"Poor Man's Stereo Microscope"

[DonSchaeffer]

With Microbe Hunter's permission, I have forgiven my digital microscope for all the hype many people have inflicted on it and its family. Microbe Hunter called it a "poor man's stereomicroscope." It fills about the same magnification range as a stereomicroscope. Of course it is not stereo and not optical. However, I found it to be useful in the range of about 20-40 power. I made some adjustments in the stand that came with it and added a glass jar which serves as a stage. I can adjust the distance between the lens and the specimen by putting specimens in the jar on any number of stacked white platforms, or I can put the specimen right on top of the jar.

poormans.jpg (152.87 KiB) Viewed 5838 times

fly2mmlong.jpg (241.83 KiB) Viewed 5838 times

2020-06-16_104259.jpg (227.43 KiB) Viewed 5838 times

[MicroBob]

Hi Don,
I think the combination of optics and electronics has lots of future in microscopy. E.g. a smartphone based field microscope.
But you put this bright future at risk by showing these grainy results!

Bob

[DonSchaeffer]

I'm sorry about the grain. When I make it sharper with a photo-processing it comes out grainier. I feel willing to accept te grain to get more detail. The camera in the digital microscope just makes distortion. I don't know what to do about it. I try to compensate.

[Scarodactyl]

More light might help. The sensors on some of these lower end ones do have some inherent noise, and some also cheat on resolution with a layer of interpolation.

[DonSchaeffer]

I think that is the true problem. The software fills in to cover errors. I guess that's the difference between one of these electronic gizmos and an optical scope with a camera.

[Scarodactyl]

There are higher end examples in this category (dinolite is a name brand) but they tend to be overpriced imo.

[DonSchaeffer]

I had purchased 3 of them over the last 10 years. I think I was early to the interest in them. Not knowing what they were really doing, I believed the hype about incredible magnification power. Only now can I see a real use for them. My equipment is a few years old and outdated. I am not going to buy any more of them. I just have to live with outdated equipment.

[apochronaut]

I had purchased 3 of them over the last 10 years. I think I was early to the interest in them. Not knowing what they were really doing, I believed the hype about incredible magnification power. Only now can I see a real use for them. My equipment is a few years old and outdated. I am not going to buy any more of them. I just have to live with outdated equipment.

I've got a James W. Queen microscope! I was thinking of upgrading.

[MichaelG.]

I've got a James W. Queen microscope! I was thinking of upgrading.

Hopefully no connection with the ACME Corporation
... or some of the specifications might be suspect !

MichaelG.
.
http://golubcollection.berkeley.edu/19th/186.html

[geo_man]

Well, everyone has their own definition of poor, I'm sure, but here is a solid nomination.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/American-Optic ... SwhrFe5SF7

And its good for not so poor folks too!

[DonSchaeffer]

That does look like a steal. Of course shipping is $51.00.

[Hobbyst46]

That does look like a steal. Of course shipping is $51.00.

The pleasure given by using a true stereo microscope, and its wide usefulness, are unrivaled by any DIY adaptation of a non-stereo microscope.

[DonSchaeffer]

I think you are right about that.