Hello from UAE

[TareqPhoto]

You can only use the 20X eyepieces with the 10x objective. If your 40X is a .65 N.A. you enter the zone of what is called empty magnification, so even though everything gets bigger, it doesn't gain any resolution.....kind of like walking right up to a movie screen , hoping to see more detail.
You cannot go any more than 1000 x the N.A. of the objective for the magnification limit with any objective. You can use a 15X on most 40 X objectives , or if you happen to have a 40X with an N.A. of .85, you could get away with a 20X but I can't think that I have ever seen a high N.A. 40X on a 3 watt led microscope.

With higher resolution, you would be able to see some detail of bacteria at 400X but it is the objective creating that resolution and you just have to have really good ones.

My 40X objective is 0.65, and believe it or not, it allowed me to see something very tiny to move, it was so so difficult to see that with 4X or 10X objectives, and i did use 20X eyepieces.

What do you mean higher resolution? resolution of what?




Are there something like 40X eyepieces? so i can use that with 4X or 10x objectives if possible.

Resolution of details in your subject. Yes you can see things moving and using eyepieces of a higher power increases the magnification but the fine details of what you are looking at get blurred. If you use an objective with higher magnification and a higher N.A., staying with a lower power eyepiece, you get more magnification and the finer details will be more defined and sharper.
High power eyepieces also usually have poorer eye relief( the distance between your eye and the lens) and are often uncomfortable to use for long periods of time.
Based on the formula above a 40X .65 objective has a useful total magnification capability of about 650X, maybe 700X at the extreme, so using a 15X eyepiece with an average 40X objective is o.k. Anything above that will yield very little if any extra information.
A 4X objective, which usually have an N.A. of about .10 could accept a 25X eyepiece, although since you have a 10X objective ???? A 10X .25 objective could be used with a 25X eyepiece and that might have some value at 250X.
Most of the higher magnification eyepieces are special purpose and more often than not designed to be used with very high N.A. objective lenses.

Ok, i got it, so the higher magnification of objectives i go then it is better to go with lower magnification of the eyepieces, so i keep the total magnification within limits, so 800X-1000X aren't really good unless i have good optics and using oil immersion?

So, when i see those videos of those germs or whatever you call it in details or can see the shapes at powers such as 100X or 400X so why can't i see those at same size even with 40X objectives and 20X eyepieces?

I think i saw amoeba and paramecium and something else, but all of them, all were very tiny so that i feel i don't know what they are, but in videos with lower magnifications they look really big or clear, not talking about fine quality but about the size, so i want to know things here before i really think if i buy very expensive microscope will make them suddenly bigger with same magnification, i just ordered adapters to connect cameras, so i don't know if they will be bigger or larger size with camera then by eyes.

[apochronaut]

Ok, i got it, so the higher magnification of objectives i go then it is better to go with lower magnification of the eyepieces, so i keep the total magnification within limits, so 800X-1000X aren't really good unless i have good optics and using oil immersion?

Good optics is the key. You can get 800-1000x with dry objectives but they need to be very high quality with high N.A's

So, when i see those videos of those germs or whatever you call it in details or can see the shapes at powers such as 100X or 400X so why can't i see those at same size even with 40X objectives and 20X eyepieces?

Correct. Not usually.

I think i saw amoeba and paramecium and something else, but all of them, all were very tiny so that i feel i don't know what they are, but in videos with lower magnifications they look really big or clear, not talking about fine quality but about the size, so i want to know things here before i really think if i buy very expensive microscope will make them suddenly bigger with same magnification, i just ordered adapters to connect cameras, so i don't know if they will be bigger or larger size with camera then by eyes.

With the camera you can crop an image , so even though it was being viewed at 400X magnification through the eyepieces, it could be cropped to look like 800X on the monitor. Monitor size affects this also; larger monitor, larger subject and if you have a very good monitor and or system, the image quality will reflect that.
Generally though, unless your photo or video skills are quite high, and your digital system quite good; the image quality you will see on the monitor will not be as good as what your eyes saw through the eyepieces. Increasing the size on the monitor often can give a kind of panoramic sense, that moderate field eyepieces don't have, though.

[TareqPhoto]

Ok, i got it, so the higher magnification of objectives i go then it is better to go with lower magnification of the eyepieces, so i keep the total magnification within limits, so 800X-1000X aren't really good unless i have good optics and using oil immersion?

Good optics is the key. You can get 800-1000x with dry objectives but they need to be very high quality with high N.A's

So, when i see those videos of those germs or whatever you call it in details or can see the shapes at powers such as 100X or 400X so why can't i see those at same size even with 40X objectives and 20X eyepieces?

Correct. Not usually.

I think i saw amoeba and paramecium and something else, but all of them, all were very tiny so that i feel i don't know what they are, but in videos with lower magnifications they look really big or clear, not talking about fine quality but about the size, so i want to know things here before i really think if i buy very expensive microscope will make them suddenly bigger with same magnification, i just ordered adapters to connect cameras, so i don't know if they will be bigger or larger size with camera then by eyes.

With the camera you can crop an image , so even though it was being viewed at 400X magnification through the eyepieces, it could be cropped to look like 800X on the monitor. Monitor size affects this also; larger monitor, larger subject and if you have a very good monitor and or system, the image quality will reflect that.
Generally though, unless your photo or video skills are quite high, and your digital system quite good; the image quality you will see on the monitor will not be as good as what your eyes saw through the eyepieces. Increasing the size on the monitor often can give a kind of panoramic sense, that moderate field eyepieces don't have, though.

And how can i get those good digital things as camera and monitor?

Monitor size? so i have 30" monitor[Mac] and also i have 4K 65" TV, those aren't helping? as camera i have full frame cameras, but i was thinking to start with very small sensor camera and small pixel size, but maybe this will crop the image too much but the details are gone maybe?

[Hobbyst46]

Hi TareqPhoto,

May I suggest that you try and know the size, at least approximately, of the tiny and moving objects that you see. A paramecium and other cilliates, for example, are quite large - order of magnitude 100 micrometers; whereas bacteria and yeasts and red blood cells are much tinier, a few micrometers or less. Estimation of the size will facilitate the evaluation of your equipment. To measure the size, one needs to "calibrate" the FOV by means of a stage micrometer. This device is now quite inexpensive on eBay.

Let me suggest a few typical sizes for the full diameter of the field of view through the microscope:

Suppose that the eyepiece has a field number of 20. Then, the diameter of the FOV will be about 2mm (10X objective), 0.8mm (25X objective), 0.5mm (40X objective), 0.2mm (100X objective).

[TareqPhoto]

Hi TareqPhoto,

May I suggest that you try and know the size, at least approximately, of the tiny and moving objects that you see. A paramecium and other cilliates, for example, are quite large - order of magnitude 100 micrometers; whereas bacteria and yeasts and red blood cells are much tinier, a few micrometers or less. Estimation of the size will facilitate the evaluation of your equipment. To measure the size, one needs to "calibrate" the FOV by means of a stage micrometer. This device is now quite inexpensive on eBay.

Let me suggest a few typical sizes for the full diameter of the field of view through the microscope:

Suppose that the eyepiece has a field number of 20. Then, the diameter of the FOV will be about 2mm (10X objective), 0.8mm (25X objective), 0.5mm (40X objective), 0.2mm (100X objective).

I was using 20X wide field -although narrow eye relief- eyepiece, coupled with 40X objectives, so those were very small or tiny things moving around, so i was watching at 0.5mm field from your calculation and still they are very tiny really, i was watching at 800X magnification, and because i don't have an oil immersion so i didn't use 100X objective.

I will try to buy one of those micro measurements, it might be handy one day, why not, even if not cheap i won't buy so many anyway.

The cells of prepared samples i bought are larger enough, but i can't depends on those large cells of plants/animal/human to be the judge or reference, i wanted to see live moving things more than dead or steady cells.

I can't describe all moving subjects i saw, but one of them i can see clearly its shape, something look like a stick but with balls form, like pearls of a necklace or similar, one was small with 3 balls or cells and the other larger i think 5 or 6 ones, i hope you know what i am talking about, if you have a picture of that then i can confirm you about it and then you can easily tell me the size of that and then you will have an idea what i was talking about.

[Hobbyst46]

Sorry that I cannot identify what you describe; a "chain" of identical tiny forms could be bacteria, cyanobacteria, or fungi; if you can post photos, I'm sure that knowledgeable forum members can help.

[apochronaut]

Ok, i got it, so the higher magnification of objectives i go then it is better to go with lower magnification of the eyepieces, so i keep the total magnification within limits, so 800X-1000X aren't really good unless i have good optics and using oil immersion?

Good optics is the key. You can get 800-1000x with dry objectives but they need to be very high quality with high N.A's

So, when i see those videos of those germs or whatever you call it in details or can see the shapes at powers such as 100X or 400X so why can't i see those at same size even with 40X objectives and 20X eyepieces?

Correct. Not usually.

I think i saw amoeba and paramecium and something else, but all of them, all were very tiny so that i feel i don't know what they are, but in videos with lower magnifications they look really big or clear, not talking about fine quality but about the size, so i want to know things here before i really think if i buy very expensive microscope will make them suddenly bigger with same magnification, i just ordered adapters to connect cameras, so i don't know if they will be bigger or larger size with camera then by eyes.

With the camera you can crop an image , so even though it was being viewed at 400X magnification through the eyepieces, it could be cropped to look like 800X on the monitor. Monitor size affects this also; larger monitor, larger subject and if you have a very good monitor and or system, the image quality will reflect that.
Generally though, unless your photo or video skills are quite high, and your digital system quite good; the image quality you will see on the monitor will not be as good as what your eyes saw through the eyepieces. Increasing the size on the monitor often can give a kind of panoramic sense, that moderate field eyepieces don't have, though.

And how can i get those good digital things as camera and monitor?

Monitor size? so i have 30" monitor[Mac] and also i have 4K 65" TV, those aren't helping? as camera i have full frame cameras, but i was thinking to start with very small sensor camera and small pixel size, but maybe this will crop the image too much but the details are gone maybe?

Yes. Having fine resolution monitors will allow you to present your microscope's view with as much original resolution as would be possible but the camera has to be able to capture the resolution in the first place. You cannot add resolution. You can only hope to preserve it as intact as is possible.
You can digitally enhance but I have yet to see digitally enhanced images that actually look like the real thing. I suppose it is o.k. if you are taking pictures of robots.

[TareqPhoto]

Sorry that I cannot identify what you describe; a "chain" of identical tiny forms could be bacteria, cyanobacteria, or fungi; if you can post photos, I'm sure that knowledgeable forum members can help.

I can't post any photo because i don't know the name of that

[TareqPhoto]

Good optics is the key. You can get 800-1000x with dry objectives but they need to be very high quality with high N.A's



Correct. Not usually.



With the camera you can crop an image , so even though it was being viewed at 400X magnification through the eyepieces, it could be cropped to look like 800X on the monitor. Monitor size affects this also; larger monitor, larger subject and if you have a very good monitor and or system, the image quality will reflect that.
Generally though, unless your photo or video skills are quite high, and your digital system quite good; the image quality you will see on the monitor will not be as good as what your eyes saw through the eyepieces. Increasing the size on the monitor often can give a kind of panoramic sense, that moderate field eyepieces don't have, though.

And how can i get those good digital things as camera and monitor?

Monitor size? so i have 30" monitor[Mac] and also i have 4K 65" TV, those aren't helping? as camera i have full frame cameras, but i was thinking to start with very small sensor camera and small pixel size, but maybe this will crop the image too much but the details are gone maybe?

Yes. Having fine resolution monitors will allow you to present your microscope's view with as much original resolution as would be possible but the camera has to be able to capture the resolution in the first place. You cannot add resolution. You can only hope to preserve it as intact as is possible.
You can digitally enhance but I have yet to see digitally enhanced images that actually look like the real thing. I suppose it is o.k. if you are taking pictures of robots.

I keep reading about Oliver here so is he the founder or admin here?

So in his video, for example this one, he was using Canon 650D, this is a crop factor camera, also Olympus microscope, so let's just ignore the quality of the microscope and only focus on the magnification, what magnification that video was at? and will another microscopes with same magnification and same camera and assume it is a low quality can give same size?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAXDSDkZmxc&t=5s

[TareqPhoto]

After i watched another videos about bacteria shapes i think the one i was describing is very similar to "Diplo" or "Coccus" one, not sure if it was that or not, but it is the closest one i can describe it with, so what are the size of those then if i can see them barely under 800X? Also i saw a lot of circle or round germ don't know what, look like rings or donuts maybe, and i am sure the other one is paramecium because it has that kind of round cylinder jelly form, and it was almost larger than other subjects i can see unless i saw Amoeba but did or not moving who knows, hope i can capture those either in video or in photos to show one day.