American Optical DIC with Canon T3I multiple set-up options

[einman]

In an earlier string I posted photos of my model AO21 with DIC. Originally I was using the trinocular tube with an adapter to mount my Canon T3i. However I now have three options.

Option#1 Utilizes the AO Cat#1044 photo tube. as seen in the photo below:



I then attach a camera adapter as pictured below to the trinocular tube #1044.



This adapter allows you to insert a photo eyepiece inside eliminating vignetting etc. The picture is the adapter attached to an Olympus IM trinoc. It is quite practical and will work on any 23.2mm trinoc tube. The Canon EOS is then attached using an M42 adaoter.

Option #2 involves using an AO teaching beam splitter between the head and body. This allows for the addition of another head or with an adapter, the Canon EOS T3I as shown below:



Both options give excellent photos, Option #1 and #2 can be combined with a video camera mounted on one and the still camera on the other!

Option #3 entails using an AO cat #1191 Expostar shutter assembly. I gutted the "shutter" and "photocell" leaving the lens assembly intact. This allows for a mag choice of 2.8X to 5X eliminating the need for a photo eyepiece. This set up also requires an Adapter to mount the EOS T3I.




The adapter USED IN OPTION #2 and #3 were purchased from Rafcamera. Apo mentioned these adapter on another thread. I want to thank him as I was in the process of asking RAF to make them for me when it turns out he already had them for sale on E-bay.

The versatility of the AO scope is exemplified here! AO was, despite what many may think, an innovative American company. It is constantly underrated by amateur hobbyists drifting towards the German makes and/or newer cheaper quality ( but not price) Chinese scopes.

Here is a pic with both option#2 and #3.

[zzffnn]

Re options #2 and photo #3 showing camera mounted that way:

Was / is your camera parfocal with eyepiece and is the view field about the same? I did not see other lens between camera and adapter, though I understand it would work when properly set up.

Also cannot wait to see your DIC photos/videos!

[einman]

Option #2 with the camera attached to the teaching adapter it is not parfocal. However- That is ok by me as i generally have my camera tethered to a laptop using Live View by Canon.

Option #1 and #3 are parfocal.

Regarding Option#2 it is my guess you could create parfocality by inserting addition lens extenders such as used for macro photography. I have several and plan on trying them to see if I can get it parfocal via that means.

I have posted some videos on YouTube sometime ago using Option #1. the trinocular tube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxjUgDZoVWQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3lKU4pgP5o

These were made when I first acquired the scope so were not perfect as I was familiarizing myself ( and still am) with DIC. It was not parfocal as these videos do not use a photo eyepiece.

[einman]

I will post some videos using all three options. I just have so many projects that I jump back and forth depending on the current days demands. I was originally working on the Olympus IM using the adapter in the photo when the RAfcamera adapter arrived. So I stopped long enough to mount the teaching attachment and the camera to quickly check it out. I am back to the IM now as I discovered some copepods in a jar of algae I have been growing for a while!

I had a slight set back on my available time when I had a heart attack in September. But,,all is well..

My rehab requires I take 2-3 hours out of each day. So less free time..

[zzffnn]

Nice videos. I have subscribed to your YouTube.

Option#2 would be easily parfocal, if you add a monocular eye tube and mount camera with adapter. However it is not necessary for you, since you are viewing from computer screen.

[einman]

You are correct. Actually there are many different approaches.

[Crater Eddie]

Such versatility! You are seducing me towards the AO line. Must... not... search... Ebay...
CE

[einman]

Oh and there are more!! You can mount a second head and then use an eyepiece mount. You cant miss with either of the 10,110,20,120 series. The 150,160 series are not as versatile.

I watched a 120 series go for less than $100 last month.

[apochronaut]

Actually, neglecting the 400 series microscopes here , the 410 and 420 is a big oversight. I have, and use almost all of the AO and Spencer models, going back to apochromatic Spencer #5 and 7 research models close to 100 years old and the optical leap that took place when the 400 series was brought out was dramatic. We are now just coming up to the point where many of these are being deleted from labs, schools, industry etc.( most are now about 20 years old) .and they can be had for about the same price as the 10/20 and 100/120 series can, mainly because as mentioned, they all are viewed through phobic coloured glasses and get overlooked as a choice.
The 400 series are slightly larger microscopes with usually 5 and on the Diastar 420 6 hole nosepieces, adapted to take 45MM D.I.N. parfocal optics, rather than the diminutive 34mm parfocal objectives that Spencer/AO used for about 100 years . The reconfigured D.I.N. infinity objectives have flatter, wider fields than the earlier infinity objective lines with stellar contrast and brighter images.
As good as those older AO microscopes are and as much as I use them and like them , if it came down to choosing a 10, 110 or 410( all between 20 and 30 watts) or a 20, 120 or 420( all 100 watt) , with similar features otherwise and at a similar price, I would choose the 400 series , simply because the range of optics available is much more diverse and the imaging has the possibility to be breathtaking, not just excellent. Unfortunately, Diastar 420s are less common and still command some $, so a 20 or 120 may yet be more economical but there are lots of 410s out there going for very very little, compared to what they actally can do as a microscope.

[Crater Eddie]

Would the 410 be Reichert?
The reason I ask, I was chatting with an Ebay seller about a Reichert 410 he had for sale, discussing objectives, and he likened putting anything other than achromats on it to putting lipstick on a pig.
I didn't take the discussion any further.
CE

[charlie]

Actually, neglecting the 400 series microscopes here , the 410 and 420 is a big oversight. I have, and use almost all of the AO and Spencer models, going back to apochromatic Spencer #5 and 7 research models close to 100 years old ....

If everyone was like the hoarders in this forum, there would be no nice microscopes left!

Really sweet AO21 einman! I love the interchangability.

[apochronaut]

Actually, neglecting the 400 series microscopes here , the 410 and 420 is a big oversight. I have, and use almost all of the AO and Spencer models, going back to apochromatic Spencer #5 and 7 research models close to 100 years old ....

If everyone was like the hoarders in this forum, there would be no nice microscopes left!

Really sweet AO21 einman! I love the interchangability.

you are welcome to buy any one of them any time you want!

[apochronaut]

Would the 410 be Reichert?
The reason I ask, I was chatting with an Ebay seller about a Reichert 410 he had for sale, discussing objectives, and he likened putting anything other than achromats on it to putting lipstick on a pig.
I didn't take the discussion any further.
CE

Reichert was just a name that Cambridge instruments, the parent company from 1984 to the 90's, thought would be more marketable. The microscopes were actually made in the renamed AO factory in Buffalo and were of AO design.
American Optical bought C.Reichert of Vienna Austria in 1962. Austria had until just a few years earlier been not much different than East Germany. The economy was about a third of the U.S. economy at the time, so it was not dissimilar to Nikon, Olympus, Leica and Zeiss going to China today. The difference was though, that instead of using the Reichert factory to produce the cheap line of microscopes, they gave them freedom to pursue their self determined line of microscopes, with a certain amount of input and guidance from AO. They exchanged product. AO could get optics made there, cheaper than in the U.S.even if they were Buffalo designs, and some U.S. made product shows up in the European Reichert catalogues, with Reichert badges on them, as far back as the early 70's. AO, who had embarked on their rather bold infinity corrected optical program already, slowly, converted Reichert over to infinity, beginning about 1972. Early Reichert infinity corrected lab microscopes ( Diavar II) had AO infinity corrected objectives in them.
Primarily due to lower labour rates, the development of most of the research oriented products was done in Austria and marketed by AO/Reichert under the Reichert name in North America. The bulk of the lab microscopes for the North American market were produced here. Optics went both ways.
The 400 series of microscopes came along , right when the industry was in turmoil.Wild/ Leitz was losing money,Bausch & Lomb was losing money,Zeiss had to cough up a lot of dough to repatriate Zeiss Jena and figure out what to do with it, PZO was becoming history, Vickers was heading down the tubes. Probably only Nikon and Olympus were reasonably healthy but what had been a huge economic advantage for decades for them, was soon ending. I don't know whether AO/Reichert were solvent but they did end up being consolidated into Leica around 1992 and the 410 and 420 microscopes stayed in production until 2001, I believe.
The microscope had terrific objectives available ; planachros, 7 of them, Neoplans, 4 of them and 3 planfluorites. You can also use the planapos made for the infinity corrected Reichert research microscopes and later Leica objectives, made with R.M.S. threads in them. From the coding, used for their objective catalogue numbers, it appears they had plans for more objectives to be formally released over time for the scope, certainly a 60 or 63X planachro but likely planapos as well but the industry took a U turn and AO's pioneering infinity work ended up fueling Leicas rebirth as an infinity corrected modern innovative company.
Lipstick on a pig, eh? Kermit the frog might have something to say about the advantages of that!

[einman]

I have heard similar comments to that "lipstick on a pig" comment from others on the yahoo forums. However- as Apochronaut and I have had many discussions in this regard I can say, unlike many of those on the yahoo forums, I have compared the optics to many other brands including Zeiss, Leitz, Olympus, and Bausch & Lomb.

The AO's and even more so the Reicherts compare very favorably. I find the AO series to have excellent resolution comparable to the other brands with poorer color contrast. However, The Reichert infinity 45 din objectives have superio color/contrast to the AO 34 mm objectives and equal to better resolution ( with my eyes which are admittedly not as good as many) . I recently purchased a Reichert 410 with phase contrast and spent some time comparing it to my favorite Leitz scope/objective combinations. I find them to be very comparable and superior in some cases depending on whether you are comparing to Fluotars etc.


One comment to Apo in regards to the 410 vs 10,110,120. Nearly all if not all the 410's on E-bay have been used and used and used if you get my drift. Whereas the 10,10,110's can still be found in good to excellent shape for very cheap. However as I frequent multiple auction sites I have started seeing them pop up but they command a good price still.

In regards to Charles calling those those who "collect" scopes as hoarders... well I guess that could be said of anyone that collects anything. I will say that it is those of us that are "hoarders" that , in part, are driving the vendors to search and offer for sale microscopes in the first place.

Let's face it the GE's, Procter & Gambles of the world are not looking on E-bay for used microscopes.

[apochronaut]

I overlooked the fact that nearly all if not all the 410s on ebay have been used and used and used. I guess I don't know what to look for. Odd that the 10/20 and 100/120 models wouldn't have been. Grab them while you can folks; they're on ebay and they haven't been used and used and used.

[einman]

Hmm do I detect a note of sarcasm?? Really Apo you can not compare your knowledge of construction etc of the AO and Reichert line to the majority of Hobbyists here, myself included. Your ability to identify via a glance, what if any issues exist ,and how easily they are corrected is not the norm.

If you were on a poster it would be on the wall in my lab. LOL

I speak in in regards to an average hobbyist. You do not fall in that category- as I have often emphasized to the forum.


I believe it is just that there were a larger number produced and thus available of the model 10,20,110,120 and thus more available, making it easier to find good ones. If you look at every 410 currently on E-bay (US)-and I have- There is not a one that does not have an issue. If you look at the stages they show a lot of wear on most. Could be simply poorer quality build. That is something I still feel ambivalent about. The objectives appear well worn, as in the paint wearing off. Of course painted objectives is something APO addressed in an earlier posting.


There is currently only one 420 and it appears to have been dropped and the stage has the finish peeling. It could still be in good working condition but the seller is asking over $500.

[Crater Eddie]

Well, I am sorry that I brought it up.
Very nice and clean looking instruments.
CE

[apochronaut]

Einman, you are just responding to cosmetic issues and therefore are making assumptions and completely missing the point. A microscope can be a shelf princess and sit around looking pretty or it can be used. It is always nice if it is both but then often $ can get in the way of that. So, AO put more money into building a better performing microscope, and made the mistake of dropping engraving off the list of do's and put in a few plastic knobs. Whoopee. I've seen series 10's on ebay with the stage scraped bare of paint and so have you. Now, 25 years after that fateful decision to not engrave, you can buy a microscope with still, state of the art performing optics, comparable to the planachro or planfluorite optics of the major maker's, not just the Chinese, for under 200.00 with some paint missing on the objectives, or some scuffing on the stage. I have a 100X Reichert( Austria) 1.30 N.A. planfluorite objective I paid 50.00 for because it was missing some paint. It compares favourably to a 3000.00 objective from any of the major makers.
Very few microscopes sold on ebay, don't have any issues, whether it be missing objectives, eyepieces, transformers, power cords or some mechanical fault. I could start going down any list and find them by the dozens. There are no particular brands out there , that are exempt from being knocked off a bench, poorly serviced or abused, there are suspect instruments for sale on every list. When they are complete and functioning perfectly and the seller knows that, often the price will reflect that. Sometimes there are real bargains; an instrument that a seller doesn't understand is as good as it is, or they just want to move it on.
The real point is, that the optical quality of AO microscopes up to about 1980 or so was in keeping with the industry pretty much as a whole and that level of quality is about as good as a modern budget microscope, one up to about 1500.00, so. At a few hundred dollars for an AO 120 for instance( there has been one languishing on ebay for about 6 months at 250.00), that's a very good score, relatively speaking, since it would cost you about 1500.00 to get an equivalent quality Asian scope and it wouldn't be built as well and probably wouldn't last as long.
However, due to the optical enhancement that computer ray tracing, improved coatings and newer glass formulas provided into the 80's and 90's the D.I.N. optics made for the 400 series are in a different league altogether AND can be pushed higher because even better D.I.N. optics were made for it and are still being made. There are a lot of upgrade options available for the 400 series and much fewer for the earlier microscopes.
Here's a representative sampling of Microstar IVs ( 410) on ebay. I don't see too much, given the prices being asked, that would inhibit a purchase . A few objectives are necessary but those are cheap to buy. I bought 2- 20X .50 planachros,( with the elusive paint) for 75.00 once. You see 400 series objectives for sale all the time, for peanuts, some clearly almost new or new.

Needs a couple of objectives to be complete. A couple of the 5 are duplicates and could be sold. The price is right for sure.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Reichert-410-Mi ... SwDNdV510L

Has a video coupler, very nice; you don't see that often.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Microstar-IV-/1 ... SwHnFVyOx2

The teaching attachment on this can be used for a camera.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Microstar-IV-/1 ... SwHnFVyOx2

I'm curious what the "issues" are with these microscopes, given the prices and what one would pay for an equivalent new microscope?

[75RR]

I'm curious what the "issues" are with these microscopes, given the prices and what one would pay for an equivalent new microscope?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Microstar-IV-/1 ... 1c57837eb8

Price is due to faulty illumination. Seller selling for parts.
I think the lack of information on the Objectives is a factor + the low resolution photographs do not help.
However one could always contact the seller and ask for better photos and additional details.

Microstar IV
Model No: 410
Volts: 20
Serial No: 12018-8
Hertz: 60
Amps: 0.2
Watts: 24
Cambridge Instruments INC
Bufflalo NY 14215 Made in the USA
Fuse Type: 3A6
Rating: 0.3A
We are selling this item for parts does not turn on.
We are selling this item as is.

[apochronaut]

I see that, it doesn't turn on. The electronics in the Microstar IV tended to be very stable. Much better than the earlier internal electronics of the 110.
I would contact the seller and ask him to pull the bulb out and have a look at the filament. Most lighting issues on them are bulbs.
The objectives are a 4X .12 planachro, a 40X or 50X( hard to tell from the picture but it looks to be a 50X .80 oil Neoplan) and a 100X 1.25 planachro. It is missing the 10X and has a 4 place nosepiece.
I noted this one because it has a nice video attachment. I'm pretty sure that would fetch 100.00 alone.
It does need a set of eyepieces. Those need to be Cat.# 181 . They show up regularly on ebay.

Ebay makes it very easy to ask questions. If you don't get the answers you need, don't buy.

[einman]

No I think you are missing my point Apo. I am not disagreeing with you as I purchase scopes, sell off parts to recover my costs and ultimately end up with a free scope sometimes. None of the "issues" i mentioned would deter me or yourself. However- My comment was taking into consideration others on this forum.

So to be clear(er)- It is easier to find the older AO series scopes in good to excellent condition for little money than the 400 series. That was my point. Buying scopes repairing and selling off parts is what we "hoarders" as Charles put it do.

But if you read the posts many are afraid to purchase used scopes and so drift towards new Chinese brands.

My post was meant to say that for those individuals- try an older AO 10,20,110,120 as I see more in good shape. For those more into the hobby or with experience- yes- I fully agree with you.

For example the scope I mentioned looks like it was dropped..That would not deter me as I have made offers on it already and been turned down. It has been on the site for quite some time. But for someone new to the hobby and apprehensive about repairing etc. That scope may not be a good choice for a first scope ..

Hopefully that clears up the intention of my post.

I was not trying to discourage anyone from the 400 series. I am sure that despite your admiration for the 400 series you would not sell off all your older scopes. Why discourage anyone from experiencing those scopes and perhaps along the way when available acquire a 400 series.


Wow didn't expect such a discussion from what was in my mind simply an attempt to encourage people to take a look at older Ao scopes vs newer Chinese scopes.

[einman]

Well if nothing else it can't be said we aren't a passionate group of individuals!!

But then that is why like the hobby..and the people who participate.

[einman]

In response to which option do I prefer I would have to say option #1. It turns out to be the simplest and least expensive as well. The side mount option results in vignetting. The AO adapter option results in a much enlarged image closer to being parfocal but still very large filling the entire sensor and being "magnified" as well. I have not spent much time determining to what degree the image is magnified.

Option one can be used with or without an eyepiece. the eyepiece actually fills the sensor and is probably larger than what most might want. But you have the option to include the eyepiece or not.

Both option #2 and #3 have addition adapters etc. manufactured by AO that I plan to experiment with to see if it will eliminate their corresponding deficiencies. Keep in mind both option 2 and 3 are not being used exactly as AO intended as they were not designed for the modern DSLR.

I will update this thread as I explore other adapters etc.

[charlie g]

Einman...I sincerely hope your recovery path from MI is on track. Keep on, keeping on, einman.

My first and greatest concern is: oh so many folk I know have tried :online forum sale of valuable goods to complete unknown buyers. When a deal is: PayPal negotiated, or eBay negotiated...seller has headaches if an unknown online buyer raises issues.

I sincerely state to you and all forum members..selling to strangers is not easy! I have no idea how you (einman) are able to purchase all sorts of stands...eventually get a free microscope out of this 'commerce'...how on earth do you ship delicate and costly optics to total strangers..and not have headaches? Are you conected to some corporation which goes to bat for you(joke-joke)?

For myself...a clown in Colorado,US demanded specifics on samples of Lilac tree wood I send to him...this clown had assured me he would in kind favor send me at least one or two mounted slides of the wood...err..that was years ago! Imagine if I had a costly and unique optical component I sent to the clown?!

Other fantastic microscopists have indeed enriched my world in swaps we made: 'over the pond'...and 'con-US'. It was fun to buy from an Aussie...and then swap a poster of a microscope convention to a con-US microscopist in exchange for him signing an article he wrote in :"Journal of Historical Microscopy"...about a stand I purchased from a Prof I experienced a demanding course from!

But bless you, einman...how you do ;'commerce with strangers' as a single microscopist...and not get burned...bravo, einman!

Please keep getting well. fondly, charlie guevara...who only would face to face sell valubale optics...after the clown in Colorado!

Long story short...dear einman...keep to recovery after your MI...do not share that chopped up optical parts of value are 'easy to online move' to complete strangers.

[apochronaut]

Regarding the vignetting with the teaching attachment: Just about a year ago , I got Rafi( Rafcamera) to make up 6 adapters specific to AO for various ideas I had for camera adapters. He made a small run of each and subsequently listed them on ebay. They are all still available for 2"( 50.4mm) and 1 9/16"( 39.7mm) Two of them are for applications specific to the teaching attachments, such as einman is showing here.
The image coming through the teaching attachment has not been rectified, so remains an infinity corrected image and it does not give sensor coverage. Two of those adapters Rafi made for me, were made to convert the AO 2" ( 50.4mm) dovetail to the filter threads of a couple of 35mm format camera lenses I was trying out. A 200mm prime lens set at infinity focus with a 52mm filter thread on the front can couple to the 2"/52- .75m adapter and give complete coverage for an APS-C sensor. I also had an adapter made for a camera lens with a 46mm filter thread. Not all 200mm camera lenses are created equal but some are surprisingly good as a microscope tube lens. The bonus is that the large field of view of a camera lens allows it to see a broader field than the microscope eyepiece sees. One of the 200mm primes I used captured the equivalent of about a 28mm field, although there was some corner distortion and coma towards the edges. Generally, though, the lens provided a large enough field that with cropping, the entire microscope field of view could be captured but in a rectangular format with excellent image quality and colour correction. The iris diaphragm in the lens becomes visible at a certain f stop, so usually the lens needs to be wide open or just a stop or 2 below.
It is a good system for someone with no trinocular head and a roughly 200mm lens sitting around. Teaching attachments are fairly common and for AO, any of them made for the 10/20,110/120 or 410/420 will work because the dovetail is the same. I tried a 135mm lens but could not get coverage but I am pretty sure some of those various mfg's. zooms that go up to 180mm , and are quite common, would.
The lens I used was a Nikkor Q, which is a very old and cheap lens. It also just happens to be a 200mm lens that compares extremely well against many other 200mm lenses, even some highly touted modern ones, in independent tests. For a non apo lens it has stupendous colour correction and a very flat relatively coma free field.

[einman]

Einman...I sincerely hope your recovery path from MI is on track. Keep on, keeping on, einman.

My first and greatest concern is: oh so many folk I know have tried :online forum sale of valuable goods to complete unknown buyers. When a deal is: PayPal negotiated, or eBay negotiated...seller has headaches if an unknown online buyer raises issues.

I sincerely state to you and all forum members..selling to strangers is not easy! I have no idea how you (einman) are able to purchase all sorts of stands...eventually get a free microscope out of this 'commerce'...how on earth do you ship delicate and costly optics to total strangers..and not have headaches? Are you conected to some corporation which goes to bat for you(joke-joke)?

For myself...a clown in Colorado,US demanded specifics on samples of Lilac tree wood I send to him...this clown had assured me he would in kind favor send me at least one or two mounted slides of the wood...err..that was years ago! Imagine if I had a costly and unique optical component I sent to the clown?!

Other fantastic microscopists have indeed enriched my world in swaps we made: 'over the pond'...and 'con-US'. It was fun to buy from an Aussie...and then swap a poster of a microscope convention to a con-US microscopist in exchange for him signing an article he wrote in :"Journal of Historical Microscopy"...about a stand I purchased from a Prof I experienced a demanding course from!

But bless you, einman...how you do ;'commerce with strangers' as a single microscopist...and not get burned...bravo, einman!

Please keep getting well. fondly, charlie guevara...who only would face to face sell valubale optics...after the clown in Colorado!

Long story short...dear einman...keep to recovery after your MI...do not share that chopped up optical parts of value are 'easy to online move' to complete strangers.

Nothing I sell is subpar. In fact most of what I sell is better given I generally clean and check the optics before re-selling them. I simply sell the parts I already have. For example. I purchased a Zeiss universal with a 63X planapo oil objective for $600. I sold teh objective for $350 and then the scope for $900. I used the profit to purchase another scope!

That is how I get a "free" scope. I have NEVER sold a subpar piece of equipment on E-bay.

Purchasing parts can get very expensive on e-bay. It is almost always cheaper to buy a whole scope. remove the part you need and sell the remaining stand back on E-bay. It is not rocket science.

I have been "burned" once or twice in purchases and selling. Not very frequently given the number of transactions. I have met some very cantankerous individuals.

[charlie g]

Hear, hear einman! Charlie Guevara

[apochronaut]

Purchasing parts can get very expensive on e-bay. It is almost always cheaper to buy a whole scope. remove the part you need and sell the remaining stand back on E-bay. It is not rocket science.
.[/quote]

It depends on where you live. 95% of the supply of used microscopes and parts on ebay are from the U.S. I don't live there. In most cases I don't have the luxury of having a domestic shipping tab on ebay purchases. I'm stuck with an export shipping bill and often customs intervention. I just today, let a seller keep all but 4 parts of a scope , a scope I could have easily reconned and put to use as a very fine series 20, but the shipping bill would have been twice the price of the scope. I paid the full price of the microscope let them keep it, minus the 4 parts and minus 185.00 on the shipping bill.
My experience with U.S. sellers has been both bad and good, in terms of their sensitivity to and understanding of such problems. I live 50 miles from Oswego N.Y. and yet a microscope shipped from there would cost me the better part of 100.00 guaranteed or more, plus possible customs fees. The same microscope , shipped from Vancouver would be about 40.00.
In most cases, it makes more sense for me to buy parts, unless the entire microscope is worthy of restoration and something special. What I run into a lot, is people wanting to make their life convenient by using whatever packaging they have on hand, to ship small items in, instead of spending a few small minutes cutting and shrinking a box or finding another smaller one. They seem oblivious to the fact that for a small item, a large cardboard box becomes an expensive part of the shipping cost, when every 3/4 oz. is 1.50-2.00.
I will in future be building a museum for my collection..........of boxes. It is being billed( har har) as the world's most valuable collection of corrrugated cardboard boxes. The room displaying the "Medium Size Boxes " is to be of special interest. Some of the glue in those boxes is valued at close to 50.00/ lb. although, the ones in the diorama, billed as "Mega Boxes That Small Parts Were Hard To Find In" will likely be the centerpiece, having been evaluated much higher.
Fortunately, I don't quite have enough yet, to complete my museum, although, I have much against my will, recently been involved in negotiations for more valuable assets for my collection. I may be asked in the future; how did you come across the idea for this fabulous display of North Americana? All I will be able to answer is; I am humbled by the generosity of U.S. ebayers, for it is they who built this display, not I.

[einman]

I do believe this thread is getting waaaay off topic.

[apochronaut]

That's what I was wondering too but you were the author and took it in that direction, so I figured that was where you wanted it to go.