New Purchase Bestscope Model BS-2080 Chinese vs Big 5

[einman]

OKay. I have quickly looked at the optics and find them to be quite good actually. I will need to select a slide, diatoms or something of that nature, as a standard.

If available, you can use Klaus Kemp's 8 Test forms of Diatoms. Especially the Gyrosigma is a good test of the objectives resolving power.

That is the exact slide I have. The only one actually.

[einman]

OKay. I have quickly looked at the optics and find them to be quite good actually. I will need to select a slide, diatoms or something of that nature, as a standard.

If available, you can use Klaus Kemp's 8 Test forms of Diatoms. Especially the Gyrosigma is a good test of the objectives resolving power.

Ok Initial evaluation using the KK Diatom slide using the 40X objective indicates the Leitz Diaplan to be directionally better in terms of resolution. It is very close though. My old eyes are not the best for evaluating such detail perhaps. Interestingly, when I look at a variety of slides the Bestscope actually seems to be better in some circumstances. This could be related to differences in DOF specs for the newer objectives. At this price range I would expect the newer objectives to benefit from computer technology, coatings etc and out perform the much older Leitz objectives. Color/contrast is superb with the Bestscope equal to superior to the Leitz.

The bestscope is quite pleasant to use. I am addressing optics only as the Leitz has a host of features not available on the Bestscope currently or via options.

To be continued.

[lorez]

My old eyes are not the best for evaluating such detail perhaps.

Boy, isn't that the truth. Over the years I've seen a decline in my acuity and am always mindful that just because I don't see it doesn't mean it's not there. I think you are wise to use something like the diatom slide as a benchmark. The microscope you are evaluating has as its target market the medical community and in that case some of the obligatory specimens are often challenging.

I'm fortunate in that I can call upon the professionals to do some of the evaluations and having more than one opinion is certainly beneficial in that I can confirm my observations.

I've (with benefit of my professional support team) compared the objectives you have on your microscope to the Olympus objectives on the BX... models and they hold their own very well. When you start to discuss the $$$$ it takes on a life of its own.

The evaluation of the stand can be done without comparison, but I think that having the time on the bench is really the telling factor.

lorez

[billben74]

Ha ha. This reminds me of my scope. The lens look identical to mine.

[einman]

My old eyes are not the best for evaluating such detail perhaps.

Boy, isn't that the truth. Over the years I've seen a decline in my acuity and am always mindful that just because I don't see it doesn't mean it's not there. I think you are wise to use something like the diatom slide as a benchmark. The microscope you are evaluating has as its target market the medical community and in that case some of the obligatory specimens are often challenging.

I'm fortunate in that I can call upon the professionals to do some of the evaluations and having more than one opinion is certainly beneficial in that I can confirm my observations.

I've (with benefit of my professional support team) compared the objectives you have on your microscope to the Olympus objectives on the BX... models and they hold their own very well. When you start to discuss the $$$$ it takes on a life of its own.

The evaluation of the stand can be done without comparison, but I think that having the time on the bench is really the telling factor.

lorez

So true. I often have wondered am I spending money on Apo objectives when perhaps my eyes are not capable of discerning the difference? That has seemed to be the case in the past.

So far this scope has been performing quite well. It did not come with a 20X objective, which I use quite often. I really would like to have one. So I am shopping for generic infinity plan objectives that look the same as the ones I have as well as cheap olympus objectives, if that is possible.

[lorez]

So I am shopping for generic infinity plan objectives that look the same as the ones I have as well as cheap olympus objectives, if that is possible.

I have a 20X objective that is almost identical to the set you have. It is from a different manufacturer, but I don't know positively that they are both not outsourcing their objectives. It seems that they would make their own objectives and have components supplied by sub vendors.

Both sets are compatible with the Olympus BX models and are of equivalent quality in all respects. I am adding an edit here: The Chinese sets are equivalent, but not necessarily with the Olympus objectives although they proved to be indiscernible in my side by side tests with the professional panel.

I don't have any cheap Olympus objectives, but I have some new ones that are not cheap.

lorez

[Oktagon]

I've been following this thread for a while, and I think my parciality to a particular brand of scopes is well known here. Having said that, in my opinion off-brand microscopes are not not necessarily bad, but they are not consistent. Either there is a problem with QC, or the materials used do not produce stable tolerances. It is true, that all but the top pf the line research scopes from LNOZ use plastics nowadays, but these are plastics which maintain mechanical stability and hold tolerances under variety of conditions. Technologically they are even superior to my beloved brass, nut there are plastics, and then there are plastics. If you take the best optomecanical design, all the G-codes from CAM, and then substitute materials for inferiors ones, you will get worse results. Add spotty QC, and you end up with significantly cheaper and much more inferior product. This is my problem with Off-brand scopes. Some of them might even be manufactured by the same facilities as lower end LNOZ, but using spare production capacity, out-of spec worn out tooling etc. An then there is longevity and resale value! I can sell my 40 years old ZSU for more than I paid for it any day of the week. I can part it and sell it part by part and get even more! Try doing it with off-brand scope. My 1940's Orthlux stand with no optics has a value! Will Off-brand scope with no glass be worth anything other then door stop (not even good one, it is too light). My suggestion is always go for older brand names. Allot of Olympuses can be had for very little money. They do not require the knowledge of peculiar Zeiss systems and diagnostics of delamination. Look for wonderful AO 110 series, look at very fine Medji. All quality instruments designed to outlast its owner. I find it insane to spend $2500 on Amazon for an off brand scope, when less than that will get you superb instrument from several members of this forum who stand behind their products! Even LOMO stands, especially older Biolams (Zeiss J stands) and newer research stands offer better value.

[apochronaut]

So true. I often have wondered am I spending money on Apo objectives when perhaps my eyes are not capable of discerning the difference?

Most of the people on this forum are amateurs, so the value for dollar is important. Your new acquisition has excellent value up to a certain price, then it would lose ground to a better buy, which almost always would be a used microscope from a precision manufacturer.
When it comes to the value of apos, and most microscopes can be fitted with them, cost is always a factor but in terms of whether one would see the difference? I don't think it is so subtle that visual acuity, would have much to do with it. I would say, one would see a beneficial difference almost always, unless the sample is unsuitable for shorter working distances or the set up cannot otherwise be done to accomodate the apochromat's slightly picky requirements. Achromats can give a sense of what I call false contrast. and frequently do, so in some instances can be seen as having higher contrast than an apochromat. Thin lines or borders and small specular details can easily be darkened and somewhat thickened by the unwanted diffraction of an achromat. This heavy thickened dark margin or spot can yield false contrast , when viewed alongside the more gentle, accurate contrast of an apo. You cannot mistake the differential in resolution, from a distortion free image. Apochromats provide a much more real representation of the subject, than an achromat, sometimes verging on 3-D.

[einman]

When I commented about my eyes not being able to discern the difference I was referring more to the fact my eyes are in fact deteriorating as a function of age and severe astigmatism. Thus the superior optics of an APO may look no better than a planachromat.

Subtle differences are wasted on the blind..

In regards to the precision of this particular scope..well that was the reason for the purchase and I believe based on comments to date both from forum members and from at least one individual that services Olympus microscopes there is little if any difference.

Of course Olympus makes complete line-up of objectives so for the most part we are talking the planachromats that came with the BX series scopes. I would consider the BX series to be precision microscopes. And I believe their stands to be easily superior to this stand. But in terms of optics ..not so much.

[einman]

Ok using Klaus Kemp's 8 form diatom slide I find the Best Scope to be very good. It is comparable to my Diaplan in performance with a slight edge to the Diaplan. I also compared it to an AO 20 and a B&L Balplan. The Bestscope performed better than the AO20 but equal to maybe slightly poorer than the Balplan. Contrast/Color was better than all the others. The Diaplan once again made a good showing. I must admit being impartial while examining these scopes is difficult given I have a fondness for the older models. I have the scopes lined up on a bench and intend to have some of my microscope friends rate them.

I also recently acquired a VWR Vista Vision equipped with plan infinity and phase contrast objectives. That will be included in the fray. This particular VWR, like the Best Scope was brand new still in the box. It too listed for about $3548 when sold on VWR's website Amazon and various other retailers. It appears that VWR no longer markets their branded microscopes. rather it appears they switched to the same stands branded Jenco. The stand design was used by several manufacturers and tends to cost less than the Best Scope stand design. Given the number of companies utilizing the same stands and optics and simply adding their brand it is no surprise some would not be successful. The market is just too crowded. VWR appears to have chosen to carry another brand and let that company carry the marketing. This VWR scope should give us some idea of another Chinese scope costing over $2000.

I will be selling some of these scopes once I have made my evaluations. It will be an excellent opportunity for someone to get superb scopes at very reasonable prices. Although, like many others on this forum, I tend to get attached" to my scopes and sell them only with reluctance when the finances demand it.

I think I may also throw into the fray an older B&L Dynazoom scope equipped with APOS. It is a beautiful scope with nice clear images although the FOV is noticeably smaller. I am not rating based on FOV though it does factor into the equation when choosing a scope. Both the Leitz Diaplan, Balplan, VWR and Bestscope have a larger than normal (> 18mm) FOV with the Diaplan having greater than 25 mm. I will post pictures and summary comments on each of the scopes.

Both the Bestscope and the VWR are priced beyond the means of most hobbysists including myself. I would prefer a used Olympus BX41/51 rather than a private label Chinese scope at these prices. Unless, I could acquire them as I have these due to companies shutting down etc. The question will remain how well does a new $500-$1000 Chinese scope perform against an older scope in the same price range. At least we will know how mots of our scopes perform against a $3000 Chinese scope.

[CaptainKirk]

It's the same as Amscope's http://www.amscope.com/40x-1500x-plan-i ... scope.html

I guess the photo on their website shows different objectives, but it's most likely a listing error (older revision). They definitely have the same exact ones, at least on the T720s

[einman]

Yes you are correct. I believe I mentioned that in a post. Not sure if it was on this site. In response made to resell value..
I am in 100% agreement. Offbrand scopes have very little resale value and as mentioned that is one reason I still prefer the Big 5 scopes.

However, the intent of my posting was not to convince the more experienced hobbyists to go with an off brand rather it was to demonstrate that newbies could, with patience, purchase a very good scope comparable in optics to the older stands without worrying about maintenance, repairs etc.

i have no intention of giving up my Diaplan. But for $500 or less you can get a scope retailing for over $2000, I plan on keeping the Bestscope as I am happy with its performance.

In regards to the comment on "plastics" given I am a chemist and deal in polymers. I am quite knowldegeable in that regard. Without getting into specifics I agree there are significant variations in the quality of a "plastic". Although those being used in modern scopes will not and do not hold up to "brass" etc. That is not to say there are not polymers that can not out perform brass in some respects. I am just saying the manufacurers choose not to use them as they want scopes to be replaced in less time than has been the practice.

[einman]

Interestingly I have seen some offbrand manufacturers pointing out they use metal in their construction. Perhaps in response to concerns like those mentioned in this forum. Whether those "metal" pars translate to equivalent longevity or performance to older scopes will be proven with time.

[CaptainKirk]

Interestingly I have seen some off-brand manufacturers pointing out they use metal in their construction. Perhaps in response to concerns like those mentioned in this forum. Whether those "metal" parts translate to equivalent longevity or performance to older scopes will be proven with time.

I think it boils down generally to which factory produces the specific model of scope you order from the name-brand company. There are 4 main factories (I think) with several smaller ones in China. One company prints the abbreviation/date code of the factory right on the box they ship you. Each factory has varying quality. Nobody is rating them so it's hard to know which products to buy/avoid. Several off-brand companies are using these same factories, some with certain variations on the models.

Sure, you can say "Don't buy a _____", because X model sucks. Well, it probably does because it came from that one factory, but the other model might just be great. I know that Premiere and Bestscope, to name just a few, are using those same factories. They are finding their market niche- which may be a slightly higher quality scope (or perception of) on a given model. Or maybe it's not really higher quality because their warranty sucks and when the power supply blows out in a year (some burn), they'll charge you for a new one. What factors do you consider when determining quality? I'm sure we all want a scope that has great optics, high quality materials used in construction, a good warranty from a company maybe with good customer support, while not being priced ridiculously high. I think we all want Amscope prices and Olympus quality all in one.

Some have the luxury of affording Big 4, they swear by them because they are guaranteed to be high quality. Why not? You are paying literally thousands for them. Good for you money isn't such a concern.

Others like generics/Chinese because they try to copy the Big 4 and sell them at a fraction of the cost. Some of those attempts end up being like Toyota's, others like a Ford Pinto. Life is like a box of chocolates...

[75RR]

Some have the luxury of affording Big 4, they swear by them because they are guaranteed to be high quality.

Though I do not doubt a new microscope from one of the Big 4 is a very nice thing to have, I think you will find that most of us extolling the virtues of the Big 4 or 5 are referring to the excellent value for money they represent in the second hand market - in which one can get a quality microscope for the same or even less than the cost of a mid-range Chinese clone.

[mrsonchus]

75's right - the prices compare really well. I wasn't ready to go for an 'old master' when I started though, as I simply didn't know enough to be able to use such a 'scope properly. I bought a new Chinese 'scope which gives beautiful images - but my recently acquired Leitz Orthoplan out performs it at almost every level, but it took me two years to learn enough to be able to buy such a 'scope!

If you want a 'use out of the box' 'scope - go for one of the excellent Chines 'scopes for sale new - if you have the confidence and capability to get to grips with an older big-4 'scope - go for that.

That's my thought based upon the experience I have of exactly this scenario.

The performance of the Chinese 'scope is far above what I'd expected for the quality, however the Orthoplan is far better, and has an order of magnitude lead in quality and build.

Just my thoughts...
John B

[einman]

I believe the Chinese scopes are underestimated. The problem lies in the fact the same stand can appear under various names with varying quality optics. What brand can you trust. You can't omit the fact Zeiss, Nikon, Olympus Leica are manufacturing in China and with the Chinese propensity to ignore patent law you could very well obtain a Chinese scope with the same optics as the Big 4 on a different stand for pennies on the dollar.

If you look at the scope I started this discussion with with the BS2080 the stand is identical, in some cases slight variations under various brand names. The question always remains the same. How do the optics compare.

I believe I mentioned seeing a brand new Chinese scope unboxed, at a dealer, with Nikon objectives installed. I am sure it was by accident as it was not a "Nikon" branded stand.

[mrsonchus]

I believe the Chinese scopes are underestimated.
...................

I must agree 100% with you einman - this has definitely been my experience. The 'SP200' that I started with from Brunel was a superb 'scope and of course had full Kohler capability.
It lacked the versatility and build-quality of my current Orthoplan but was in no way deficient in use. Optically it was very good with a superb set of plan objectives, the planarity of which would even put some of my Leitz pans to shame.

It's weaker points were it's condenser and relatively low (borderline insufficient I think) illumination power.

John B.

[Hobbyst46]

einman,

The high number of views of this post so far (3000+) indicates that you hit upon an important and intriguing question asked by many microscope users and potential users. An impressive project.

Two very recent posts in this Forum attracted my attention. Although they do not refer to the scope model that you tested. In one of them, a new Chinese microscope was incorrectly (?) advertised by a seller as made in Korea. In the other post, about darkfield difficulties, a NEW darkfield condenser would not fit mechanically into the holder on the NEW Chinese microscope.
For me, such issues raise a question mark, and justify a thorough verification of the long-term potential and upgrade options of the microscope, in addition to its immediate performance and resale value.

[einman]

Your point is valid on the models/brands from China that are or tend to be at the lowest prices. It is for this reason, like with any brand, you need to recognize its quality. Many Chinese manufacturers do not even brand their scopes. That is a red flag right off.

You have to know or be aware of the brands reputation. I recently did an experiment in which I purchased 2 laptop desks advertised under various names or in some cases simply a description. One listed for $18 and the one with a trade marked name and significant marketing listed for $50. They were but 2 of many identical looking laptop desks with prices varying from $15 to $100. They both arrived. The $18 one arrived in a box covered in Chinese writing. Well I assume it was Chinese. It did say manufactured in China. The $50 one arrived in a neatly labeled box with the trade name "Chill Desk". It was also manufactured in China. Upon examining the 2 desks the first thing I noticed was the design was as expected, identical. Both desks had a pattern made into the desktop of the letter X to allow air to circulate beneath the laptop. The $18 version's X pattern was off center. The $50 version was dead center. The $50 version appeared to have a very slight advantage in the thickness of the legs. Other than that they appeared to be the same. But, there was a $38 price difference. The point being the design was identical, pricing varied significantly, there wasa slight quality difference and both came from China.
The same holds true for Chinese scopes. The stand may look the same, but manufacturing specs can vary. I believe the big 4 require higher standards and when possible try to obtain proprietary designs. Although China is notorious for not respecting patent laws.

[Nance]

"I do not see yet where the stage is adjustable. Overall not a bad scope. So where is the $2500? Well ..more to come.[/quote]"

Looking forward to your analysis, will be very helpful to me in my novitiate status.
- - meanwhile, there has been a price reduction on Amazon.

BestScope BS-2080 Trinocular Compound Microscope, EWF10x Eyepieces, Infinity Plan Objectives, 40x-1000x Magnification, External Halogen Illumination, Swing-Out Condenser, Mechanical Stage, 110V
Be the first to review this item
Price: $1,644.73 & FREE Shipping.

[einman]

"I do not see yet where the stage is adjustable. Overall not a bad scope. So where is the $2500? Well ..more to come.

"

Looking forward to your analysis, will be very helpful to me in my novitiate status.
- - meanwhile, there has been a price reduction on Amazon.

BestScope BS-2080 Trinocular Compound Microscope, EWF10x Eyepieces, Infinity Plan Objectives, 40x-1000x Magnification, External Halogen Illumination, Swing-Out Condenser, Mechanical Stage, 110V
Be the first to review this item
Price: $1,644.73 & FREE Shipping.[/quote]


Yes I saw where the price was reduced. No doubt in response to the prices on the low end Nikon, Olympus and Zeiss scopes. I did get a chance to compare it vs a Nikon 50I and though the 50I stand was of a better build, the optics were in fact almost identical. Some slight advantage to the Nikon. It would have been nice to have had a diatom slide. I was using some prepared slides that were available. In short you can pick up a used AO, Reichert, Leitz, Nikon etc with comparable to better performance for significantly less than the $1644 they want for a new Bestscope. In addition add-ons are tend to be similar priced but of far better quality. Don't get me wrong. The Bestscope is a fine scope still, but I would not pay $1600 plus for it. I have considered selling mine to make room in my lab. I purchased it new for less than $1600 thus why I have one.

[billbillt]

Hi,

I guess I can't see why that Chinese stand is so expensive... To me, Amscope gives you more bang for your buck.. such as this:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/AmScope-40X-16 ... 0009.m1982

BillT

[einman]

Hi,

I guess I can't see why that Chinese stand is so expensive... To me, Amscope gives you more bang for your buck.. such as this:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/AmScope-40X-16 ... 0009.m1982

BillT

I have seen that amscope stand and it is significantly inferior both in construction and optics. Whether it is worth the difference is ones opinion. I would not own the Amscope although I do have the objectives I bought for comparison. The objectives on the Bestscope are infinity plan objectives. They are identical to what is found on the Olympus BX series. It is more or less the equivalent to the Amscope T750 series scope. https://www.ebay.com/itm/AmScope-T750-4 ... SwSPBaVort

[billbillt]

Thanks for the info..

BillT

[Nance]

It would have been nice to have had a diatom slide. [/quote]

I just sent an email to Klaus Kemp inquiring about how much to paypal him for shipping his "8 Test Forms" Diatom slides... I can send you a couple of diatoms when I get them. I hear he is a really nice guy, so I'll ask him if he might send me an extra Gyrosigma balticum for you. you never know... the whole set cost $19 plus about $6 in shipping from the UK I expect. N.

[einman]

It would have been nice to have had a diatom slide.

I just sent an email to Klaus Kemp inquiring about how much to paypal him for shipping his "8 Test Forms" Diatom slides... I can send you a couple of diatoms when I get them. I hear he is a really nice guy, so I'll ask him if he might send me an extra Gyrosigma balticum for you. you never know... the whole set cost $19 plus about $6 in shipping from the UK I expect. N.[/quote]


Thank You for the offer but it is not necessary. I have the test slide as mentioned. I just did not have it with me at the time I was comparing scopes. I was at a Microscope dealer (a friend of mine) comparing the Bestscope with the Nikon 50I, and an Olympus BX. He is quite the fan of AO microscopes as well, and constantly laments local schools moving to Chinese scopes due to the quality of construction.

[Nance]

correction, btw, I just realized that the klaus kemp 8 form set is on one slide - not eight.

[einman]

correction, btw, I just realized that the klaus kemp 8 form set is on one slide - not eight.

Yes..If you read earlier in this discussion you can see where I used the Klaus Kemp test slide and the Bestscope performed favorably. My comment in regards to wishing I had a test slide with me was in reference to comparing the Bestcope against the Nikon and Olympus at the same time, side by side. I could only make a subjective conclusion without having an actual standard.

[charlie g]

Hello all...eiman, Nance..on eBay: "the Diatom shop", Italy based...offers diatom test slides for quite reasonable cost...please visit this excellent vendor on eBay.

Regards to my old eyes (me, Charlie g)...I thought that apochromate objectives benefit image-captures...despite my or anyone elses 'tired old eyes'?

I have intense remorse for missing out on a selection of apochromats years ago...when that one 25X apochromat objective I did purchase, really gives me enhanced (yes, yes almost 3-D views, as Phil mentions in this thread sometime ago).

But correct me, or comment on my sense that apochromate objectives enhance image captures..despite ones visual observation experiences at the bench>

Thank you, einman for a terrific and useful/ thoughtful microscopy thread. Charlie guevara