, the beautiful slightly later instrument by van Musschenbroek (Fig. 6) is hand-held, almost pokes into the user's eye and the observer must try to look through a tiny (about 2 millimetres) lens. This was the main reason why the astounding range of  van Leeuwenhoek's discoveries - from striated muscle to bacteria, described in over 560 Letters to the Royal Society in Great Britain - did not result in the large-scale introduction of the "simplex" microscope for research.


(A single-lens microscope has been traditionally called a "simple" microscope, but I have intentionally changed this to "simplex" microscope to avoid confusion with the simpler type of modern microscope, e.g. a student's microscope).

The shortcomings in image quality - especially loss of fine detail due to the presence of colour fringes - were also known from the telescope. At the end of the 18th century it was discovered that a telescope objective consisting of a combination of lenses made of different kinds of glass could greatly reduce the colour fringes, leading to a revolution in optics. Such lenses were called "achromatic", free of colour. In the beginning of the 19th century, this principle was also applied to the objective of the compound microscope. Together with theoretical and empirical studies by investigators like Lister in Great Britain and Amici in Italy this resulted in continuous improvement. From about 1850 to 1870, British instrument makers like Power & Lealand, Ross and Beck led the field and these Victorian microscopes (Fig. 7), with a tubelength of 10 inches, were truly monumental examples of the instrument makers' craft. Diatomists wanting to resolve ever finer detail created a genuine demand for optical improvement and thus formed an important market.


 
 
On the European Continent, a simpler and smaller (tubelength around 160 mm) model (Fig. 8) had become the standard and by 1870, optical performance of the lenses produced by European opticians like Hartnack had caught up with the British. The German instrument maker Carl Zeiss then joined forces with a physicist, Ernst Abbe, who was the first to create a comprehensive theory of image-formation for the microscope. Combining the earlier work with his own studies, Abbe developed a rigorous mathematical treatment of lens design. Together with the development of new types of glass, this raised the resolving power of the microscope to the limit of what is physically possible. Abbe's work was in the public domain, as we say now, so that all designers could use his data to perfect their own products. Since circa 1890 images have become crisper thanks to coatings and the field of view has become larger and sharp almost to the edge by "wide-field" optics, but the resolving power of the classic LM has remained the same. For much higher resolving power the electron-microscope has become available.

Another important 19th-century development was the mass-production of perfectly clear cover-glasses of uniform thickness (or rather: thinness, they are only about 1/6th of a mm "thick"). As early as 1868, one British manufacturer alone sold about 900,000 of them, which tells a lot about the interest in microscopy at that early time!

The late 19th-century "Continental" type of stand (Fig. 9) was the standard for almost half a century. In the early Thirties Zeiss introduced a revolutionary type of microscope (Fig. 10), which was of the modular type, permitting a choice from a wide range of different components. Comfortable viewing was assured not by inclining the stand as in Fig. 9, but by an inclined tube. The model shown has a binocular tube for viewing with both eyes - now standard for larger instruments. Variations on this type of stand have been the standard ever since. Coatings were introduced just before the Second World War and shortly after it, two important optical techniques were introduced: phase-contrast (whose inventor, Zernike, was awarded the Nobel Prize) and interference contrast. Both make it possible to enhance the visibility of almost transparent objects like living cells.


      «««« »»»»

 
3. COMPONENTS





The various parts of the microscope are identified in Fig. 11. Although this stand appeared in 1933, all modern microscopes basically have the same parts - perhaps arranged slightly differently. The model was a true trend-setter and was produced as a Soviet Union copy until the mid-Seventies.

1 = foot (contains built-in light source in modern stands);   2 = limb (inclining in Fig. 9, fixed in most modern stands);  3 = tube (in Fig. 9, its effective length can be adjusted by sliding the inner "draw-tube" that carries the eyepiece (5) in and out, in modern stands its length is fixed);  4 = objectives;  5 = eyepiece;  6 = coarse focus control;  7 = fine focus control (in modern stands coarse and fine focus controls are concentric);  8 = stage (a rotating stage in this case);  9 = revolving nosepiece for quick changing of the objective;  10 = mirror (most modern stands have a built-in light source instead);  11 = substage condenser or condenser for short, which ensures correct illumination;  12 = condenser iris diaphragm, which controls the cone of light produced by the condenser. 13 = swing-out filter ring;  14 = control permitting oblique illumination by shifting the iris diaphragm sideways. This is only rarely present in modern microscopes.

The condenser focus control is not visible here because it’s on the other side of the microscope, at approximately the same level as the fine focus in the picture.

The objectives
Magnification of the image takes place in two stages: in the objectives and in the eyepiece(s). Both have their proper magnification engraved. Magnification of objectives ranges from 3x to 100x, that of eyepieces from about 5x to about 15x. The total magnification thus ranges from about 15x to 1500x. Some binocular tubes have their own magnification factor, ranging from 1.25x to 1.5x, which should be accounted for in calculating the eventual magnification.

Objectives also have a parameter called numerical aperture (abbreviated as NA) engraved on their mount. This is the parameter determining the resolving power of that objective and it ranges from 0.1 for a 3x objective to 1.25 or even 1.4 for a 100x objective.

The maximum attainable resolving power of the LM is circa 0.25 µm. This means that two small details (say "dots" of a diatom) 0.25 µm apart can be seen as separate instead of fusing to a single "blob". Depending on  individual eyesight, resolving power of the unaided human eye at the normal reading-distance (25 cm) is about 0.3 mm, about 1500 times less. For direct visual observation and very generally speaking, a magnification of 1500x will therefore be sufficient for the very finest details, or 1000x for people with sharp eyesight. There are important exceptions to this rough guide, as we'll see later.

Objectives of less than 10x power are used for general surveys, e.g. in botany, pathology or entomology. Standard biological sets include 10x, 40x and 100x objectives, but I consider an additional 20x indispensable. Without it, it may be difficult to keep oriented if you switch from a 10x to a 40x because the diameter of the field of view suddenly becomes 4x smaller (it is inversely proportional to magnification). A good routine set giving manageable magnification steps of about 2x would thus be as follows:

          10x/NA 0.25 or 0.3;    20x/NA 0.45;    40x/NA 0.65;   100x/NA 1.25 or 1.3

The 10x, 20x and 40x objectives are called "dry objectives"; they are used "dry", meaning that there is air between the lens and the slide. The 100x is an "oil immersion objective", meaning that a small drop of special immersion oil is placed on the slide and the front lens of the objective is dipped into it for viewing. The reason why the "lens is oiled to the slide", as the standard expression goes, will become clear later.

The optical construction of objectives for routine work is shown in Fig. 12; good image quality requires from 4 to 6 lenses of different shapes and kinds of glass, all of them small to tiny, perfectly ground, polished, coated, cemented together and centered. Top-quality objectives may have up to 14 lenses.

Modern objectives are parfocal, meaning that the image stays approximately in focus if you switch from one objective to another, requiring only a small adjustment of the fine-focus control. When objectives are changed by turning the revolving nosepiece, the object should also remain centered.

Finally, two additional numbers are often engraved on the objective mount, the tubelength, typically 160 mm, and cover-glass thickness - typically 0.17 mm. We'll return to these two highly important parameters later.

The eyepiece(s)
Eyepieces are less complex than objectives and are often derived from the two-lens Huygenian eyepiece (after the 17th-century inventor Christiaan Huygens), Fig. 13. Modern designs with a wider and flatter field of view use combinations instead of two single lenses. In the majority of cases, the effective eyepiece power used will be about 10x (which means about 6.3x eyepieces if there is a binocular tube with a proper magnification of 1.5x).
Ordinary eyepieces do not permit the use of spectacles/glasses, which will lead to an unending bothersome "on-off" exercise. Also, many people wear glasses not only to correct for short- or far-sightedness, but also for astigmatism of the eye, which means that the observer never sees sharply, regardless of distance.

"High-eyepoint"eyepieces are the solution to this problem: glasses can be kept on. You can see where the eyepoint (or exit pupil as it is also called) lies if you set up the microscope for normal observation and then hold a piece of ground glass or thin paper above the eyepiece. In one position close to the top lens, you’ll get a sharp bright circle, that’s the exit pupil.

Eyepieces with a very wide field of view may actually cause fatigue because your eye cannot take in the complete field of view and starts wandering. Be critical, try for yourself !

The condenser
The function of the condenser is to fill the objective evenly with a cone of light. This cone of light is narrow for an objective of low NA (e.g. 0.25) but needs to be very wide for one of high NA (e.g. 1.25). Parts of the objective that do not receive light cannot fully participate in image formation! Because of this great variation required, the cone of light exiting from the condenser must be adjusted with the condenser iris diaphragm.

Condensers also have a numerical aperture, engraved on the mount. A typical value for the condenser NA is 1.2, but as we shall see, this can only be attained when the condenser too is oiled to the slide. As this is messy and the gain is at best small and at worst doubtful, the condenser is likely to be always used "dry" anyway and then its maximum possible NA is 0.9, regardless of what it says on the mount.

The condenser can be racked up and down with the condenser focus control. The most frequent and most serious error made by inexpert microscopists is to rack it up or down to adjust the brightness of the image. For observation, the position of the condenser is rigidly defined and not arbitrary - see further on. For a normal condenser with NA between 0.9 and 1.4, this will mean that the top lens of the condenser almost touches the lower surface of the slide. If you have it at "half-mast", you're doing something seriously wrong. Brightness of the image is controlled with a light dimmer fitted to the illuminator.

For low magnifications (e.g. 3x objective), it may become difficult or impossible to illuminate the field of view (which is then relatively large) entirely with a condenser of NA 0.9 or more. In such cases, a special low-power condenser can be used, or the top lens of a normal condenser is screwed off - or swung aside in some models. For correct illumination, the position of the condenser will then be much lower than with the top lens on. Many modern stands have a separate control by which the "illuminating train" (everything between the lightbulb in the lamp and the slide) is adapted to low-power viewing. This may be a swing-in extra lens below the condenser, or an extra lens in the lamp. If  the low-power set-up is used for observation at higher powers, correct illumination cannot be obtained.

The cheapest condensers (sometimes erroneously called an "Abbe-type") have a poor image-forming quality because they suffer from all shortcomings in image formation mentioned earlier. Such uncorrected condensers will not yield perfect illumination with objectives of high NA, as we'll see later.

A better type is the aplanatic condenser, which is much less expensive than the top of the range, an achromatic-aplanatic condenser (Fig. 14), yet yields good illumination. An aplanatic condenser of  NA 0.9 is much better than an uncorrected one of  NA 1.2. Highly corrected condensers are easily recognized because the degree of correction is engraved on the mount.

What we've discussed so far is so-called brightfield microscopy, in which objects are seen against a bright background. Three different methods of illumination require a different type of condenser, as follows.

Darkfield condensers illuminate the objects "from the side" instead of "straight through" as in brightfield. The background is black, therefore, and the objects are bright. The classic example is a room with the curtains almost drawn during a sunny day except for a narrow slit. Tiny dust particles then become visible in the beam of sunlight. Darkfield observation will be discussed later.

Phase-contrast condensers are actually often of the simplest uncorrected type and only differ from the ordinary condenser in having a set of ring-shaped "annular stops", one for each phase-contrast objective, centerable and mounted on a rotating disc. There is also a "clear" (unobstructed) position which allows normal observation. Phase-contrast will be discussed later.

If you're a capable tinkerer, you can make such annular stops yourself, use them with the condenser you already have and just buy phase-contrast objectives, saving a lot of money.

Interference-contrast condensers are of complex optical design and are used in conjunction with additional special components in the microscope.
 

Accessories
A rotating stage is convenient for ensuring optimum orientation of the object if the microscope is combined with a photographic or video camera or computer screen. It is essential for observations in polarized light or differential interference contrast (DIC, "Nomarski") because there, the orientation of the object affects the image. Rotating stages have centering controls to prevent objects wandering out of the field of view as the stage is rotated. Fig. 10 shows a rotating stage combined with a mechanical stage. The latter permits controlled scanning of the slide horizontally and vertically and by noting the co-ordinates of a detail in a slide it can quickly be found the next time. Rotating stages are rather rare, mechanical stages are standard nowadays except for the simplest stands.

A centering telescope comes with phase-contrast sets but is also available separately. It is a small telescope that can be focused from close-up to infinity and is a handy gadget for other purposes as well, for instance to check for correct illumination or dirty objectives.

For simple measurements, an eyepiece micrometer is used, an eyepiece that contains a graduated scale. More exact measurements require a filar micrometer eyepiece, in which a marker visible in the eyepiece is displaced sideways by turning a graduated drum. Both eyepiece micrometer and filar micrometer eyepiece need to be calibrated by the user. For this, you need an object micrometer, a special slide carrying a tiny scale of 1 mm with divisions equalling 0.01 mm (10 µm or 10 "microns"). The user then determines how many divisions of the eyepiece micrometer or filar micrometer correspond to 10 µm. This is done once, for each objective, and the values found will only be correct for that particular model of microscope.

Maintenance
If treated well, the microscope's lifetime is almost infinite - I have microscopes of over a century old that perform just like when they were new. Avoid all contact with chemicals, protect the instrument against dirt by covering it when not in use (a plastic bag is fine), dust off with a soft brush and cloth. Do not lubricate or grease, if you think this may be necessary consult the dealer.

The one thing to avoid at all cost is grimy lenses. The top lens of eyepieces easily collects dust or grease (eyelashes!): breathe and wipe with soft cloth or lens tissue. The top lens of objectives may collect dust if you leave the eyepieces out for some time (don’t!). Remove objective from the revolving nosepiece and clean with a soft and completely fat-free brush. Actually, a few dust particles hardly affect image quality, but grease or oil is quite another matter and the front lens of objectives (that is: the lower lens, facing the object) is the one to watch. The front lens of a 40x objective is particularly at risk as it is close to the slide. Remove the objective and inspect, if the front lens is not perfectly shiny, breathe on it and gently wipe with soft cloth or lens tissue.

When using an oil-immersion objective, apply only a very small drop of immersion oil to the cover-glass. With modern microscopes, you can mostly switch from a 40x to a 100x without major refocusing, but to avoid damage in the beginning, follow this procedure:


Oil immersion front lenses are cleaned at the end of a session by gently wiping them with soft cloth or lens tissue - you don't need to remove them unless they are really extremely dirty (not a good sign...). In the latter case, remove the objective from the revolving nosepiece and clean with soft cloth or lens tissue moistened with a little xylene, then wipe dry. Always completely clean immersion oil from the slide as soon as you're finished with the oil-immersion objective (wipe off with tissue, breathe on slide and wipe again with clean tissue). Otherwise you're likely to smear the front lens of the 40x when you switch to it, and anyway, image quality will be hopeless. Always clean slides before use too, traces of grease will impair image quality.

Never try to dismantle optical components unless you're a certified master optician.


 «««« »»»»



 
 
 
 

4.  BASIC MICROSCOPY





First, it's necessary to define some fundamental concepts necessary for a further discussion of the microscope. Secondly, here are some golden rules on what to do and what not to do, to avoid the most serious errors. It is assumed that the reader does have a microscope, but is not yet an expert user. Any slide with reasonably finely structured diatoms will do for the experiments described.
 

Contrast and resolution
The main task in microscopy of objects that do not show colour - which is why diatoms are an excellent example - is to find a good balance between contrast and resolution. Unfortunately, one cannot always have both, in ordinary microscopy (called "brightfield" because the objects are seen against a bright background) the one is at the expense of the other. This is why phase-contrast and interference-contrast have come in. Contrast and resolution have often been confused, but since computer images have become familiar to all, an explanation has become easier.

Contrast is the difference between the brightness of various details in the object, and the difference as compared with the background. A typical black and white computer image will consist of pixels in 256 shades of gray, ranging from intense white to intense black. The "gray-value" of the pixels will thus lie between 0 and 255. If the values in the image range from 30 to 50 only, contrast will be very low (soft image), if the values range from 30 to 200, the image will be very contrasty. If the background has a uniform pixel value of 50 and the image pixel values range from 70 to 120, contrast between object and background will be poor; if the background pixels have a value of 50 and the image pixel values range from 120 to 180, the object stands out clearly from the background. The figures given are arbitrary, it's the principle that counts and for colour the situation is similar..

Resolution is the finest detail actually visible in the image (the resolving power is the highest resolution possible with the lenses in question). This is roughly comparable to pixel size: the smaller the pixels, the finer the detail visible in a computer image. The maximum resolving power (think of it as "optical pixel size") for a 40x/NA 0.65 objective is about 0.5 µm, for a 100x/NA 1.25 objective it is about 0.25µ. Whether that value is really attained depends on the expertise of the microscopist. It's just like when you scan a picture for the computer: if you do this at 100 dpi (dots per inch) quality will be much poorer than at 600 dpi, for instance.

Fig. 15 shows low and high contrast, at the same resolution and low and high resolution at the same contrast. High resolution does not help much if visibility is very poor and good contrast is not  helpful if you don't see fine detail! Both contrast and resolution are determined by the "illuminating train", particularly the focusing of the condenser and setting of the condenser iris diaphragm.

Hints:
Here are five typical beginners' problems:

1) do not examine objects - in particular, a drop of liquid material - without using a cover-glass. The objectives may become wet and the image will be extremely poor anyway.

2) when switching to higher power in the beginning, look at the objective from the side to check that it does not crash into the slide. You would not be the first to put a slide on the stage upside down!

3) adjust the lamp brightness for optimum comfort with a dimmer control. If the light source is an intense one (low-voltage, halogen), always use an "anti-infrared" filter because IR in the long run severely damages the eye. Good intense light sources have such a filter built in, check with the dealer if you're not sure.

4) the fine focus control may have a limited range of about 2 mm. In that case there are two small markers somewhere on the limb, plus a third, moveable, marker opposite them. Adjust the fine focus control until the moveable marker is about midway between the fixed markers. If it's at the limit, the fine focus will no longer work in one direction. Check this every now and then.

5) Microscope lamps may produce somewhat yellowish light. If you put the blue ground glass filter that often comes with a microscope in the filter ring below the condenser to correct for the yellowish light and make the illumination more even, you have about the worst illumination possible. Only use a clear light blue filter and find a way to attach it permanently to the lamp (some lamps have filter rings). You can then use the filter ring of the condenser for other purposes - see later.
 
 

Some experiments

If you use a "vintage" or simple microscope, this may have a mirror instead of a built-in lamp. Use the flat surface only. You will then also need an outboard lamp. For the time being, use whatever you have (e.g. a desk lamp), placing the lamp about 35 cm away. Adjust the mirror and the position of the lamp (turn, tilt) for even illumination of the field of view.

Most modern microscopes have some form of built-in illumination. Set up the microscope according to the instructions in the manual, or to the best of your ability if you don't have a manual. Switch in a 10x objective, put a slide (preferably diatoms) on the stage and focus. Rack the condenser up until it almost touches the slide. The field of view should be evenly illuminated. If you have a centering telescope, use it when the following text says “take out the eyepiece” - focus the top lens of the centering telescope for a sharp bright circle.

Aperture
Take out the eyepiece and look through the tube (this will be called “check the aperture”). You will see the bright circle of the illuminated objective. This bright circle is called the aperture (= opening). Aperture is not the same thing as the numerical aperture (that is a number, not a bright circle) but the two are closely connected.

Now close the condenser iris diaphragm slowly and you'll see it appear at the edge of the aperture. Refocus the centering telescope if necessary for a sharp image. The condenser iris should be nicely in the middle - if it's not, the condenser is decentered. In that case, rack the condenser down and try whether it moves sideways and "clicks in". If this does not help, consult a microscope expert.

Close the condenser iris fully and note that only a small portion of the aperture is now illuminated. Re-insert the eyepiece and look at the image. Resolution is very poor because the non-illuminated portions of the objective do not fully contribute to image formation. Contrast is fair, though.

Take out the eyepiece, open up the condenser iris until it is no longer visible in the aperture. Insert eyepiece, examine slide. Resolution is much better, but the image is rather "hazy": poor contrast.

Take out the eyepiece, close the condenser iris until it cuts off only about 15% of the aperture, at the edge. Insert eyepiece, examine slide. This gives nearly maximum resolution for the objective in use, with acceptable contrast.

For any objective, Fig. 16 shows the range of the condenser iris that gives acceptable results, from minimum (left) to maximum (right). Contrast decreases whilst resolution increases from left to right. It's your task to find the best position depending on what you wish to see and you'll vary it during the observation, as you will vary the fine focus. You will also regularly take out the eyepiece and check the aperture.

Now switch to the next objective, 20x or 40x and adjust the fine focus for a sharp image. Check the aperture: only the center will be illuminated, because the numerical aperture of the objective is now much higher than before. So for each different objective you will have to reset the condenser iris to a new optimum position, in the range indicated above. Adjust the iris until about 85% of the 20x or 40x objective aperture is illuminated, the image should be nice.

Now rack the condenser down by 2 cm or so, the image will be poor and when you check the aperture, only the center will be illuminated. It's obvious that this is just as wrong as closing the condenser iris. You'll have seen that the intensity of the illumination also changes, but you may never use the setting of the iris or condenser for adjusting the brightness of the image. For that, you will use the dimmer control of the microscope lamp (if the lamp has no dimmer, e.g. a desk lamp, you can use one of the household light dimmer controls).

Question: so why is there a provision to rack the condenser up and down anyway? For two reasons:
slides differ in thickness and thus may require (very slight) refocusing of the condenser different condensers may be used, requiring refocusing. This is especially the case for special darkfield condensers and for the low-power condensers used for observation at low power -  e.g. a standard condenser with the top lens removed (see in Chapter “Components”). This requires major refocusing of the condenser.

The centering telescope of a phase-contrast set is very convenient for checking the aperture as the image is then larger and can be sharply focused by turning the top lens. You can also "focus through" the various levels of the objective to detect dirt on the back lens or grime on the front lens, for instance.

Lens faults
Switch back to 10x objective, focus on the slide. For a microscope with built-in illumination, place a match or cocktail stick on the clear window in the foot so that you see its shadow in the microscope. (For a microscope without built-in illumination, place the match in front of the lamp you use). Open the condenser iris fully, rack the condenser down until you see the match in focus. It will show a marked colour fringe, which changes from blue to red as you vary the position of the condenser. This is the colour fringe lens fault mentioned earlier and is called chromatic aberration. It will be severe for an uncorrected condenser, but even with an achromatic-aplanatic condenser there is a small residu of colour fringes. In objectives, the degree of correction is very high.

Return to normal observation, 10x objective, condenser iris and condenser position correctly adjusted, focus an object in the middle of the field of view. Without changing focus, shift the object to the edge of the field of view. You'll have to re-adjust the fine focus to see it sharp. This is called curvature of field. The field of view is only flat with "flat-field" or "plan" optics, but even then there may be a small residual curvature.

Switch to the 40x objective, adjust condenser iris and focus for a nice image. Swing the objective away, put a small drop of water on the cover-glass of the slide and then put another clean cover-glass on top. Swing the objective back into position, refocus and see how awful the image is now. We have intentionally introduced spherical aberration here, by using a cover-glass of completely wrong thickness. Remove the extra cover-glass, dry the slide. Normally the objective is very well corrected for spherical aberration if the cover-glass has the correct thickness - the 0.17 mm mostly engraved on the mount. You can therefore ruin the objective’s correction for spherical aberration by using cover-glasses of the wrong thickness (or using no cover-glass at all!). This is especially the case for "dry" objectives of NA over 0.4.
 

Correct illumination
As we’ve seen while juggling with the condenser iris, the set-up of the “illuminating train” is important to ensure the best image quality your lenses can yield. This set-up of everything from the light bulb up to and including the condenser is what you control yourself and fortunately there is a simple and rigidly defined procedure.

The guiding principle is that the light-source is focused in the object itself. So when you see the object in focus, the light source should also be in focus. Evidently, to get an evenly illuminated field of view you need an evenly illuminated light source. There are two varieties of this form of illumination.

- Critical illumination. Here the filament of the light bulb itself is the light-source. Because it’s in focus in the field of view, the image of the filament would be very objectionable and therefore the light bulb is lightly frosted. Such an illuminator should also have a collector lens to ensure that the light from the illuminator forms a parallel beam. That means that the light source is imaged at “infinity” - or at least a very long distance away. This is essential, if there’s no collector, the illuminator does not yield critical illumination but is no better than a desk lamp.

Some “plug-in” illuminators and built-in lamps offer critical illumination. Critical illumination is simple in use and yields good results.

- Köhler illumination. Here the light source consists of an iris diaphragm in the lamp. This lamp iris is not to be confused with the condenser iris. As the lamp iris is in focus in the field of view, its size can be so adjusted that only the field of view is illuminated. This reduces glare. Lamps for Köhler illumination also have a collector lens system that projects an image of the filament at the level of the condenser iris diaphragm - at a short distance away from the lamp instead of  at “infinity” as in the critical illumination case.

Köhler illumination is somewhat more contrasty than critical illumination but also somewhat more complex to set up at first. It is now standard in research-type microscopes.

Although it may be assumed that modern microscopes from reputable manufacturers do not incorporate design errors, this need not be true if you combine a microscope that has no built-in illumination with a separate lamp. In that case, it may be impossible to set up strict Köhler illumination. This situation will be discussed further on.

                    «««« »»»»


 
     5. GEOMETRIC MICROSCOPE OPTICS






The laws by which light rays are broken (refracted) by lenses are called geometric optics. A lens is a piece of glass where the surfaces are not parallel, but one or both are either:

In the ray tracings, A = optical axis, L = lens,  C= centre of lens, F1 and F2 = front and rear focus, O = object,  Im = image

The perpendicular line through the center of the lens is called the optical axis.
A positive lens (Fig. 17) concentrates parallel rays of light from infinity (e.g. the sun) in a point called the focus. Thus, you can project an image of the sun on a piece of paper held at the focus. If you run the rays in Fig. 17 from right to left instead of from left to right, you’ll find a second focus, at the same distance from the lens in this case. There’s a “front focus” and a “rear focus”, therefore:  F1 and F2.

A negative lens (Fig. 18) has a “virtual focus” - parallel rays are made to divert and seem to come from a focus on the other side of the lens. Thus a negative lens does not project an image on a piece of paper.
The distance between the focus and the center of the lens is called the focal length.

Focal planes
Project an image of the sun on a piece of paper by pointing the lower (larger) field lens of an eyepiece at the sun. An image is not formed in a point, but in a plane, called the focal plane. If you turn the eyepiece around (smallest lens pointing at the sun), no image can be formed. The front and rear focal planes of a lens system therefore may have totally different positions.

Two rules
Two simple rules are sufficient to understand what lenses do:
A ray from infinity, which runs parallel to the optical axis, is refracted through the focus. Conversely, a ray from the focus always exits the lens parallel to the optical axis.
A ray through the center of the lens is not refracted but goes straight through.

In ray tracings, lenses are always reduced to simple lines, which I’ve marked “L” in the drawings.
If you place an object at the front focus of a lens (Fig. 19) and apply the two rules (ray through center goes straight through, ray parallel to optical axis goes through rear focus), you’ll find that all rays exit the lens in parallel. The object seems to be located at infinity.

If you place the object further away than the front focus (Fig. 20), application of the  rules results in a projected image that is upside down. This is called a real image because you can see it on a screen.

If you place the object inside the front focus (Fig. 21), you get a magnified image. It’s in front of the lens so you can’t project it and therefore it’s a virtual image. The lens now acts as a magnifier.

Light
Visible light consists of electromagnetic waves with a wavelength (Fig. 22) between about 780 nm (red) and 380 nm (violet). A nanometer (nm) is 1/1000 micrometer (µm), which in turn is 1/1000 millimeter (mm). White light is a mix of all colours, as is shown by sending it through a prism (Fig. 23), when it is split into a spectrum.

Besides in wavelength, two light waves can also differ in amplitude (Fig. 24), which we interpret as a difference in brightness, and in phase (Fig. 25), when one wave is delayed in relation to the other. The human eye cannot distinguish phase differences.

Refractive index
If you partially submerge a stick in water, the stick appears to be broken. This is because light rays passing from one medium into another are refracted - deviated from their original path. The degree of this deviation depends on the refracting power of  the media, called refractive index and given the symbol “n”. Some values:

Refraction of a ray passing from one medium to another is determined by Snell’s law (Fig. 26). Calculation is simple, as shown in Fig. 27. The “sine” is a parameter proper to an angle, calculators offer the sine function so you can look it up.

Dispersion
The refractive index of a medium is not constant for light of different wavelengths. This is why a prism disperses white light into a spectrum: for red the refractive index is lower than for violet. Dispersion varies greatly for different media, independent of their refractive index.

Chromatic aberration
A lens can be thought of as a series of prisms (Fig. 28) and thus also splits light into its constituent colours. The focus lies closer to the lens for blue than for red light, so there is an overlapping series of images of different colours. This is called chromatic aberration. Because a negative lens has an effect opposite to that of a positive one, the chromatic aberration of a positive lens can be corrected by combining it with a “weaker” negative lens made of glass with a much greater dispersion, Fig. 29. The lens thus remains positive (so it magnifies) but the dispersions counteract each other.

Such lenses are called achromatic and produce good images, but the colour correction is actually only optimum in yellow and green. Near the orange and near the blue it becomes less perfect. By using special types of glass, the residual errors can be further suppressed and such lenses are called fluorite objectives and apochromats. They yield sharper and more contrasty images also in the red and violet and as a rule also have a higher numerical aperture. However, do not underestimate the performance of really good achromats - they even permit colour photomicrography (Fig. 30).

Spherical aberration
If Snell’s law is used to construct the ray paths of central and peripheral rays through a lens, the focus for the central rays is found to lie at a different position from that of the peripheral rays (Fig. 31). This is spherical aberration and Fig. 32 shows that its magnitude strongly depends on the shape of the lens, with negative lenses again showing values of  opposite sign. Correction can be done by combining a positive lens of a shape that has a low value of spherical aberration with a much weaker lens of a shape that has great but opposite spherical aberration. As you may suspect, this spherical correction is again colour-dependent; for achromats it is good in yellow and green, for fluorite lenses and apochromats it’s also good in both the red and the blue.

Effect of cover-glass
Light rays from the object do not exit in parallel beams, but as a cone or fan of beams,  as we’ll see further on. The object lies on the lower surface of the cover-glass (Fig. 33) but when the light rays leave the top of the cover-glass (before they enter the objective) they pass into a different medium (from glass to air) and are refracted. This results in severe spherical aberration: for rays that leave the object at a large angle the object seems to lie higher than for rays that leave the object at a small angle.

To counteract this, objectives need to have a strong built-in negative spherical aberration, in other words: the objective is given a strong intentional error. If such an objective is used without cover-glass, the full built-in spherical error will come out! As the spherical aberration caused by the cover-glass depends on the thickness of the latter, objectives are mostly corrected for a standard cover-glass thickness, of  0.17 mm. The effect of incorrect cover-glass thickness is worse as the numerical aperture of the objective is higher and it becomes objectionable above NA 0.4 or so. With a “dry” objective of NA 0.95 (a typical 40x apochromat) a difference of 0.2 mm in cover-glass thickness seriously impairs image quality! For uncovered specimens (e.g. in mineralogy) special objectives are made, showing “d = 0” on the mount. These, of course, are useless for covered specimens.

The correction of the combination of cover-glass and objective for spherical aberration is also affected by the tubelength, which is why this could be adjusted in vintage stands. At present, tubelength is fixed. In that case, the degree of spherical correction of high-power objectives can only be adjusted if the objective has a correction collar, which alters the relative positions of lenses within the objective. This adjustment is done on the basis of the image quality attained and therefore requires considerable experience in assessing image quality.

Preparation errors
Cover-glasses of good quality specify the thickness on the box and vary only between narrow limits. But you can ruin the entire situation by incorrectly preparing a slide!

If you place the specimen on the slide and then put a cover-glass with mountant on top of it, you get the situation of Fig. 34. Regardless of whether the cover-glass is of the correct thickness, you’ve added an unspecified but considerable thickness of mountant to it, resulting in severe spherical aberration. Always place the specimen on the lower surface of the cover-glass, never on the slide!




Numerical aperture
As we’ve seen, high-power objectives have a higher NA than low-power ones and this results in greater resolving power. If we draw a low-power objective and a high-power one (Fig. 35), it’s clear that the latter catches rays under a greater angle. This “angle of admittance” determines the NA of the objective as follows:

             NA = n * sin u

in which n = the refractive index of the medium in front of the lens and sin u = the sine of half the “angle of admittance”. As the “angle of admittance” can never be greater than 180° (the rays would then return) and the sine of 90° (half of it, “u”) = 1.0, the NA is always less than 1.0 if there is air in front of the lens, because for air n = 1.0. Higher NA, or higher resolving power, cannot be obtained by increasing “u” to an arbitrarily high value.

Immersion objectives
But it can be increased if “n” in the formula is raised, and that is done by dipping the front lens of a specially constructed immersion objective into a liquid. In the majority of cases, this is a special immersion oil, whose refractive index (n = 1.515) and dispersion are the same as those of the cover-glass and the objective’s front lens.
That immediately implies that the spherical aberration caused by the cover-glass is also absent (it’s like there is also glass between the cover and the front lens!), so that cover-glass thickness is no longer critical. The objective becomes easier to construct because it need not have a strong built-in negative spherical aberration. The NA then attainable is 1.25 to 1.4.

There are also water immersion objectives, although these are rather rare. I’ve found medium-power (40 - 50x) water immersions very useful as their performance is much better than that of a “dry” objective and although it is slightly inferior to that of an oil immersion of the same power, removal of the water (just touch with tissue paper) is much easier than removal of oil. This makes it simple to switch forwards and backwards between a 40x immersion and a “dry” 20x or 10x objective. The NA of water immersions is about 0.85 to 1.0 for medium- and 1.2 for high-power objectives.
 
 

    «««« »»»»


 
6. PHYSICAL OPTICS IN MICROSCOPY





The laws by which fine detail is made visible in an optical instrument are called physical optics. The reason why physical optics are quite different from geometric optics is that light consists of waves (not “straight arrows” as geometric optics treats them) and are affected by the object. Ray tracings are fine to show where the image lies, but they do not yield information on the properties of the image. We’ll assume that the quality of the objective is perfect so that performance will not be impaired by serious aberrations.

Image formation
The theory of image formation was formulated by Ernst Abbe in the late 19th century.  Abbe treated the object as a fine grating and although that is not an exact description of say, plant sections, it is a very good approximation of the regular structure of diatoms.

When light passes through a grating it is scattered (diffracted) so that it becomes a fan - or rather, a cone, Fig. 36. A narrow parallel bundle of light that enters the object is therefore split into an undeviated (straight through) bundle and deviated bundles on both sides. The undeviated light contains no information about the object, it’s simply the background illumination. The deviated light contains the object’s information. The image is formed behind the lens, where the deviated and undeviated light interact (interfere).

A reasonable image can already be obtained when the two deviated bundles closest to the undeviated light (the first-order maxima) are passed through the objective to interfere with the undeviated light. If the higher-order maxima are not included in image formation, the image is not perfect but it can be seen that a grating is involved and the fineness of the grating can be determined. That is to say: there is just sufficient resolution.
The degree of diffraction, i.e. the angle between the two first-order maxima, depends on two factors:

Experiment:
Diffraction can be demonstrated beautifully with a slide of the diatom  Pleurosigma angulatum. Focus normally with the 100x oil immersion objective, then close the condenser iris as far as it will go. Check the aperture with a centering telescope (the unaided eye won’t do here because the image is small). A star-shaped diffraction pattern is seen, each of the six points of the star is a spectrum with violet inside (less markedly diffracted) and red outside (markedly diffracted). These are the first-order maxima and this is exactly what the theory predicts!

Because diffraction by finer detail increases the angle between the first-order maxima, it’s now evident why high resolving power requires a wide “angle of admittance” of the objective, i.e. a high NA.

Another advantage of the immersion objective can now also be explained (Fig. 37): as the angle of the diffracted image-forming rays coming out of the object increases, there comes a point where by Snell’s law the angle of these rays becomes 90º or more when they pass from the top of the cover-glass into the air. That is to say, they do not leave the cover-glass but are reflected backwards so that the diffracted rays representing the fine image detail do not enter the objective at all. By using an immersion lens, this total reflection is avoided and for fine gratings information-carrying rays also enter the objective.

The advantages of an oil immersion objective are, therefore, three-fold:

Water immersions do not completely solve these problems but nevertheless reduce them very considerably.
 

The condenser’s contribution
So far we assumed that the specimen is illuminated by a narrow beam of parallel light. From Abbe’s theory it followed that an image results when the two first-order maxima can interfere with the undeviated light. Actually, only one first-order maximum is already sufficient: because it is representative for the grating, it carries just enough information to create an image when it alone interferes with the undeviated light. (If you happen to be a radio ham: it’s the equivalent of single sideband).

That means that if the light is made to strike the specimen obliquely (Fig. 38), both one first-order maximum and the undeviated light can be caught by the objective - the angle of admittance of the objective appears to be doubled. If you illuminate obliquely from all sides instead of from one side only, you get a cone of light at an angle equal to the angle of admittance of the objective. And that is exactly what the condenser supplies.

We’ve seen earlier that in order to fill an immersion objective completely with light, the condenser must also be oiled to the slide. This is very bothersome, increases glare and may so reduce contrast that you can’t benefit from the improvement in resolution. The condenser iris is (almost) never fully opened anyway with objectives of any NA because this would reduce contrast. Only the most recent apochromats permit full illumination of their aperture and even so, they still show somewhat better contrast when the condenser is slightly stopped down.
 

Resolution
The resolution with brightfield microscopy can be calculated reasonably well with the formula
                 d  =   1.22  *   l  /  NAobj + NAcond

where: d = resolution in µm;  l = wavelength of the light used (0.5 µm for white light as average value);    NAobj  =  NA of the objective;    NAcond = NA of the condenser. The latter is the effective NA, that is the portion of the full NA actually in use as controlled by the condenser iris!

From this formula, you can easily calculate that the gain in resolution by immersion of the condenser (NAcond raised from 0.95 to 1.2) is only marginal. Likewise, reducing the size of the condenser iris to about 80% of the full aperture of an objective only slightly reduces resolution while greatly improving contrast. The formula shows that for light of 0.5 µm wavelength, NAobj = 1.3 and  NAcond  = 0.95 (“dry”) the maximum resolution the microscope can give equals about 0.26 µm. This is the limit you can reach in routine practice.
 

What magnification?
Whereas we’ve worried a lot about ensuring high NA, we’ve not yet once mentioned magnification. The reason is that whilst ensuring high resolution is absolutely crucial, magnification says nothing about the information content of the image. In his theory, Abbe also treated magnification, but here he tripped up wonderfully because he made wildly optimistic assumptions of the performance of the human eye, as later research has shown. So don’t believe older books!

Magnification is a matter of convenience and ensuring that none of the information in the image is lost. Here is how to decide on magnification, and for an example I consider a specimen that contains detail with a fineness of 0.3 µm :

Visual observation:
At a comfortable reading distance of 25 cm (which is what we approximate in microscopy), people with very sharp eyes can resolve 0.3 mm, others reach 0.5 mm. Magnification of 1000x is OK for some, 1500x is better for others.

Photomicrography:
Document films as used in professional photomicrography can have a resolving power of 100 lines per mm, i.e. 10 µm. Let’s be very conservative, assume less perfect film and make it  60 µm. Then the minimum effective magnification on the film for 0.3 µm detail would be at least 200x. Because camera systems mostly reduce power 2x, this would require at least 400x from the microscope. For contact prints, the rules for visual observation apply, so print at least at 1000x to 1500x for our example, or simply more if you think it makes for more convenient viewing - e.g. at a larger distance than 25 cm.

At present, digital cameras do not approach the resolving power of document films and their performance differs for different models, so you’ll have to make test pictures to see what the camera can handle.

Prints in journals:
If your pictures are going to be published, they will be printed using a fine screen. This will slightly impair image quality so for the fine structure in our example I would suggest at least 1500x and better 2000x. For a “close-up” of a relevant portion of  the image you might even use 2500x here. For a poor-quality journal the printer’s screen will be coarser and you may have to use higher magnification.

- Video monitor, computers
This “coarse screen” situation also arises if you show microscopic images on a video- or computer monitor. A normal TV has only 625 lines for the entire height of the screen, a normal computer monitor has 600 or 768 for the entire height and 800 or 1000 for the entire width. This means that you can never hope to show the detail in a hard copy photograph at the same picture size on screen, you need a much larger scale and scrolling of the picture may be unavoidable. Digital is not always better!

When scanning hard copy photomicrographs, and certainly when scanning negatives, you will have to remember what you do: many of my negatives on document film indeed contain detail near 50 lines per mm, which requires a scan with at least 1250 dpi. Because of the “landscape” screen format of most computers you’d better rotate pictures for optimum viewing.

Conventional wisdom (Abbe) had it that horrible things happened when magnification was greater than about 1000x the NA of the objective, but these are fables. When looking through a microscope at very high magnification (say 2000x) you’ll notice the residual imperfections in the lenses - and the preparation! - more, the field of view becomes smaller and the image becomes darker. So the image will not be really crisp, that’s all. But if you have a superb photomicrograph on negative or CDROM, you can blow it up to spectacular poster size for a presentation to let people enjoy it!

    «««« »»»»

  7. ILLUMINATION IN MICROSCOPY





In this chapter, some of the finer - and lesser known -  points of illumination will be discussed. If you just want  to use the microscope for routine work, you can stick to a few rules and refer to the instructions for your microscope. If you are interested in the microscope as such, however, and especially if you wish to combine a microscope that has no built-in illumination with a stand-alone illuminator, here’s some food for thought. So to begin with, here’s a summary:

Summary


Condensers
If the light source must be focused in the object, it’s evidently the condenser that must do this. And as the condenser therefore has to form an image, one may assume that this image has to be of some reasonable quality - perhaps not as good as the image of the object formed by the objective, but not completely junk either.

We have seen experimentally in Chapter 3 how chromatic and spherical aberration ruin the image. To what extent are the aberrations of the condenser important?

In Fig. 39 the operation of the condenser is illustrated. Rays from the light source are dotted, continuous lines show the image formation of the condenser iris. This image should be located at an infinite distance behind the condenser. The design of the condenser should, therefore, be such that the condenser iris is located in its front focal plane. The condenser delivers a bundle of light up to its maximum NA (0.95 dry, higher only if used “wet”) into the objective. Effective condenser NA is adjusted by stopping down with the condenser iris. If only a small portion of the condenser is used, spherical and chromatic aberration are greatly reduced and the first conclusion, therefore, is that up to about a 20x, NA 0.45 objective we need not worry.

If we talk about correction for spherical aberration, it’s necessary to refer to a complicating factor. Any lens can form an image of an object placed at any distance, although the position of these images will be very different. The design rule for spherical correction is that good correction can only be obtained for exactly specified locations of the object (in front of the lens) and its image at other exactly specified locations behind the lens. For other locations, spherical aberration will still be present. These locations for which spherical correction has been optimized are called the aplanatic points.

Manufacturers happen to have marketed two different types of condensers, unfortunately without specifically saying which type it is by engraving it on the condenser. The first is “corrected for infinity”: it’s so designed that spherical correction is best if the light source is at an infinite distance from the condenser. One (front) aplanatic point is thus at infinity, the other lies at the natural (rear) focus of the condenser. Simple (“uncorrected”) condensers sometimes (and quite erroneously) called “Abbe-type” condensers of  vintage microscopes - but also much later - fall in this category.

The second is corrected for a much smaller distance of the light source, typically 35 cm or so. This is not unreasonable because the illuminator will be placed on the bench, or is built into the microscope. The front aplanatic point will then be at about 35 cm. Typical examples are found among modern highly corrected condensers.

Even dealers tend to acquire a hazy or even chastising look if you ask them whether their condensers are designed for infinity (possibly because they fear you want to have a warranty for that period), but fortunately you can find out for yourself:

Experiment:
Focus with a 10x objective on a slide. Do not use the “low power setting” of the condenser if it has one. Use the flat mirror (if the microscope does not have a mirror use a pocket mirror) to catch an image of some object outside the room, e.g. trees. If you can focus this easily by racking the condenser almost completely up, the condenser is designed for infinity. If you can’t, its front aplanatic point is closer and you can find out where by holding a pencil at some distance away from the mirror and moving it forwards and backwards until its image in the microscope is sharpest.
 

Critical illumination
This form of illumination is typically intended for a condenser corrected for infinity. The illuminating train (Fig. 40) starts with a light bulb and this is followed by a lens system (one lens in the simplest case, two or three in other designs) which projects the filament of the lamp at infinity. This lens system is called the collector. The light thus leaves the lamp as a parallel bundle. The condenser is corrected for infinity, the lamp filament now appears to lie in its front aplanatic point and is focused in the object with the lowest spherical aberration the condenser can yield.

The disadvantage is that the filament is seen in the object, so the field of view is not evenly illuminated. For that reason the light bulb, or one of the collector lenses, is given a lightly frosted surface. Another shortcoming is that the slide is illuminated by a strongly convergent cone of light which causes some glare, slightly reducing contrast.
 

Köhler illumination
In this case, the filament of the lamp is focused by the collector so that it is sharply imaged in the front focal plane of the condenser. The filament is thus projected as an image at an infinite distance behind the condenser. That implies that the slide is now illuminated by a parallel bundle of light, reducing glare. Also, because the image of the filament now lies at infinity, it is no longer seen in the object and illumination becomes more even.

In addition, a Köhler lamp has its own iris diaphragm (Fig. 40). If this is situated at the location of the front aplanatic point of the condenser, it will be sharply focused in the object. The portion of the object illuminated can now be restricted only to what you actually see in the microscope (the field of view), reducing glare. That is why the lamp iris is called the field stop. It is evident, however, that the field stop is not at infinity but close to the condenser. This means that the condenser should be corrected for a shorter distance (conventionally about 35 cm or so) than infinity.

You can use an infinity-corrected condenser in this situation if you combine it with a correction lens. This works just like reading-glasses for people, the lens should have a focal distance of about 35 cm (+ 3 diopter) and is placed in the filter ring. The vintage microscope of Fig. 9  has a very good aplanatic condenser but I can only use it for Köhler illumination if I combine it with a correction lens, otherwise the condenser performs very poorly.

Things are rarely ideal in optics, and although Köhler illumination is supposed to give a perfectly evenly illuminated field of view, this is not always the case. Therefore, the light bulb or a collector lens is mostly lightly frosted in this case also.
 

What price condenser?
All manufacturers produce the simple “uncorrected” condenser, but many also offer more highly corrected types. An uncorrected condenser is cheap, an aplanatic one may cost about double, an achromatic-aplanatic one is about twice as expensive again. In view of the difference, one may wonder whether the benefits balance the cost?

Much has been written about this and mostly the conclusion amounted to something like “the expensive ones are better”… When I first seriously tackled microscopy, I ran into a major problem which I had to solve myself because the literature did not discuss it and dealers could not help. Since then, I have found only one publication (“Teach yourself microscopy” by W.G. Hartley, The English Universities Press, 1962 and possibly later editions) that exactly described the problem I had run into and clearly identified the cause.

Experiment:
At low power (10x or 20x objective) set up Köhler illumination according to the instructions in your manual or as given at the end of this chapter. A slide with diatoms is excellent for this, focus on the object. Check the aperture to verify that about 80% of the objective is filled with light. Close down the field stop (which should be sharply focused in the field of view) until you just see it appear at the edge of the field of view. A nice Köhler image should be seen.

Switch to 100x oil immersion, refocus on the object. Use the condenser “dry”, open up the condenser iris fully. Check that about 80% of the aperture is filled with light. While looking at the object, close down the field stop until you see its edge.

If closing down the field stop causes obvious changes in the image, notably a marked reduction of resolution, check the aperture. In that case, closing down of the field stop (juggle with its setting) results in restriction of the illuminated portion of the aperture and you have a problem: severe spherical aberration of the condenser makes the field stop act like an aperture stop.

In this case, you will have to set the field stop much wider open than necessary. Strict Köhler illumination, which aims at reducing glare by limiting the illuminated portion of the object, cannot be attained because resolution will be ruined. The alternative to leaving the field stop open is to use critical illumination, which also works with a poor condenser.

An aplanatic condenser will still sufficiently fill the aperture of a 100x oil immersion with light if the field stop is small - just large enough to be seen at the edge. So Köhler illumination at high NA does not run into problems then. The edge of the field stop will still show a colour fringe, though. Focus the condenser until the inner fringe is blueish and open up the field stop slightly so that the colour fringe is outside the field of view. An aplanatic-achromatic condenser minimizes this colour fringe.

The conclusions are clear-cut:

The most cost-effective buy is obviously the aplanatic condenser. To document the above discussion, here are some pictures of a diatom (Nitzschia sigmoidea) taken with an objective of NA = 1.0 and identical setting of the condensers:


General recipe for Köhler illumination:

If the microscope has a mirror and is used with a stand-alone illuminator, place the lamp at the appropriate distance, tilt and turn the lamp to aim at the mirror, adjust mirror for centered image of filament on condenser opening and proceed as above.
 

Ray-paths
Fig. 42 shows the ray-paths for the illuminating and image-forming rays in the microscope. This is especially helpful for understanding phase-contrast.

The object is situated in the front aplanatic point of the objective and imaged at the tubelength distance (160 mm) in the eyepiece. The light source is either focused in the object (critical illumination) and imaged like the latter, or focused in the front focal plane of the condenser (Köhler illumination). In this case, parallel light illuminates the object and is focused in the rear focal plane of the objective. The field stop (= light source) is imaged like in critical illumination. The condenser iris is in the front focal plane of the condenser and is imaged like the filament in Köhler illumination, in the rear focal plane of the objective.

             «««« »»»»


 
  8. SPECIAL MICROSCOPY TECHNIQUES





What we have dealt with so far is called brightfield microscopy, where the image formed by the deviated light is seen against the background of the undeviated light. This is the most usual form of routine microscopy. In this chapter I will discuss two alternative observation techniques: darkfield and phase-contrast, and briefly mention two others: observation in polarised light and interference microscopy.

Darkfield
If sunlight enters an otherwise dark room through a slit in the curtains, tiny dust motes that were first invisible are seen against the dark background because they scatter the light. The undeviated light is excluded, the deviated light produces the image. A simple way to obtain such darkfield illumination is to place a central stop in the filter ring of the condenser. This central stop can be a coin, cemented centrally on a plastic disc cut to fit the filter ring (CDROM cassettes are good material).

This central stop (Fig. 43) blocks the direct light, only rays at an angle larger than the “angle of admittance” of the objective in use are allowed to strike the object. The background is dark, the light scattered (deviated) by the object - drawn bright blue in Fig. 43 - is imaged by the objective.

The size of the central stop will obviously depend on the “angle of admittance” (i.e. the NA) of the objective. A central stop of about 15 mm in diameter will generally yield darkfield with objectives up to about NA 0.5, depending on the properties of the microscope condenser. A central stop of 20 mm will generally permit darkfield with a 40x/NA 0.65 objective also. Adjust the focus of the substage condenser for maximum brightness of the central field of view. The field stop of the lamp can be wide open and there’s no major difference between critical or Köhler illumination.

For darkfield at higher NA, special “cardioid” darkfield condensers using mirror surfaces (Fig. 44) are manufactured. These are oiled to the slide (instead of oil, water may be used for convenience) and require exact focusing and centering with their centering screws. Even these high-power darkfield condensers cannot be used with objectives of  NA above 1.2 or higher, however. The reason is that darkfield condensers have two NA’s that should be considered: the inner NA (i.e. the portion of the light that is blocked) and the outer NA (which for technical reasons is limited to at most 1.4). For an objective of  NA 1.25 one would have to block everything up to at least NA 1.3 and the cone of light that would remain would thus be limited to an NA between 1.3 and 1.4. That’s simply not enough to produce practical darkfield. The inner NA limit attainable with current darkfield condensers appears to lie near 1.0 , corresponding to the medium-power (40 - 60x) oil immersion objectives offered by several manufacturers.

Contrast in darkfield (Fig. 45) is extreme and resolution is as high as the objective can yield. Darkfield is spectacular for observations of live protozoa or bacteria (cilia or flagella are visible) and for diatoms. I always use darkfield to scan diatom slides at low to medium power because it’s easy on the eyes and even the smallest and faintest diatoms stand out clearly. The limitations of darkfield:

Phase-contrast
The human eye is only sensitive to differences in amplitude (brightness) or wavelength (colour). Differences in phase (Fig. 46) are not visible to us. Unfortunately, many microscopic objects do not cause appreciable changes in the intensity or colour of the light falling through them, but only changes in phase. Such objects are called phase-objects. Living cells and diatoms are examples.

Differences in phase result from differences in optical path length : differences in thickness in a piece of glass, for instance, and differences in refractive index (n).

The colourless silica valves of diatoms have an “n” slightly below 1.5. They do not absorb the light to an appreciable degree, but only retard it. If they are mounted in a medium of identical “n”, the medium retards the light just as much as the diatom and no phase difference results. If the difference in refractive index is considerable, with n of the medium either = 1 (air) or 1.7 (naphrax),  the phase differences are large. It’s only when phase changes are very large that the human eye perceives them as differences in brightness - as a sort of side-effect.

The principle of phase-contrast can be explained with the theory of diffraction described earlier. In Fig. 47 two light waves are drawn, “B” is the wave that passes outside the phase-object (i.e. the background illumination), “O” is the wave passing through the object. As drawn, it has the same amplitude as “B” (i.e. there’s no absorption), but it is delayed (phase-difference). If we graphically plot the difference between “B” and “O”, the result is another wave “D” that represents the difference between the background and the object. The diffraction theory has shown what “D” actually is: it’s the diffracted light generated by the object! In the image plane, “B” and “D” interfere, which amounts to a simple addition of their graphs. Evidently this results in “O”, which only differs from “B” in phase and thus is invisible.

It can be shown that for small phase differences, “D” always differs in phase from “B” by about ¼ wavelength, the phase difference is said to be ¼ l. If “D” is artificially shifted by another ¼ l and then interferes with “B” (Fig. 48), a new wave “O” results, which has a smaller amplitude than “B”. The object is darker than the background, the invisible phase-difference has been converted to a visible amplitude difference. This effect can be further enhanced when “B” is attenuated (Fig. 49) so that its amplitude is the same (but of opposite value) as that of “D”. The wave “O” is then extinguished to zero, which equates to maximum dark. This line of reasoning is equally valid if “D” is not delayed, but advanced in phase, in that case “O” becomes brighter than the background instead of darker.

Fig. 50 shows how this is done in practice. There is an annular stop in the front focal plane of the condenser, which is imaged at infinity: parallel rays exit the condenser. The light coming from the condenser is split into two bundles by the object, the undeviated and the deviated light.

Imaging of undeviated light (left hand of Fig. 50): the undeviated light “B” continues its parallel path and is therefore imaged at the rear focal plane of the objective.

Imaging of deviated light (right hand of Fig. 50):  the deviated light “D” fans out from the object and is imaged inside the eyepiece, about 160 mm above the objective.

Because these two images are so widely separated, “B” can be tinkered with while leaving “D” alone. The objective has a special ring-shaped phase-plate in its rear focal plane, which corresponds in size to the image of the phase annulus in the condenser. In the phase-plate, “B” is given the ¼ l extra phase-shift and also attenuated (the ring in the phase-plate can be seen if you look through the objective).

Procedure is as follows: adjust illumination. With Köhler illumination you can leave the field stop open because it is not very effective anyway here. Do not forget to set the condenser iris wide open! Select correct phase annulus for objective (10x, 20x etc. as indicated on the rotating plate of the condenser), insert centering telescope, center annulus. As said earlier, the phase-contrast condenser is nothing special (actually it is mostly of the uncorrected type) and you can use any condenser and make your own phase-annulus for each objective.

Making your own: for central stop use a washer (hardware shops) of appropriate size. You need really small ones for low-power objectives, determine the size needed by inspecting the phase-plate with the centering telescope and closing the condenser iris until it’s just slightly larger than the inner circle of the phase-ring. Cement the washer on a plastic disc cut to  fit the filter ring, center it while the cement is still soft. Block the hole in the washer with black paper or paint. The condenser iris can be used to block out the peripheral light, or you can cement a thin sheet metal disc with a hole of appropriate size on to your home-made phase annulus. Center also.
 

Limitations
Phase-contrast has its limitations. In the first place, it’s only suitable for phase-objects, that is to say: thin objects that do not cause major changes in absorption.

Surprisingly, except for some very advanced texts the literature does not point out that phase-contrast may cause a major reduction of resolution. The phase-annulus in the condenser limits the “angle of admittance” to less than the maximum angle the objective handles. After all, the ring in the phase-plate has to be smaller than the aperture of the objective. For the 10x, 20x and 40x objectives in a phase-contrast set, this reduction is mostly acceptable, but for some inexplicable reason the ring in the phase-plate of the 100x objective (where you want the highest resolving power) is far too small in many routine sets. Such 100x objectives do not resolve a diatom like Surirella gemma, which one can easily resolve in brightfield (without phase-contrast), even with objectives of lower NA.

When buying a phase-contrast 100x objective, inspect its aperture. If the ring of the phase-plate has a diameter less than half that of the lens, the design is not good enough.

Several manufacturers produce 100x phase-contrast objectives with a ring corresponding to NA 0.9 approximately. These yield both high resolution and good contrast.
 

Phase-contrast on the house
Ordinary objectives are also able to yield phase-contrast, a phenomenon already known to late-Victorian microscopists, who described the effect of an “annular stop”. Such an annular stop is just like the central stop used for darkfield, only slightly smaller so that it just passes light to illuminate the edge of the objective. Fig 51 shows the effect for an ordinary 20x achromatic objective. It can be just as spectacular for a 40x objective and even a 100x objective can deliver good images if combined with a high-power darkfield condenser of the “wet” type - which as we saw cannot deliver true darkfield with an oil immersion objective of NA 1.25. The effect can be widely different for objectives of different manufacture, however, and this is purely a matter of experiment. Some ordinary achromats, even of vintage age, work very well, others can’t cope with this trickery.

The reason why this annular illumination results in phase-contrast is that spherical correction of an objective becomes less perfect at the periphery. It can be shown that this results in abrupt phase-shifts in the wave-front at the edge of the lens. What we exploit here is a sort of unintentional phase-plate at the edge of the lens, of undefined phase-shift and with zero absorption. The Victorians can be said to have failed to discover phase-contrast by a narrow margin…
 

Polarised light
Microscopy in polarised light is primarily an analytical method to determine various optical properties of crystals. Thus, it’s a method of measurement, requiring specialist knowledge and special microscopes of considerable complexity. Simple applications of polarised light can yield fine results, however (Fig. 52), and because polarised light is also used for interference microscopy, here’s a concise explanation.

Ordinary light consists of waves oscillating in all planes perpendicular to the direction of propagation (Fig. 53). Polarizing filters extinguish all waves except those in a single plane: after leaving the polariser in Fig. 53, only the “North-South” wave is left. If a second filter, the analyser, with its polarizing axis in the “East-West” axis,  is added, all light is extinguished. The two polarizing filters are said to be crossed.

Many substances display a special optical property called birefringence: a single light ray passing  through them is split into two rays, with different propagation speeds. It’s as if the substance had two different refractive indices, resulting in a phase-difference between the two rays which varies with wavelength. When a birefringent substance is placed between the polariser and analyser and the two rays exiting the substance are made to interfere, a colour results that depends on the measure of the phase-shift. In one particular range of colour, very small shifts in phase lead to marked differences in hue (Fig. 54). This range lies in the red, at a wavelength called “first-order red”. A first-order red plate between the polariser and analyser greatly enhances the differences in colour. Birefringent objects lying in the North-South or East-West axis extinguish, which is one reason why polarizing microscopes have rotating stages.

Polarised light can also be used for diatoms, making details visible that are not or barely visible in brightfield (Fig. 55). Resolution is only maximum in one direction (“azimuth effect”), requiring a rotating stage.

Interference microscopy
Like phase-contrast, interference microscopy makes phase-shifts in the object visible as differences in colour or intensity. There are many different technical principles by which interference microscopes can be designed. In all cases, the physics is fairly complex so that the specialist textbooks must be consulted. Unlike phase-contrast, and like microscopy in polarised light, interference microscopy was primarily developed as an analytical method, permitting sensitive measurement of the optical properties of the object. The polarisation microscope is actually a form of interference microscope.

One type of interference contrast set, Differential Interference Contrast (DIC, often called after its inventor Nomarski), has found wide application in biology because it’s not complex in use. Such a commercially available set, consisting of a special condenser and an attachment inserted above the objectives, greatly enhances the visibility of phase-objects but does not permit measurements to be made. Contrast is variable and DIC can cope with both small phase-shifts and large ones - which a  phase-contrast set may not be able to handle. As in polarisation microscopy, there is an “azimuth effect”, requiring a rotating stage.

    ««««««  »»»»»»

Prepared in downloadable format by Frithjof A. S. Sterrenburg and Micscape,
the monthly magazine of Microscopy-UK.

September 2002
© Frithjof A. S. Sterrenburg


© Onview.net Ltd, Microscopy-UK, and all contributors 1995 onwards. All rights reserved. Main site is at www.microscopy-uk.org.uk with full mirror at www.microscopy-uk.net.