Stereo vs Microscope for photographing Conodonts, Foraminifera

[Kirk]

Hello all!

New to the forum and so happy I found this!. Just before I clicked the button to order my stereoscope from Amscope, I found this forum. To make it simple;

I am fascinated with conodonts (earliest "toothed" vertebrate) and foraminifera. I want to take quality photos of each where you can actually "see" some details and not "look at the spot next to the piece of debris". Literally one click away from ordering an Amscope Stereomicroscope 3.5x-180x trinocular stereo zoom with dual halogen lamps; a 0.5 reduction lens for C mount cameras and an HDMI 1080p 60fps 2MP HDMI high sensitivity color CMOS C mount camera. Will this do what I want or do I get a microscope and do stack photos? I understand the reduction lens will reduce magnification by 50% but will have a wider field of view. I currently have the low end plug and play and a high school 10/25x dissecting scope which I use to filter through micromatrix but it has no photo options. I could theoretically get a microscope and use high powered direct lighting?.........I have attached two of my "best" conodont photos, but they are not magnified as best as I would like and they are pixelated...the first is about 2.9mm and the second is about 1.2mm in length.....thoughts appreciated!!!

Kirk

conodont april 29 2020 stark shale member 2,9mm.jpg (164.91 KiB) Viewed 3615 times

conodont stark shale kansas city april 29 2020.jpg (158.25 KiB) Viewed 3615 times

[PeteM]

Most of the cheaper stereo microscopes don't have very precise fine focusing mechanisms - which would be desirable for focus stacking. Their trinocular heads typically only see through one side of the stereo pair, so the 3D effect is gone along with any ease in making stereo pairs (if that's of interest). So the high power stereo microscope, while likely excellent for viewing and sorting things like forraminifera, might not be your best bet for quality photos.

Don't know what specific AmScope you were looking at, but it could be the 3.5x to 180x range was obtained from a 7x to 30x zoom with a .5x supplemental objective to get 3.5x (nothing wrong with that) and a combination of a 2x supplemental objectives (likely OK) and a pair of 30x eyepieces (probably not OK - pushing it too far). If so, you're almost surely getting empty magnification.

Your budget might determine the best approach. If you have a large budget, there are quality stereo microscopes that could be ideal for both viewing and photos.

Is it fair to assume you want mostly reflected light photos as shown? Though, forams can also look pretty cool with transmitted light on a regular transmitted microscope.

I'm thinking a quality reflected mechanical stand equipped with something like 2x, 4x, 10x, 20x, and 40x plan objectives and a known-to-be-good photographic arrangement might work for you. Ideally long working distances at the higher magnifications so you have room for some side lighting.

If you're in an area where ex-semiconductor industry wafer inspection microscopes (Nikon, Olympus, Leica, Reichert, etc.) are plentiful this might be an option. You might find a scope with both transmitted and reflected light options useful as well -- which some of these scopes have.

A macro rig might also be just the ticket for those larger conodonts.

[Kirk]

Thanks so much Pete!!!

I'd like to stay under $2,000 complete, just depends on the "quality" and end-picture. Do you have a specific rec? as far as camera, etc.?..... Thanks again!!

Kirk

[Scarodactyl]

For 2000 dollars you can do way better than an amscope stereo for photography. The sort of 'ultimate' solution for this is a high quality metallurgical microscope with long working distance objectives and a dslr or mirrorless camera, but you can get a good in-between solution with a photo macroscope like the Wild m420. A macroscope is like a stereo with a sinlge, higher resolution light path, so you get the ease of use of a stereo but without the inherent disadvantages for photography.

[viktor j nilsson]

If your subjects are typically in the 1-3mm range, I think you would be happiest with a macro rail + a few microscope objectives. Many now use infinity objectives from Mitutoyo, but you can get truly excellent results for much less money using finite Nikon microscope objectives.

4x - there are several very cheap new objectives that are great. Expect to pay under $100.

10x - several of the Nikon CF objectives perform really well. In order of increasing quality: E achromat 0.25, E plan 0.25, CFN plan 0.30. All have decent working distance (5+ mm) and give good results after stacking. Expect to pay under $100 for the E achromat, and a bit more than $100 for the CFN plan.

20x - working distance gets tight at 20x, and vibration becomes problematic. The Nikon M plan and BD plan ELWD are good. The regular (non-long working distance) have around 3mm working distance which is a little tricky to light, but I've used them with good results anyway. The ELWDs are often a little pricey, but the regular versions can be really cheap (and still give excellent results, with a little more work).

The macro rails from Wemacro and MJKZZ are good and affordable.

Some flashes or maybe even constant LED light and a ping pong ball for a diffuser, and you are ready to take really good photos of your specimens.

As others have said, stereo microscopes aren't really good for taking pictures.

[viktor j nilsson]

A solid microscope stand + the Wemacro micromate is another alternative to the macro rail.

[viktor j nilsson]

If you look at some of the rigs linked to in the following thread you'll get an idea:

https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/ ... 29&t=32155

[PeteM]

. . . Do you have a specific rec? as far as camera, etc.?..... Thanks again!!

Kirk

Kirk, can you give us an idea of the highest magnification you'd find useful? For conodonts, which are new to me (and be interested to learn more), it looks like 20-40x might be plenty unless you need to see details on them? For those a macro rig might be the ticket.

For forams, I've seen some where up to 400x might be useful? For those, starting with a high quality reflected light microscope could be better (and also handle the lower magnifications).

Also - where are you located? If you're buying used, some of the scopes are much easier to find in parts of the US than, say, Europe.

You should be able to get a very nice rig well within your budget.

Probably the best price/performance for a camera would be a used mirrorless camera body, adapted to a microscope or camera rail. Probably two or three times the camera at half the price compared to what you were considering. Some excellent and relatively new mirrorless camera bodies get sold because they don't have the latest image stabilization or exposure systems - which won't be needed for your purposes. What you do want is an electronic shutter (no vibration) and live view for focusing and composition.

[Kirk]

For 2000 dollars you can do way better than an amscope stereo for photography. The sort of 'ultimate' solution for this is a high quality metallurgical microscope with long working distance objectives and a dslr or mirrorless camera, but you can get a good in-between solution with a photo macroscope like the Wild m420. A macroscope is like a stereo with a sinlge, higher resolution light path, so you get the ease of use of a stereo but without the inherent disadvantages for photography.

Ahhhh, thanks so much!!!. that helps and I will look into it!

Kirk

[Kirk]

So............more questions!!-

I have also found a couple of Leica macroscopes M420 that also appear to meet my needs. I doubt I would need to magnify anything more than 50x, and this appears to be another possibility- thoughts, as always appreciated!- I did look at the rail systems with camera, etc. but, though it may be to you'all it looks more complicated than what I need. I am totally amateur and this would only be one of my many hobbies......Thanks again!- glad I found this forum!!!

Kirk