|
|
 | | From: | R.H. | | Subject: | Magnification preference | | Date: | 6 Dec 2004 12:37:52 -0800 |
|
|
 | I just bought a digital microscope and it only came with a 30x lens.
I'm thinking about getting another one, either 100x or 200x but I don't
have any experience using these so I'm asking for advice on which to
choose. I'm planning to use it for recreational purposes only, just to
play around with it and look at interesting things. If you had to
choose between the two which one would you buy and why?
Thanks,
Rob
|
|
| | From: | Aaron | | Subject: | Re: Magnification preference | | Date: | 11 Dec 2004 18:01:06 -0600 |
|
|
| Hi Rob,
Some time back a poster to this group was looking to develop an
instrument with the portable qualities of the Proscope and I pointed
him to this instrument. In particular this design has two major
issues. First, it is almost impossible for anyone to hand hold the
business end of this device sufficiently steady to capture a clear
image regardless of the quality of the optics. The limit for hand
held magnifiers is about 10X. Second, lighting at high maginfication
is tricky. The greater the magnification the more light is needed.
Also the objective needs to be closer to the sbuject at higher
magnifications so the objective often interfers with the lighting.
So in your particular case I would stick with the lowest
magnifications. I think you would be happier with even lower
magnifications.
Proscope sells a stand to hold the probe. Did you use this? If not
the stand would help.
Magnification is not the most important feature of a microscope.
although the advetrizing often implies that it is so. Far more
important is the resolving power or in other words the information
content of the image. Excessive magnification is a well know problem
when pushing a lens system beyond its performance limits. The image
is large but the detail is missing and there is distortion. I think
many of the photos on your website exhibit this characteristic.
Judging by the quality of the images, what you have is more than a toy
but far from a serious microscope. The lack of sharpness may be from
hand movement as I suggested before but I think it is also a
characteristic of the optics.. I get the feeling that if you were
exposed to some serious equipment you would get hooked on the real
thing. So my further advice after you read up some more, would be to
look for an quality used microscope from a major maker (Nikon, Zeiss,
Leica, Leitz, Olympus, American Optical, Bausch and Lomb etc.) which
can be combined with a digital eyepiece camera or a comercial point
and shoot digital camera. Such equipment will outperform what you
have by a great margin.
At 30X you are in the magnifications range of a typical
stereomicroscope. To achieve 200X or more reqires a different design
in which the lighting is directed down through the objectives which
also collects the reflected image.
Aaron
On 6 Dec 2004 12:37:52 -0800, "R.H." wrote:
>I just bought a digital microscope and it only came with a 30x lens.
>I'm thinking about getting another one, either 100x or 200x but I don't
>have any experience using these so I'm asking for advice on which to
>choose. I'm planning to use it for recreational purposes only, just to
>play around with it and look at interesting things. If you had to
>choose between the two which one would you buy and why?
>
>Thanks,
>Rob
|
|
| | From: | R.H. | | Subject: | Re: Magnification preference | | Date: | Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:29:26 GMT |
|
|
| Thanks for the info.
Last night I added another set of photos if anyone is interested:
http://microphotos.blogspot.com/
Part of the reason I bought the microscope was for recreational viewing,
another reason was to add some different type images to my other puzzle
page:
http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/
Rob
"Aaron" wrote in message
news:02omr0p5cd1q78t28m6j6mduvai7f2ted6@4ax.com...
> Hi Rob,
>
> Some time back a poster to this group was looking to develop an
> instrument with the portable qualities of the Proscope and I pointed
> him to this instrument. In particular this design has two major
> issues. First, it is almost impossible for anyone to hand hold the
> business end of this device sufficiently steady to capture a clear
> image regardless of the quality of the optics. The limit for hand
> held magnifiers is about 10X. Second, lighting at high maginfication
> is tricky. The greater the magnification the more light is needed.
> Also the objective needs to be closer to the sbuject at higher
> magnifications so the objective often interfers with the lighting.
> So in your particular case I would stick with the lowest
> magnifications. I think you would be happier with even lower
> magnifications.
>
> Proscope sells a stand to hold the probe. Did you use this? If not
> the stand would help.
>
> Magnification is not the most important feature of a microscope.
> although the advetrizing often implies that it is so. Far more
> important is the resolving power or in other words the information
> content of the image. Excessive magnification is a well know problem
> when pushing a lens system beyond its performance limits. The image
> is large but the detail is missing and there is distortion. I think
> many of the photos on your website exhibit this characteristic.
>
> Judging by the quality of the images, what you have is more than a toy
> but far from a serious microscope. The lack of sharpness may be from
> hand movement as I suggested before but I think it is also a
> characteristic of the optics.. I get the feeling that if you were
> exposed to some serious equipment you would get hooked on the real
> thing. So my further advice after you read up some more, would be to
> look for an quality used microscope from a major maker (Nikon, Zeiss,
> Leica, Leitz, Olympus, American Optical, Bausch and Lomb etc.) which
> can be combined with a digital eyepiece camera or a comercial point
> and shoot digital camera. Such equipment will outperform what you
> have by a great margin.
>
> At 30X you are in the magnifications range of a typical
> stereomicroscope. To achieve 200X or more reqires a different design
> in which the lighting is directed down through the objectives which
> also collects the reflected image.
>
> Aaron
>
>
> On 6 Dec 2004 12:37:52 -0800, "R.H." wrote:
>
> >I just bought a digital microscope and it only came with a 30x lens.
> >I'm thinking about getting another one, either 100x or 200x but I don't
> >have any experience using these so I'm asking for advice on which to
> >choose. I'm planning to use it for recreational purposes only, just to
> >play around with it and look at interesting things. If you had to
> >choose between the two which one would you buy and why?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Rob
>
|
|
| | From: | GTO | | Subject: | Re: Magnification preference | | Date: | Tue, 07 Dec 2004 04:37:28 GMT |
|
|
| Which brand? If it's a toy, it will be better to stick to the low power
lenses.
Gregor
"R.H." wrote in message
news:1102365472.201297.269140@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I just bought a digital microscope and it only came with a 30x lens.
> I'm thinking about getting another one, either 100x or 200x but I don't
> have any experience using these so I'm asking for advice on which to
> choose. I'm planning to use it for recreational purposes only, just to
> play around with it and look at interesting things. If you had to
> choose between the two which one would you buy and why?
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
>
|
|
| | From: | R.H. | | Subject: | Re: Magnification preference | | Date: | Tue, 07 Dec 2004 21:05:47 GMT |
|
|
| Thanks for the reply, it's a Proscope handheld microscope with a 30x lens,
they cost around $200 so it's better than a toy but certainly not a high
priced model. Some sample pictures that I took are linked below, maybe
someone can post some photos taken by a Proscope with a 100x or 200x lens.
Bismuth:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v80/harnett65/micro7.jpg
Coin:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v80/harnett65/micro14.jpg
Four more photos can be seen here:
http://microphotos.blogspot.com/
"GTO" wrote in message
news:csatd.39504$6q2.33226@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> Which brand? If it's a toy, it will be better to stick to the low power
> lenses.
>
> Gregor
>
> "R.H." wrote in message
> news:1102365472.201297.269140@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >I just bought a digital microscope and it only came with a 30x lens.
> > I'm thinking about getting another one, either 100x or 200x but I don't
> > have any experience using these so I'm asking for advice on which to
> > choose. I'm planning to use it for recreational purposes only, just to
> > play around with it and look at interesting things. If you had to
> > choose between the two which one would you buy and why?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rob
> >
>
>
|
|
| | From: | David Sewell | | Subject: | Re: Magnification preference | | Date: | Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:17:32 -0000 |
|
|
|
"R.H." wrote in message
news:LWotd.55074$MG3.49952@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
> Thanks for the reply, it's a Proscope handheld microscope with a 30x lens,
> they cost around $200 so it's better than a toy but certainly not a high
> priced model. Some sample pictures that I took are linked below, maybe
> someone can post some photos taken by a Proscope with a 100x or 200x lens.
>
> Bismuth:
> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v80/harnett65/micro7.jpg
>
> Coin:
> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v80/harnett65/micro14.jpg
>
>
> Four more photos can be seen here:
> http://microphotos.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
>
>
Looks to me about the same kind of results you can get from the Intel QX3.
David
|
|
|
