8-inch (20cm) working distance

[sam]

I never thought I could adapt to such a great working distance, but so far it's working just fine. I put a 0.4x objective on my Zeiss scope and I can see a much larger area at lower magnification and can even use a chasing hammer & punch under the scope now. Old dogs can learn new tricks

 

[mrthe]

I use a f=200 mm objective in my Zeiss Opmi-1 and i have the same working distance,for me work great too,like you say for stippling or using H&C is very nice,i have a 14 cm working distance in my Leica and i feel a great difference when i use it now,after a year using the Zeiss.

 

[rod]

Right on, Sam!

I changed from the more or less standard .5x objective, 6 inch working distance, to a .3x giving me about 10 inch distance, and true, it does allow you more room to swing and axe. In my case, and I offer this out to those engravers who do not have a standard sized body, if such a thing exists? The airline industry obviously feels that we all have standard bodies, in their case, a body that sits uncomplaining in a baby chair for 10 hours. I am not overly tall, at 6 feet 1 1/2 inches, yet my back is a bit longer in proportion, so if I am sitting in a room full of people of my height, chances are, by head is at a taller elevation. So how to I get comfortable at my bench? I like, as many do, to have the top of my ball vise at elbow joint level, so the forearms come into the workpiece horizontally, but I would then have to crouch down and curve my spine to look at a focused view when using a .5 objective focusing with a 6 inch working height.

Now change to a .3x objective, the scope needs to be inches higher to be in focus, ergo the eyepieces are exactly at the right height to come up to my eyes without crouching, allowing me good posture, and less trips to a chiropractor. By the way, while working in a seated position, I always sit in stools with no comfortable back support, most 'computer chairs can lure us into the armchair mode, and more back problems in our future lives.

Sam rightly reminds us that magnification drops a bit with smaller value objective lenses, but let's face it, we still have tons of mag to do our work, and now Sam and I have a wider field of view, if we need it. Of course, we have our .5 lens available, to put back in there if needed on special jobs.

I am writing all this to let others think about whether your own set up is at maximum comfort for your size of body? I am reminded of Andrew Biggs, not by any means a small framed guy, finding it most awkward to see comfortably when sitting at my rig... our trunks were of different lengths. Check out your ergonomics, and see if you might add more comfort and better posture, for the price of one objective lens?

Rod

 

[monk]

come on, guys ! yaller makin me want to go buy more optical stuff ! when you need higher power and the increased distance, you can switch to higher power eyepieces.

 

[Tim Wells]

The Ziess I'm going to sell came with one of those and another 300 objective that makes it an 11 inch working distance. I never figured out a use for that one so it stayed packed away the whole time I've had it. The 200 is perfect for everything especially hammering a punch under the scope. Keeps you from banging into the bottom of the lens on the upswing. Ouch!

 

[mitch]

i've had 22cm (about 8.5") with a 0.5x objective lens on my Leica S6E for years. in fact, the working distance was so much greater than my old Olympus SZ3 that I needed to buy a taller chair, since my vise platform height is fixed. i also had to put my gravermax foot pedal on a raised base.

if you need an outrageous working distance (and are ok with the vise being between your knees), you can get 16x or 20x eyepieces and .25-.3x objective lenses. you'll have about the same magnification range & field diameter as the standard engraver's set-up of 10x oculars & .5x objective, but over a foot of working distance with some scopes.

 

[sam]

When I got the Zeiss scope I went from a 0.5x objective w/6" working distance to a 0.63x objective with about 5" of working distance. It was kind of tight but I got used to it. The biggest drawback was the smaller field of view at lowest magnification. I wasn't sure I could work with the extended distance the 0.4x provides, but it's working quite nicely. As for the upper end of the zoom, there's way more magnification that I can use so losing some in exchange for a wider field of view was an excellent trade-off. A bonus is being able to use a hammer & punch under the scope, and stippling is easier as well.

Rod: I'm a pretty short guy compared to you and I'm glad you're working ok with the 0.3x. I have one for my Meiji scope and used it for a student awhile back who greatly preferred it. I'm probably too short to ever use that one.

 

[monk]

i have been using a scienscope with a .5-- 7" clearance. i now have a leica sz4 waiting for a .5 to come in the mail. those of you using the sz4-- what distance would the .2 .3 & .4 lens be ? and approximate magnification with each ?

 

[mrthe]

Monk my SZ4 with the 0,5 give me 16 /17 cm of working distance

 

[LVVP]

Sam,

Could you tell me where can I get 0.63, 0.4, 0.3, please? I have Zeiss 2000 scope, too