sanity check on new (to me) scope

[TomFid]

My family has always had a microscope around, but not really a good instrument. I've been looking into an upgrade. We already have an AmScope stereo microscope that's been heavily used over the years, so the real gap is at higher power. I recently used an AmScope achro objective on a bellows for some macro shots, and it was pretty underwhelming, so modern stuff I can afford is not on the menu. I'm much more interested in something like a vintage Leitz/Zeiss/Reichert/Nikon/Olympus/AO.

Our likely targets are:
- the usual pond life
- pollen, seeds and plant structures in wild orchids (too tiny for the stereo scope)
- snowflakes (in a cold environment, with suitable protection from thermal shock and condensation)
- whatever weird stuff turns up on the trailside, in chemical experiments, etc.

I gather from reading a bunch of threads here (fantastic resource!) that condition is king, and that it probably makes sense to find something that checks all the boxes up front in one package, because buying vintage parts piecemeal is more expensive. At the same time, I don't want to go nuts - fuorescence and DIC and all that sound cool, but realistically I'd only vaguely heard of any of these things two weeks ago. Perhaps the one thing that would be really nice is a trinocular head for easy camera use.

The local market is extremely thin (I'd be lucky to see one candidate a year I think), so I'm probably limited to fleabay or surplus outlets. I'm pretty skilled and not at all averse to fixing things. I'd be happy to do a DIY LED upgrade, for example. But I'd rather not have big mechanical problems with the stage gearing etc., and I'm seeing a lot of optics that are clearly thrashed. (What are people doing with these things? My 1960s Pentax is far cleaner.)

From browsing around a bunch, I have a few leading candidates:
- A Leitz SM-LUX. There seem to be a lot of these, and some look pretty clean. The only real downside is that most are binos, and a trinocular head costs as much as the scope alone. In that case, it would be better to move up to a Laborlux or Dialux, though price and counterspace go up fast.
- A Reichert Microstar IV. These seem like a real bargain in a little more modern scope with infinity objectives. But this thread viewtopic.php?f=9&t=9709 makes camera setup look a little daunting.
- A Zeiss Standard. Prices are a little higher, but accessory availability seems good - beam splitters and trinocular heads are fairly common. Plus they just seem cool. Objective separation is mentioned frequently - is that really a big threat, particularly for cold use?
I'd be equally interested in a Nikon or Olympus, but the examples I've seen tend to look more thrashed or more expensive, so either they were originally rarer or they're commanding bigger premiums now.

Anyway, I'm largely thinking out loud here, but any steering would be much appreciated. Thanks!

[apochronaut]

You seem to have crossed your t's and dotted your i's mostly. No brand is good if it is in rough shape or too expensive. Olympus obviously made/make mostly good to excellent microscopes but they are talked up so much that the prices asked for them or the parts no longer represent a sound option . My most recent planapo purchase was a Reichert 100X 1.32 N.A. with an iris. 150.00. What would that cost with Olympus or any big 4 name on it for that matter?

Don't overlook a good AO 10 , AO 110 , B & L Balplan, B & L Flat Field Dynazoom or some of the better stencil brands such as the LW L200.

[dtsh]

Only thing I will add is that if you aren't after profesional quality images, a cellphone or similar can be used at the eyepiece; it can yeild reasonable results with a little practice (or an adapter).
Obviously a trinocular is nicer, but if you find something that is in all other regards an excellent instrument albeit with a binocular head, it can still allow some imaging.

[PeteM]

Are you within easy / cheap shipping distance of one of the larger Ebay locations (US, Germany, etc.)? Makes a difference.

It really sounds as if you'd want both a stereo microscope (snowflakes, stuff found along the trail) and a phase contrast compound microscope for pond critters etc.? A stereo microscope on a transmitted base and a 2x supplemental objectives on something like a 7x to 40x or 50x zoom (80x to 100x total), with polarization easily added, can also be good for some of the larger pond critters and also chemical crystals.

I've recently seen some very low cost A.O. Series 150 and 160 phase contrast scopes; probably formerly in some high school science class decades ago. Would have bought a batch of five of them myself, were I not already drowning in scopes destined for kids in our Mironaut program. These aren't great scopes, but around $100-$150 each if someone did a group buy and fixed any issues. Just a phase contrast condenser typically costs as much or more. They come with a regular achromat 4x and phase contrast objectives on 10x and 40x and a built-in Zernicke type (rotating) phase condenser. Perfect for kids and pond critters. A camera could be fitted to the monocular heads. Major deficit is somewhat dim lighting, which could be replaced by a LED retrofit.

You could likely buy a lot of these, keep one, and sell the rest here?

[TomFid]

Ebay's definitely easy. It's tempting to buy several scopes, keep one I like, and pass others along to parents locally. I know microscopes would have been a lot more interesting to me as a kid if they hadn't been cheap and fuzzy.

I hadn't really thought about upgrading our stereo microscope as an alternative, but if substantially higher magnification is possible, that might be a good alternative.

[JGardner]

Be careful if you go the eBay route. Condition inflation is rampant and you can easily end up with something with major problems and end up spending a lot of time and money getting it into useable condition.

I’ve been amazed at how trashed a lot of microscope stuff on eBay really is. It’s hard to imagine how it gets this way—was it stored for decades in damp basements or just knocked around in labs?

[TomFid]

Some of the stuff I've seen would be lucky to live in a damp basement. It's weird how people seem to use a $30k research tool for a bike rack or ashtray. Anyway, the principal hazard for me on ebay is probably not getting something broken, it's getting something way beyond my needs, just because it's 90% off original retail.

Anyway, I have some great ideas to mull over - thanks all! (I'm sure I'll be back with questions later.)

[TomFid]

Like I said about the ebay risk, right after PeteM mentioned stereo microscopes on transmitted bases, I spotted an SMZ-10 and an Optiphot in the same lot. Luckily both are in good shape.

I thought the SMZ would be the answer, but I haven't really warmed up to it the way I thought I would. The optics are good, so I think the challenge is that the halogen lighting on the transmitted stand and coax illuminator feels fairly dim compared to what the Optiphot achieves at similar magnification. I think I'll upgrade the SMZ to LEDs before deciding. Before I get too far into that ... is there any real advantage to the coax illuminator over a separate LED gooseneck or just a flashlight?

On the other front, the Optiphot is one of the 210s with BD objectives and an epi illuminator. It only has the 5x and 10x objectives at present. Does it make more sense to stick to BD or ED objectives, or can I branch out to other things with an rms adapter? Seems like there would be issues with parfocality and tube length in most cases.

I probably can't keep both, but I'm learning a lot of things I never would have figured out by reading, I think.

[Scarodactyl]

The coaxial illuminator on an smz-10 is meant for flat, reflective subjects like wafers or metallurgical subjects.
I'm curious what stand you have on the smz. If you want turbo brightness (and who doesn't?) there were some amazing stands made by Diagnostic Instruments that are sometimes (not often but occasionally) available inexpensively with 50 or 100w halogens built in, or better yet with an external 150w halogen source.

Nikon made RMS threaded objectives for that optiphit as well (M plan vs bdplan). These will be marked 210mm. A few other brands have made 210mm objectives which might be compatible too.
If you want to use 160mm tube length transmitted light objectives you'd need to take off the illuminator, but that is not difficult.

[mrsonchus]

Hi, I posted re a dirt-cheap way to fit a very bright LED panel under a stereoscope's stand a while back. I've been using this method for several years now, and have even transferred said panel to my newer stereo 'scope as it is so good....
See my post with images.

This is a very good solution indeed. which I now have and am using on a beautiful Nikon SMZ800 stereo - it's just an LED panel, frosted glass plate, cheapo level controller and power supply.... It works perfectly...

[TomFid]

Brilliant. it would be easy to put the same kind of smd puck light behind the diffuser on my base.