I want to know if an inverted microscope has any advantage over an upright microscope. I know that an inverted microscope is better to observe the cultures in which the sample sinks to the bottom and the optics of an inverted and upright microscope looks same. However, are there any advantage for an inverted microscope in terms of adding new features? For example, is it easier to add a homemade DIC to an inverted microscope because it has more space to put optics?
One problem with inverted microscope is using oil, which I think it is more difficult to use than an upright microscope.
Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
-
apochronaut
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
you use a thicker oil , which has the same n as the thinner.
One limiting factor of inverted microscopes is the relatively fewer objective choices. If you use high N.A., oil immersion, or highly corrected objectives much, many such types are difficult or impossible to use on an inverted. There is also the fact that, the condensers made for inverted microscopes are usually L.W.D., so they limit objective choices. They are not in general designed for high resolution microscopy. More modern ( and expensive ones) are getting there.
One limiting factor of inverted microscopes is the relatively fewer objective choices. If you use high N.A., oil immersion, or highly corrected objectives much, many such types are difficult or impossible to use on an inverted. There is also the fact that, the condensers made for inverted microscopes are usually L.W.D., so they limit objective choices. They are not in general designed for high resolution microscopy. More modern ( and expensive ones) are getting there.
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
hello Reza!
i have an inverted microscope named leitz diavert,
i thank that inverted microscope except can observe more special sample,it has no advantage than upright microscope,(big upright microscope can also add many optics! )
as you said there are many disadvantage of inverted microscope,so inverted microscope usually use more expensive optics .such as it is difficult for inverted microscope to using oil.so inverted microscope usually using long working objectives.and it's light route is longer than upright microscope,making img less clear than upright microscope,so inverted microscope usually use high quality objectives,so that inverted microscope are more expensive.
it's my opinion.
i have an inverted microscope named leitz diavert,
i thank that inverted microscope except can observe more special sample,it has no advantage than upright microscope,(big upright microscope can also add many optics! )
as you said there are many disadvantage of inverted microscope,so inverted microscope usually use more expensive optics .such as it is difficult for inverted microscope to using oil.so inverted microscope usually using long working objectives.and it's light route is longer than upright microscope,making img less clear than upright microscope,so inverted microscope usually use high quality objectives,so that inverted microscope are more expensive.
it's my opinion.
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
Having used both types, upright and inverted, I would add:
IMO, the main issue with inverted is due to the required LWD objectives and condenser, as mentioned by Apochronaut.
Another issue with inverted, less important but still significant, is the cleaning of immersion oil from the objectives and nosepiece, even when the oil is
viscous.
The advantage of inverted over upright is prominent if the sample is contained within a petri dish, rather than mounted on a slide. Because the petri dish is not sealed.
In addition, there are petri dishes with coverslip bottoms (see recent posts). Although quite expensive, they are as good as slides with coverslips, and can be used with non-LWD objectives.
So I believe that for hobby, the mostly used objectives on an inverted microscope are the low NA, dry objectives.
IMO, the main issue with inverted is due to the required LWD objectives and condenser, as mentioned by Apochronaut.
Another issue with inverted, less important but still significant, is the cleaning of immersion oil from the objectives and nosepiece, even when the oil is
viscous.
The advantage of inverted over upright is prominent if the sample is contained within a petri dish, rather than mounted on a slide. Because the petri dish is not sealed.
In addition, there are petri dishes with coverslip bottoms (see recent posts). Although quite expensive, they are as good as slides with coverslips, and can be used with non-LWD objectives.
So I believe that for hobby, the mostly used objectives on an inverted microscope are the low NA, dry objectives.
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
Hi Reza,
I have an older inverted microscope made by Olympus. It was intended to be used with objectives up to 20:1 and in a pinch up to 40:1. So the resolution of this older model is limited compared to normal microscopes. The 20:1 objective I own is a long distance version to be used through the bottom of a petri dish. Some of the newer models from Olympus offer higher resolving objectives and condensers, but I think that these advantages make it harder to use too.
For the hobby microscopist a normal microscope is better. An inverted microscope can be an interesting addition for some special uses, but I wouldn't consider it necessary at all. If you can get one for 100€, you might buy it for watching plancton.
Bob
I have an older inverted microscope made by Olympus. It was intended to be used with objectives up to 20:1 and in a pinch up to 40:1. So the resolution of this older model is limited compared to normal microscopes. The 20:1 objective I own is a long distance version to be used through the bottom of a petri dish. Some of the newer models from Olympus offer higher resolving objectives and condensers, but I think that these advantages make it harder to use too.
For the hobby microscopist a normal microscope is better. An inverted microscope can be an interesting addition for some special uses, but I wouldn't consider it necessary at all. If you can get one for 100€, you might buy it for watching plancton.
Bob
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
While generally agreeing with the comments above, I'm a bit more enthusiastic about inverted microscopes. If your specimens can be viewed at 400x or below, there are several advantages.
1) You can use large culture dishes.
2) Rather than fixing specimens to a slide, they can remain live.
3) The ergonomics work better for sorting specimens. The modern fluorescence microscopes I see in biology labs are mostly inverted scopes (Zeiss etc.) and go from brightfield, to phase, to fluorescence (and sometimes DIC) with the flick of just a few controls.
4) Very good phase contrast images are possible and sometimes more affordable in a used inverted microscope. Depending upon what microscopes you find used, this might be a compelling factor.
5) There are workarounds to use regular slides at somewhat higher powers (inverted the slide, so the cover slip faces the objective). Not ideal, but doable for the occasional need.
6) While somewhat of a specialty, inverted microscopes make a lot of sense for many industrial, metallurgical, and measuring applications with reflected light. For one thing, the specimen plane is defined by the stage, not the thickness of the specimen itself.
To me, an inverted scope might be the third microscope a hobbyist might want, after a stereo and upright compound scope. However, if it's live biology and 400x and under -- or a high end biological research application -- the inverted scope might jump ahead in line.
One can always have more than one microscope I suppose . . .
1) You can use large culture dishes.
2) Rather than fixing specimens to a slide, they can remain live.
3) The ergonomics work better for sorting specimens. The modern fluorescence microscopes I see in biology labs are mostly inverted scopes (Zeiss etc.) and go from brightfield, to phase, to fluorescence (and sometimes DIC) with the flick of just a few controls.
4) Very good phase contrast images are possible and sometimes more affordable in a used inverted microscope. Depending upon what microscopes you find used, this might be a compelling factor.
5) There are workarounds to use regular slides at somewhat higher powers (inverted the slide, so the cover slip faces the objective). Not ideal, but doable for the occasional need.
6) While somewhat of a specialty, inverted microscopes make a lot of sense for many industrial, metallurgical, and measuring applications with reflected light. For one thing, the specimen plane is defined by the stage, not the thickness of the specimen itself.
To me, an inverted scope might be the third microscope a hobbyist might want, after a stereo and upright compound scope. However, if it's live biology and 400x and under -- or a high end biological research application -- the inverted scope might jump ahead in line.
One can always have more than one microscope I suppose . . .
-
ImperatorRex
- Posts: 571
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 4:12 pm
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
Hi,
totally inline with PeteM.
However over the time I pefer my vertical microscope, so I am hardly using any upright microscopes, despite the stereo microscope that I still use for the very convinient browsing through samples.
totally inline with PeteM.
Also 100% inline - exactely the sequence I bought my scope. Also would not recomment to buy the vertical scope first.PeteM wrote:To me, an inverted scope might be the third microscope a hobbyist might want, after a stereo and upright compound scope.
However over the time I pefer my vertical microscope, so I am hardly using any upright microscopes, despite the stereo microscope that I still use for the very convinient browsing through samples.
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
What PeteM said.
Sample handling is better with inverted scope, especially when you are a professional who needs to use that space above sample, for example.
And some inverted scopes can use regular condenser and regular high power 0.17 corrected objectives. But you need to invert the cover slip/slide.
High power 0.8-1.2mm corrected inverted objectives are quite expensive though.
Sample handling is better with inverted scope, especially when you are a professional who needs to use that space above sample, for example.
And some inverted scopes can use regular condenser and regular high power 0.17 corrected objectives. But you need to invert the cover slip/slide.
High power 0.8-1.2mm corrected inverted objectives are quite expensive though.
-
apochronaut
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
To me the point is. Why spend a bundle on a 400X microscope? You can get the same resolution from any number of student microscopes and at 400X , you can have the option of going to high enough N.A.s to achieve higher resolution, if you have a good condenser. You can even mimic much of the potential of an inverted, for depth and thickness of the sample.. Not all that easy the other way around , with an inverted.
Tuning an inverted to achieve high resolution is not possible with most of them that are within most hobbyist's budgets. To achieve high resolution, requires many thousands of dollars in expenditure, when the same resolution can be achieved with an upright microscope for a few hundred dollars.
An adaptability to viewing large and deep samples is attractive to viewing primarily protists but limits most less expensive units to primarily that, for the average hobbyist. Many upright microscopes can be adapted to achieve much of the potential of an inverted much more cheaply than the converse and still not be limited to mediocre magnification and resolution.
Tuning an inverted to achieve high resolution is not possible with most of them that are within most hobbyist's budgets. To achieve high resolution, requires many thousands of dollars in expenditure, when the same resolution can be achieved with an upright microscope for a few hundred dollars.
An adaptability to viewing large and deep samples is attractive to viewing primarily protists but limits most less expensive units to primarily that, for the average hobbyist. Many upright microscopes can be adapted to achieve much of the potential of an inverted much more cheaply than the converse and still not be limited to mediocre magnification and resolution.
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
microscope not only a tool , but also an Industrial art,because Inverted microscope are more complicated,so they are more expensive,more beautiful ,more rare ,more worth to collect.if microscope just a tool,why not to buy a plastic microscope with best lenes.
-
Scarodactyl
- Posts: 2790
- Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
If nobody minds a tangential question have seen a number of inverted microscopes listed as metallurgical scopes. What advantages would they have for that kind of work, which I'd normally associate with a stereo scope or upright compound with lwd optics? To be honest my knowledge of how metallurgical scopes are actually used is kind of limited, since I'm only interested in them because many are handy for looking at gems and minerals.
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
I don't disagree with Apochronaut. In fact, I am doing exactly what he suggested at home, which is using some inverted objectives on upright scopes. I don't have an inverted scope at home, though I have used some good ones at work.
But hey, many hobbyists here are rich enough to own at least one very good inverted scope, even though that may be their 3rd scope. What fun is life, if it is all rational and logical, right
But hey, many hobbyists here are rich enough to own at least one very good inverted scope, even though that may be their 3rd scope. What fun is life, if it is all rational and logical, right
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
I think the primary reason for a metallurgical microscope being inverted is simply 'ease of handling'.Scarodactyl wrote:If nobody minds a tangential question have seen a number of inverted microscopes listed as metallurgical scopes. What advantages would they have for that kind of work, which I'd normally associate with a stereo scope or upright compound with lwd optics? To be honest my knowledge of how metallurgical scopes are actually used is kind of limited, since I'm only interested in them because many are handy for looking at gems and minerals.
MichaelG.
Too many 'projects'
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
"Metallurgical" covers a wide range of applications. There's measurement of fine features, determination of surface finishes, viewing of specially prepared samples to examine alloy grain structure, and more.Scarodactyl wrote:If nobody minds a tangential question have seen a number of inverted microscopes listed as metallurgical scopes. What advantages would they have for that kind of work . . .
Simply viewing metal samples of varying thickness and weight is easy on an inverted. Place sample on stage and it's already pretty much in focus. With a compound scope the objective may have to move inches to get in focus. Weight and odd sizes also make an inverted more ergonomic.
For measurement, often done with micrometer movements and a reticle, it helps to have a large stage with those x-y movements. Somewhat easier on an inverted scope or a scope with only reflected light.
With silicon wafers (and many microscopes sold for just that application) the sample is of constant thickness and technology was advancing to optical measurement. So, the old inverted designs (Unitron etc.) started giving way to specialized upright scopes but with deep throats (as wafers went from 6" to 8" etc.) and brightfield, darkfield, and DIC illumination -- all episcopic.
You'll also see microscopes used for hardness testing - basically to measure the size of a calibrated indentation. And even for depth measurements, relying upon very shallow depth of field. Basically focus to bottom of feature, focus to top of feature, and read out a calibrated distance between them. Both those are upright configurations.
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
There is on other use for inverted microscopes: Watching chemical reactions. Leitz made the "Chemikermikroskop" for this use. It is used with low power objectives and I'm not sure whether it has a condenser at all. The stage is very sturdily built and can support quite big reaction vessels. The objectives below the stage are much better protected against e.g. acid vapors so an upright microscope can't compete here at all.
-
ImperatorRex
- Posts: 571
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 4:12 pm
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
Simply check for used microscopes, for example an old Zeiss IM35. My opinion: this is a top range inverted research microscope, scaleable to whatever you are dreaming! With some patience and knowledge you will get such for few hundreds of dollars on ebay. It seems many labs in USA are clearing their older equipment, so ebay market seems to be flooded with such equipment.zzffnn wrote:But hey, many hobbyists here are rich enough to own at least one very good inverted scope, even though that may be their 3rd scope. What fun is life, if it is all rational and logical, right
Maybe some maintaince work to be done, but then it will last for the rest of your life and maybe even for your children. I would say such an investment is rather cheap - if you have a 30 USD montly membership in a gym it costs you more after two years.
-
ImperatorRex
- Posts: 571
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 4:12 pm
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
Hi Resa...unless your needing that protection of objective lens faces from ( gasp!) chemical reactions being observed with acid vapors or other obnoxious generated gasses..spend your monies on a good and upgradable upright cmpd microscope with a trinocular head.
Very large watch glasses, very large depression slides fit on the stage of my Nikon Labaphot (circa 1980's clinical stand?)...and yes the mechanical stage offers movement about the central 1/3rd-2/3rds the watch glass areas.
I have a vintage Olympus CKa inverted stand ( I picked it up cheap at a camera booth at our NY "NEAF astronomy three day exposition and flea market some years ago.)..it was fun to use through it's variety of objectives...but higher magnification observing ( unless it's the chemical reaction microscopy, the dedicated tissue culture microscopy) requies wetmount slides with coverslips...and agents to slow down motile organisms for observation at the higher magnifications. Plain and simple..inverted scopes are quite a treat for very specific microscopy tasks,,IMHO. My Olympus CKa inverted stand sits boxed on a shelf. With 2X objectives, 4X objectives,,it's also for me not necessary to use the wonderful stereo scopes I have...but an inverted stand just does not permit even 400X enjoyable observations of motile organisms..the rotifers, water bears, mites, nematodes, snails, finger nail clams,flat worms, hydras, water fleas, microturbilarians, motile protozoa and yes the larger (and often quite motile) bacteria...etc. etc....you need the sweet spot depth of water colum under a coverslip with a wetmount slide. Also the non motile organisms, the filamentous algae, the larger desmids, diatioms ( often diatoms are quite motile..and if your enjoyment is prepared diatom frustules/fixed slides..well there we are..an upright microscope for higher powers to revel and drink up the frustule morphologies)...well for these dimensional 'micro forests. the gentle tamp down of the sweet spot water colum depth under a coverslip with a wetmount slide...offers a much more manageable depth of field to focus about in than observing an often four (4.0mm) depth of water colum in a pertridish with fluids using an inverted stand...again other than that incredibly specific area of tissue culture..or those chemical reaction microscopy tasks.inverted stands are quite a specialized scope (I have one as a silly collector of microscopes..and I bought it cheap/ bricks and mortar purchase).
Think about a quality 2X objective for an upright stand with a trinocular head...inverted stands are quite a specialized microscope IMHO. thanks for starting this great thread..all the posters offer great insights for me! Charlie guevara
Very large watch glasses, very large depression slides fit on the stage of my Nikon Labaphot (circa 1980's clinical stand?)...and yes the mechanical stage offers movement about the central 1/3rd-2/3rds the watch glass areas.
I have a vintage Olympus CKa inverted stand ( I picked it up cheap at a camera booth at our NY "NEAF astronomy three day exposition and flea market some years ago.)..it was fun to use through it's variety of objectives...but higher magnification observing ( unless it's the chemical reaction microscopy, the dedicated tissue culture microscopy) requies wetmount slides with coverslips...and agents to slow down motile organisms for observation at the higher magnifications. Plain and simple..inverted scopes are quite a treat for very specific microscopy tasks,,IMHO. My Olympus CKa inverted stand sits boxed on a shelf. With 2X objectives, 4X objectives,,it's also for me not necessary to use the wonderful stereo scopes I have...but an inverted stand just does not permit even 400X enjoyable observations of motile organisms..the rotifers, water bears, mites, nematodes, snails, finger nail clams,flat worms, hydras, water fleas, microturbilarians, motile protozoa and yes the larger (and often quite motile) bacteria...etc. etc....you need the sweet spot depth of water colum under a coverslip with a wetmount slide. Also the non motile organisms, the filamentous algae, the larger desmids, diatioms ( often diatoms are quite motile..and if your enjoyment is prepared diatom frustules/fixed slides..well there we are..an upright microscope for higher powers to revel and drink up the frustule morphologies)...well for these dimensional 'micro forests. the gentle tamp down of the sweet spot water colum depth under a coverslip with a wetmount slide...offers a much more manageable depth of field to focus about in than observing an often four (4.0mm) depth of water colum in a pertridish with fluids using an inverted stand...again other than that incredibly specific area of tissue culture..or those chemical reaction microscopy tasks.inverted stands are quite a specialized scope (I have one as a silly collector of microscopes..and I bought it cheap/ bricks and mortar purchase).
Think about a quality 2X objective for an upright stand with a trinocular head...inverted stands are quite a specialized microscope IMHO. thanks for starting this great thread..all the posters offer great insights for me! Charlie guevara
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
The chief feature of the inverted microscope for me is freedom from dealing with wet slides -- it's just that simple. Using Petri dishes with .17 glass bottoms allows me to very properly examine a sample, then return it, rinse, and be ready for the next as quickly and efficiently as it's ever likely to get. This is a heck of an advantage when doing settling tests, or otherwise checking progress of my diatom processing. It also makes quick checks of pond or birdbath water wonderfully easy and hassle free. It makes all the difference not having to mess with cover slips.
I consider the inverted to max at 400x, and higher magnification/resolution observations go to the upright stand.
Your mileage may vary, but that's how it works in my world.
I consider the inverted to max at 400x, and higher magnification/resolution observations go to the upright stand.
Your mileage may vary, but that's how it works in my world.
Cheers,
Kurt Maurer
League City, Texas
email: ngc704(at)gmail(dot)com
https://www.flickr.com/photos/67904872@ ... 912223623/
Kurt Maurer
League City, Texas
email: ngc704(at)gmail(dot)com
https://www.flickr.com/photos/67904872@ ... 912223623/
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
Hi folks,
Here's a YouTube video I've enjoyed. It shows a Nikon rep
stripping down a Nikon Ti Eclipse, explaining as he goes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAV0X1c3s-g
I must admit that this Nikon is even nicer than my AO 1820.
I hope you enjoy.
Brad
Here's a YouTube video I've enjoyed. It shows a Nikon rep
stripping down a Nikon Ti Eclipse, explaining as he goes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAV0X1c3s-g
I must admit that this Nikon is even nicer than my AO 1820.
I hope you enjoy.
Brad
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
I agree with KurtM regarding the great ease of use of an inverted microscope for certain applications. I, too, find it amazingly fast and much more 'ergonomic' to use when examing pond samples and spending a fair amount of time scanning the sample for activity, interactions, and other ecological matters. I use a 0.17mm bottom miniature dish for normal or adjustable objectives, or on another scope, a set of objectives for 1.2mm thickness (a typical slide or perhaps an optical petri dish). The latter objectives enable me to use well-slides that I made using superglue and nylon washers (no coverglass).
Obviously the depth of the specimen water makes it less easy to image or video, but there are tradeoffs in everything. Although I did see a patent or design someplace a while ago that had a objective carrier/nosepiece that could rotate around the stage on a horizontal axis to enable either top-down or bottom-up viewing. (Naturally it cost a fortune).
Obviously the depth of the specimen water makes it less easy to image or video, but there are tradeoffs in everything. Although I did see a patent or design someplace a while ago that had a objective carrier/nosepiece that could rotate around the stage on a horizontal axis to enable either top-down or bottom-up viewing. (Naturally it cost a fortune).
Re: Inverted microscope vs upright microscope
Reza, thanks again for this wonderful thread! Brad..fantastic links..yes, yes! I simply can not guess the cost of a quality inverted stand as shown in Brads terrific link. The bench I have evolved has space for one primary work-horse stand. I simply would not have as large additional space at my bench for the 'foot print of an inverted stand'..in addition to my work-horse stand.
Please consider a quality 2X objective for an upright cmpnd microscope with a trinocular head...rather than invest in an inverted stand. An upright cmpnd stand offers so much more mucroscopy than the specialized inverted stand can...with a hobbyists buget I'm thinking.
Reza...only with your permission..I could plop a few pics in this thread of meiofauna/protozoa observations I enjoyed this evening( 10/6/18) using a cmpnd stand with: 2X,4X,10X,20X,40X objectives on my Nikon Labophot. Thanks for a great thread you sparked, Reza..yes, yes, Brad for those microscope links. Charlie guevara
Please consider a quality 2X objective for an upright cmpnd microscope with a trinocular head...rather than invest in an inverted stand. An upright cmpnd stand offers so much more mucroscopy than the specialized inverted stand can...with a hobbyists buget I'm thinking.
Reza...only with your permission..I could plop a few pics in this thread of meiofauna/protozoa observations I enjoyed this evening( 10/6/18) using a cmpnd stand with: 2X,4X,10X,20X,40X objectives on my Nikon Labophot. Thanks for a great thread you sparked, Reza..yes, yes, Brad for those microscope links. Charlie guevara