Amscope Super Widefield vs Extreme Widefield eyepieces?

[KRinAZ]

I’m wondering what the real world differences in using each are:

My microscope (still on the way to me) is/will be an Amscope SM-3T stereo trinoc scope.
The standard eyepieces included with scope are Super Widefield WF10/20 - 10x with 20mm field of view.
The optional Extreme Widefield eyepieces are WF10/22 10x with 22mm field of view.

I’m wondering if there are differences in clarity, focus flatness, working distance, etc., changes - I would like to understand the pro’s and con’s of each - before making purchases.

I would especially like to hear from those who have both to compare to each other.

[Scarodactyl]

The only difference should be how big the image you get is (as in, how much you can see--magnification is the same, but the bigger the field number the less of the available image is cropped off). 20mm is ok but about the bare minimum for a modern microscope. 22mm is going to be noticeably nicer, but you won't suffer with 20mm. I like them as wide as I can get, but my current scope only has a 22mm fn and it is a pleasure to use.

[Greg Howald]

With a stereo scope, use of extreme wide field Eyepieces may indeed improve your view over super wide field. Many compound scopes with 30mm tubes use super wide field eyepieces, but placing extreme widefield eyepieces in a compound scope may cause distortion, as has happened to me.
Greg

[Scarodactyl]

Yeah, with any ultrawide eydpieces you also need optics that can deliver a good image across that ultrawide field of view. That's a lot easier on a stereo microscope with lower magnifications and resolution, while it's usually a more specialized feature on compound objectives. I am not sure how far out an amscope's lenses can deliver a good image--I wouldn't bet on them covering a true ultrawide 26mm well, but maybe more than 22 with adequate quality.