 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / Optics / December 2008Help Request - Best scope for $300
Total newbee here - looking for either a new or refurb used high power student scope - a couple questions if I may: 1. Generally, what should I be looking for in a scope? 2. What are the best brands? 3. What brands should I steer clear of? 4. What are the pros/cons of Binocular vs Trinocular? 5. Should I care about a camera attachment or get that later so the money can all go toward the best scope? 6. What features are critical? 7. What accessories are critical? 8. Is ebay a good source? If not, what is the best source for price/ service? 9. What questions should I be asking prior to purchase? 10. Any other tips/hints/suggestions? If you don't mind, please reply directly to me: cpiel AT verizon DOT net Thanks!!! > Total newbee here - looking for either a new or refurb used high power > student scope - a couple questions if I may: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Thanks!!! I doubt you will find any thing new that is any good. It would be better to look at used dealers and see if they have something like an AO 10 or a B and L. These are solid older microscopes plus tons were built so there is plenty of stuff out there. The advantages are that they use Kohler illumination, kinda, sorta and can accept a digital camera if the unit is equipped with a trinocular. For what you can afford don't even worry about a digital camera, that's out of your price range. Good luck! Kevin Cunningham SMS > The advantages are that > they use Kohler illumination, kinda, sorta and can accept a digital > camera if the unit is equipped with a trinocular. A trinocular is a convenience, not a necessity, for digital photography. http://www.truetex.com/micad.htm For future readers, here is what I found: There are basically 2 types of microscopes: Compound and Inspection. Compound are for looking at slides (which need to be meticulously prepared with paper thin slices of the sample you are trying to view unless you buy prepared ones). They can go up to about 1600X which is considered high power although there are low power compound scopes available as well. To look at skin cells for example, you would need a compound microscope. Inspection scopes are for looking at 3 dimensional objects such as insects (even tiny ones), gemstones, etc. They typically go up to about 90X which is considered low power Both types come in Monocular, Binocular, Trinocular. Monocular is less expensive but can be harder on the eyes, Binocular is easier on the eyes and Trinocular just gives you an “extra” view for either a second person or a camera attachment if you want to add one later on. For either type, be careful to look at the power (90X, 1600X etc.) because this number is obtained by multiplying the objective lens power by the eyepiece lens power. The objective lens is the one closest to the object you are viewing and determines the resolution/ detail of the image. The eyepiece lens simply magnifies the image presented to it from the objective lens and does not help resolution whatsoever. Therefore, 2 scopes with 90X power could give very different quality of images. For instance, one with a 9X objective and 10X eyepiece would show much better detail than one with a 4.5X objective and a 20X eyepiece. Since this scope is for my son for Christmas to view little creatures, I chose a Trinocular Stereo Zoom Inspection Scope. I purchased it from www.amscope.com The reason I chose Trinocular (instead of Binocular) is so we can eventually buy him a camera attachment for it. > For future readers, here is what I found: > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > The reason I chose Trinocular (instead of Binocular) is so we can > eventually buy him a camera attachment for it. (sigh) What you found is just not so. However if you and your son like the microscope it just doesn't matter. Sorry, you made every mistake in the book. > Sorry, you made every mistake in the book. And you just extinguished the next Pasteur. > > Sorry, you made every mistake in the book. > > And you just extinguished the next Pasteur. Sir, I don't think the next Pasteur will come from ignorance. The gentleman's post was ignorance piled on top of ignorance. If the gentleman had taken the time to read, quickly, the educational stuff at any of the major manufacturers, Monster Magnet or my site he would know more and have bought a better microscope for less. I hope that the child is so interested in science that he ignores all the mistakes. It would be great to see a scientist emerge. It would be wonderful for an informed citizen to emerge. >> > Sorry, you made every mistake in the book. >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >the mistakes. It would be great to see a scientist emerge. It would >be wonderful for an informed citizen to emerge. Don't worry, Kevin. It seems to happen all the time. Ask a question for cheap and good and find out the hard way that these are at odds with one another--against advice to the contrary. Surprise! Spend some $$$ and have a system rather than little $$ and have a boat anchor. Kiss French. Drink California. gary at gaugler dot com >>> Sorry, you made every mistake in the book. >> And you just extinguished the next Pasteur. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > the mistakes. It would be great to see a scientist emerge. It would > be wonderful for an informed citizen to emerge. Is it just me, or did the "informative" post read more like an ad than someone's discoveries after researching equipment? The post certainly didn't take its target audience into consideration. > Is it just me, or did the "informative" post read more like an ad than > someone's discoveries after researching equipment? I think it was an honest effort from a novice parent trying hard to figure things out and finding some import-sales Web site(s). >> Is it just me, or did the "informative" post read more like an ad than >> someone's discoveries after researching equipment? > >I think it was an honest effort from a novice parent trying hard to figure >things out and finding some import-sales Web site(s). Perhaps so. Thus, why is it then that many neophites query this site, elicite responses and then ignore them? Why? Sometimes, folks look for rationale to do what they already wanted to do. They do not want contratiran views. I propose a new introductory message about what to get. Say what you have researched to date, the pros and cons and what you seek to achieve but are having a hard time about it. If not, then the post is ignored as vocal diahrrea. Kiss French. Drink California. gary at gaugler dot com > Sir, I don't think the next Pasteur will come from ignorance. The > gentleman's post was ignorance piled on top of ignorance. If the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the mistakes. It would be great to see a scientist emerge. It would > be wonderful for an informed citizen to emerge. Are you serious? Yes, I'm new to this as I pointed out in my post and was looking for some guidance from the experts here. I was astonished that no one bothered to either provide a nice summary or at least direct me to one. Here's a tip for ya Kev . . . If you feel it's important for a newbee to read the educational sources you mention, reference them in your first post rather than after the fact. People will continue to "make every mistake in the book" if they don't receive some guidance up front. Also, if you are going to take the time to call out the mistakes, then take the time to explain what those mistakes specifically were and what could have been done differently. That way your post actually contains some value for the next reader that comes along looking for similar input. And unfortunately, knowledge of microscopes will never compensate for lack of social skills - maybe take some lessons from Mr. Kinch. Have a nice day. > > Sir, I don't think the next Pasteur will come from ignorance. The > > gentleman's post was ignorance piled on top of ignorance. If the [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > of social skills - maybe take some lessons from Mr. Kinch. Have a nice > day. Please take a look at my first post. You didn't do a thing to look for either information or quality used instruments you could afford. You went to a poor site and bought a cheap but low quality instrument. I hope the instrument works for your purposes. Your techniques in purchasing the instrument reminds me of walking into a car lot and buying the first thing you see then later complaining that the car can't carry 30 ton loads. There is a lot of physics to learn about microscopes. And you didn't get it. Magnification has nothing what so ever to do with the imaging performance of the microscope. In my training we had to not use the term for a day, we had to get used to using the proper term, NA. You didn't get the core point that NA matters, mag doesn't. But I hope this works for you, really. Most people are interested in the specimen, not the microscope and that is the was it's always been. > > > Sir, I don't think the next Pasteur will come from ignorance. The > > > gentleman's post was ignorance piled on top of ignorance. If the [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > > - Show quoted text - My son is 9 and will be be mostly looking at insects. Somehow I think this scope at this time will be just fine, but thanks for your concern. For future readers, here is what I found: There are basically 2 types of microscopes: Compound and Inspection. Compound are for looking at slides (which need to be meticulously prepared with paper thin slices of the sample you are trying to view unless you buy prepared ones). They can go up to about 1600X which is considered high power although there are low power compound scopes available as well. To look at skin cells for example, you would need a compound microscope. Inspection scopes are for looking at 3 dimensional objects such as insects (even tiny ones), gemstones, etc. They typically go up to about 90X which is considered low power Both types come in Monocular, Binocular, Trinocular. Monocular is less expensive but can be harder on the eyes, Binocular is easier on the eyes and Trinocular just gives you an “extra” view for either a second person or a camera attachment if you want to add one later on. For either type, be careful to look at the power (90X, 1600X etc.) because this number is obtained by multiplying the objective lens power by the eyepiece lens power. The objective lens is the one closest to the object you are viewing and determines the resolution/ detail of the image. The eyepiece lens simply magnifies the image presented to it from the objective lens and does not help resolution whatsoever. Therefore, 2 scopes with 90X power could give very different quality of images. For instance, one with a 9X objective and 10X eyepiece would show much better detail than one with a 4.5X objective and a 20X eyepiece. Since this scope is for my son for Christmas to view little creatures, I chose a Trinocular Stereo Zoom Inspection Scope. I purchased it from www.amscope.com The reason I chose Trinocular (instead of Binocular) is so we can eventually buy him a camera attachment for it. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- These were the questions in the original post: "1. Generally, what should I be looking for in a scope? 2. What are the best brands? 3. What brands should I steer clear of? 4. What are the pros/cons of Binocular vs Trinocular? 5. Should I care about a camera attachment or get that later so the money can all go toward the best scope? 6. What features are critical? 7. What accessories are critical? 8. Is ebay a good source? If not, what is the best source for price/ service? 9. What questions should I be asking prior to purchase? 10. Any other tips/hints/suggestions? " The questions weren't very clear and OP didn't provide much information, for example: - the scope is to be used by a 9 years old boy - to study insects - and so on. So they were very difficult to answer, but that's what one can expect when a novice is trying to find his way in an entirely new field of knowledge. It's a sad thing that OP didn't get any real answer at all on his questions, except for some bashing on his lack of knowledge and an unusable lecture (spanking is perhaps a better word) on Köhler and N.A. ... A very good overview on the technology of the microscope, including which microscope (not) to buy is given in the "Mikrofiebel" written by the German Klaus Henkel. It contains a very interesting chapter on "Die Mikroskopie und Kinder" ("microscopy and kids"). The "Mikrofiebel" is only availlable in German.It can be downloaded for free here: http://www.mikroskopie-muenchen.de/mikrofibel.pdf Y. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.