Compound Microscope for Gross Anatomy Observation?

[krame]

Hello,

I have a Nikon SMZ-1 (stereo) that has 8-35x zoom as well as a 2x Barlow lens. I enjoy going out into the yard with my 6 year old daughter and collecting plants, rocks, bugs, etc for viewing.

Can a compound microscope be used for viewing gross anatomy like those items above? Or do most subjects have to be mounted on a slide? Given my experience with a 70x zoom with the attached Barlow, I -think- I'm look something around 200x magnification.

Thank you!

[Scarodactyl]

It is possible to set up a compound microscope for looking at larger, three-dimensional subjects, but it isn't trivial.

The reason that 4x objectives are usually the lowest magnification that's standard on a compound microscope (equivalent to 40x on your stereo, since compound objective magnifications are quoted without the 10x eyepiece but stereo magnifications are often quoted with) is parfocality. On a compound microscope you want your image to stay in focus when you change objectives, so your objectives need to have the same 'parfocal distance' (distance between the shoulder of the objective and the plane where the subject is in focus). High magnification objectives need a short distance from the front lens to the subject and low magnification objectives need a long distance from front lens to subject (aka 'working distance'). Within a range the length of the objectives compensates for this--your 4x is shorter, so the front lens is further from the subject and your 100x is longer so the front lens is very close to the subject. But there are limits to what you can do in this space, and going below 4x starts to get challenging. The rules above aren't 100% absolute: you can do things to adjust the working distance and magnification, but they're complicated. You can generally get 2x or even 1x objectives from the major brands today, but they're more expensive and have limitations (like, paradoxically, a shorter distance from the front of the lens to the subject) because of the weird stuff they have to do to get this magnification into this space.

So, that's the essential problem, and there are a few ways around it. In ye olde days for low magnification objectives they'd just give up on parfocality--you could get a lower mag lens and you'd just need to crank the focus rack to get more space between the lens and subject. Other makers made special series of objectives for lower magnifications which are extra long.

This leads to a different problem: many microscopes are not designed to allow for longer working distance objectives or thicker, three-dimensional subjects. The stage will only go so low. So for this type of usage you also need to get a microscope where the head is able to move relative to the stage, allowing for a much larger vertical range. This isn't just important for lower magnification work either, it's essential for high magnification work on three-dimensional subjects.

So, it's absolutely possible, but complicated. It's generally easier to have multiple microscopes, a stereo or macroscope for lower magnification examination, combined with a compound microscope for higher magnifications. For looking at three-dimensional subjects at higher magnifications a metallurgical microscope is usually the best option because the objectives are designed for looking directly at subjects rather than at subjects beneath a glass cover slip and they often have more focusing room.

Sorry to give such a long and rambling answer, but it's a bit involved and I've been spending a while myself getting my own setup put together.

[krame]

That's great information! Oh, and thanks for selling me the stereo microscope to begin with!

It sounds like I may not be able to bring in a large rock, but I could get away with a shard or small trimming of moss. I just want to get closer to what I'm seeing in the stereo, so the key seems to take only the tiny portion of what I want to investigate further and isolate that component.

I went looking on youtube for examples and found this channel to be pretty much what I had envisioned, albeit at a much, much higher quality.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBbnbB ... jLGUwX5Q3g

Have any compound microscopes you want to sell?

[MicroBob]

Hi,
with your good stereo microscope you probabla already have the most useful instrument for use with a 6 year old. The advantage is that the objects are visible with the barey eye and large areas of the image are sharp. For the compound microscope with its shallow depth od field you would need fairly flat specimen to get a view that is appealing for a 6 year old. With objectives above 10:1 it becomes increasingly important to use a cover slip, at 40:1 it is essential for good image quality. Focussing is not easy at these magnifications, even adults struggle at the beginning. But there are some simple slide preparation techniques, typically specimen in water under coverslip:

- bit of torn printed paper
- pollen
- water life (scrape off leaves and wood swimming in water to get a concentrated slide)
- tiny snips of moss leaves

So if you don't mind the expense and required space and if you are interested yourself a compound microscope would be useful even if still too difficult to use alone for your daughter.

Bob

[krame]

Thanks for the reply!

The compound microscope is for me.

[MichaelG.]

.

If the subject is large ... it’s sometimes better that Mohamed goes to the Mountain

If you see one of these at a reasonable price, I suggest you grab it
https://www.exceltechnologies.com/micro ... microscope

I have a very early model which is somewhere in the queue of restoration projects

MichaelG.

[krame]

That's pretty cool!

[krame]

So after doing some research, which is challenging when you can't get your hands on anything, I've come down to what I believe I'm looking for in a microscope.

I want to observe pond microbes with the ability to take pictures/video. This is for occasional use, not a major hobby or profession.

1. Simple achromatics will suffice. Can upgrade to plan at later point if necessary.
2. Ability to use darkfield and oblique lighting filters.
3. Trinocular.
4. Mechanical stage to chase critters.

The Swift 380T fulfills these requirements, but reading through posts here, almost everyone with microscopy experience have been unimpressed and some even being offended with this recommendation. Given my requirements (based on no experience) what better alternative would you all suggest at a comparable $400 price tag? I have searched through the forum and have not found suggested alternatives that can be bought new today.

I am willing to buy used, but only from a member here on the forum, I will not use ebay because I don't have enough knowledge to protect myself from getting a bad deal.

If I double my budge to $800, would that lead to significantly better options when buying new or used?

I posted a WTB thread in this forum a little bit ago with no leads at this time. I am located in the US and I will be purchasing a microscope one way or the other in about two months, I'm not going to wait around hoping for the deal of a lifetime when I can be out exploring. At some point, you have to get off the pot.

[Chas]

Krame, I dont have much knowledge of what is available over your side of the water, but if there are cheap used horsehoe-stand microscopes I would go for one.
Honestly you can't really go wrong
Put in on the carpet,take it outside.
Dont worry if the objectives arent parfocal they soon get to know which is which
(Funnily enough I bought a set of DIN objectives to go on an old microscope that my son was playing around with, years ago, and he wouldnt look at them - He had got to know each of the 'Liquorice Allsort' mixture of brass objectives ).
Most importantly, you wont be over-distressed if it happens to get damaged

Chas
[Put a peice of paper on the mirror to get a much nicer light].

[Chas]

Also, bear in mind that the older monoculars were designed with long focal length /wide field of view objectives in mind, so you can use older 2 Inch and 3Inch objectives. But I also have an inexpensive no-brand DINx2 that isnt bad
But the pleasure from using the older lenses far exceeds. If you want to do this, look out for stands that have a pull-out draw tube, most of them did.
If I have had bad experiences from buying ebay microscopes, it is from buying ones with prisms inside them i.e. inside binocular heads or angled monocular heads; they can be pretty hard to clean and trickey to fix if broken/cracked.
I dont think that there is much that cant be done with an old monocular that can be done with a modern microscope.
[I can hear Stuka sirens ]

[krame]

Thanks everyone!

Does anyone have any thoughts on this listing? I'd prefer to buy from someone here, but there's nothing going on at the moment.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Motic-BA300-Ph ... 2714315029

[Stomias]

Got one of these 6 weeks ago.... Solid, affordable scope



https://www.ebay.com/itm/Reichert-Micro ... SwKSRfC15e

[dtsh]

Thanks everyone!

Does anyone have any thoughts on this listing? I'd prefer to buy from someone here, but there's nothing going on at the moment.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Motic-BA300-Ph ... 2714315029

I don't know Motic well, but that looks like a decent scope. Objectives are plan, the design looks decent, phase contrast is nice. It looks like everything is there, but again I'm not real familiar with them.
It looks to have 3 phase (10x, 40x, and 100x) and one brightfield objective (4x). You can use phase contrast objectives (at least the ones I've seen) as brightfield objectives, a little loss, but generally tolerable.

It's new enough that you probably won't have to deal with 50 year old dried grease to clean out.
I don't see that it has either a bartand lens or a phase telescope, which you will need to properly align the phase contrast system. It is my understanding that you cna do it with one eyepiece stacked atop the other, but I am told it isn't as good as doing it "the right way" (bartrand lens or phase telescope). So if you decide to buy that I would make sure you review and understand how to setup phase contrast *before* it arrives so you are prepared to evaluate it when it does arrive.

They claim it's working, so if it isn't returning it is at their expense. Absolutely do not accept anything less than it being operational.

[Scarodactyl]

That is not a bad deal, though if it were my money I'd take one of two approaches:
First, you can get a less expensive intro scope from a lesser-known but solid maker. Just as an example, here is a trinocular scope for a little over 200 including shipping, or best offer.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Wolfe-Trinocul ... 4146090702
Wolfe of that era were made by Kyowa, a solid second-tier Japanese maker. See a review of their stuff here: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6509
If you make yet lower offers on a few of these you'll likely get a crazy deal. These are solidly made scopes and should be a good intro, and once you have used it a bit and have a better idea of what you really need you'll still have most of your budget left over for another scope (plus it should hold its value well, if it's in good shape you can probably resell it for more than you paid since it is now a tested scope).

Or (more preferably, personally) I'd just YOLO my budget towards an older name brand that is listed as used (and thus needs to be working or you can return it) until I found one that stuck, returning any that came in non-functional condition or, if it's in between, asking for a partial refund to cover repairs.
Like, again as a quickly-dug-up example, this Nikon labophot with phase contrast.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-Labophot ... 3823944075

[PeteM]

It looks like the Ebay Motics are phase contrast and with plan phase objectives. Those scopes should be a distinct step up from the Swift scopes, lacking only the trinocular head.

My view used to be that documentation was such an important (and fun) part of microscopy that most everyone should get a trinocular head. Given the advent of decent and affordable cameras and screens, a monocular, binocular, or teaching head can make sense for someone who wants to do their viewing, composing, movie and photo making all through a screen.

And as cell phones get better, we really should be seeing more really good (and quickly removed and reattached) cell phone holders for microscopes. The basic idea is out there - use both tubes of a binocular head to stabilize the camera, include and attach a quality eyepiece to the holder (or a compensating one of one's own choice), and do it all for under $100 or so.

To the OP - if you happen to be in the Bay Area, I can show you a few scopes to get an idea of the options. However, that Motic is within your budget and if phase contrast is a priority (excellent for pond critters and the like) - it's a pretty good deal. If other imaging methods are more important (polarization? high magnification darkfield?) then something else might be better.

[krame]

You can use phase contrast objectives (at least the ones I've seen) as brightfield objectives, a little loss, but generally tolerable.

I did not know that phase contrast objectives could not be used in brightfield without loss. Makes sense.

I don't see that it has either a bartand lens or a phase telescope

I didn't know that those existed until right now. Not only do I not know how to use them, but I wouldn't be able to confirm the scope to be in working order should I need to verify that component. I tool a quick look at ebay, and the they'll add another $35-$140.

though if it were my money I'd take one of two approaches:

I have this deficit where I don't know what I don't know. Given this, I think it would probably be better to stick with a basic microscope as suggested and get a feel for the hobby.

Got one of these 6 weeks ago.... Solid, affordable scope

I put in an offer!

My view used to be that documentation was such an important (and fun) part of microscopy that most everyone should get a trinocular head. Given the advent of decent and affordable cameras and screens, a monocular, binocular, or teaching head can make sense for someone who wants to do their viewing, composing, movie and photo making all through a screen.

After thinking about it, I more inclined to go with your line of thought. I put an offer in on a binocular scope, but if it gets turned down, I'll put an offer down on the one Scarodactyl posted.

Overall, thank you, everyone, so much. It really easy to get carried away and lost with all of the options. When you have no experience, it's really hard to know what you "need".

[krame]

My offer was accepted @ $150 for the Reichert. Assuming it's it working condition, I'm quite happy.

I went with this scope because it had plan objectives over the other ebay listing shared here. I do wish it was trinocular, and I know you can always add objectives but not another tube, but if I suddenly turn into a citizen scientist, I'll know a little better about what to look for next time.

Thanks all!

[dtsh]

Assuming all is in working order I think you will be very pleased. I also have a Microstar IV and have been nothing but pleased with it, the optics are very nice. Parts availability is pretty good for the common parts, but some of th more unusual configurations seem to be hard to find. I know trinocular heads exist for it, but I haven't seen any listed thus far. An inexpensive cellphone adapter works rather well, especially given the very wide field of view on these, so it's not like imaging is impossible with them. I suspect you will get a lot of enjoyment out of it and that you will be hard pressed to find a comparable microscope for less than two or three times that price.

[Scarodactyl]

I think you made a good pick.

[hans]

Nice, that one has the hard-to-find 20X plan achro. Note that since it is listed as used it is guaranteed "fully functional" and the seller has to pay return shipping within 30 days (or negotiate a partial refund) if there is anything wrong, so check it out carefully as soon as you get it to take advantage of that. (In this case "seller does not offer returns" just means no returns because you changed you mind, found a better deal, etc.) May want to order some inexpensive prepared slides now so you have something to look at.

In addition to the more obvious things make sure the blue filter works and look carefully while shining a flashlight from different directions through the head and eyepieces individually to check for any signs of cloudiness, delamination, or deterioration of the metallization in the beam splitter.

[krame]

Yup, bought some slides right after.

In addition to the more obvious things

Humor me, what are the obvious things?

make sure the blue filter works

Is this just a matter of turning it on and it being blue?

shining a flashlight from different directions through the head and eyepieces

Pulling out eyepieces and looking for deficits, and is looking into the head mean down through the tubes that the eyepieces sit in?

Do I need to take off the objectives and look for anything specific?

Thanks again!

[MicroBob]

Hi,
I use more than one microscope and only one of them with a trino tube. My micro camera is a Nikon 1J5 with standard objective coupled to an eyepiece as one unit. I just plunge this into on of the bino ports and take my photos. I have a better camera and the parts to make it a better micro camera, but the Nikon poses so few limitations that I never got around to fully assemble the improved solution.

Bob

[hans]

Humor me, what are the obvious things?

Just all the mechanical stuff, that everything operates smoothly throughout the full range with minimal backlash. In particular, there should be almost no perceptible backlash in the fine focus -- it should reverse direction as soon as you start turning the knob the other way. Excessive backlash in the fine focus is annoying in use. May not be a serious problem but could require a fair amount of disassembly to clean/relubricate stuff.

Is this just a matter of turning it on and it being blue?

The little knob labelled "blue" should swing a pale blue filter into the light path, making the yellowish halogen light more white. The plastic part inside that holds the filter gets brittle with heat/age and is sometimes broken or missing.

Pulling out eyepieces and looking for deficits, and is looking into the head mean down through the tubes that the eyepieces sit in?

Yeah, take the head off and shine a flashlight in the bottom at a bit of an angle while looking down the empty eye tubes. Also check the tube lens on the bottom of the head for damage while the head is off.

Do I need to take off the objectives and look for anything specific?

I would take them off to get a good look at the lenses at both ends and check for obvious damage.

[krame]

Great, thanks again!

[krame]

Just received the microscope! I've looked it over and to the best of my limited knowledge, it seems to be in working condition! The light works, the blue filter works, the ND works, and the diaphragm works!

I didn't realize it, but all of the objectives are infinity plan achros. I have two additional ports for objectives. How hard would it be to get a 60X for this?

I have slides coming tomorrow for something to look at, and I'm very happy so far.

When I figure out how to attach pictures, I'll start a thread in the my microscope section!

Thanks again everyone!

[dtsh]

Just received the microscope! I've looked it over and to the best of my limited knowledge, it seems to be in working condition! The light works, the blue filter works, the ND works, and the diaphragm works!

I didn't realize it, but all of the objectives are infinity plan achros. I have two additional ports for objectives. How hard would it be to get a 60X for this?

I have slides coming tomorrow for something to look at, and I'm very happy so far.

When I figure out how to attach pictures, I'll start a thread in the my microscope section!

Thanks again everyone!

I'm not sure there was a 60x objective made for the 400 series. IMO, the lack of variety is the only downside for the series in that it doesn't have the enormous variety as compared to some other platforms. There are other options out there, but near as I can tell they can be quite uncommon, partly due to many of them still being in service.

It might be possible that objectives from other vendors using a 45mm infinity sysytem could be used, I don't know. I wouldn't expect them to be parfocal though.

My advice, which is what was told to me not so long ago and I have found it to be useful, is instead of trying to add a variety of components onto one microscope, work toward having a stand dedicated to the purpose you want to achieve. For example, swapping between brightfield and phase contrast objectives and condensers is time consuming and greatly increases the opportunity for dirt and damage to occur, so it's best to just have two separate stands, each dedicated to the function. I bought mine with the brightfield and with phase contrast, which was foolish as the plan achros now sit in a box untouched. Were I a smart man, I should have bought another Microstar IV and put them on it, but alas, I have slipped into madness with the AO 10 series (a madness I am enjoying)

There's still a lot you can do with filters, analyzers, etc, especially considering that it's an infinity system.

With a little fabrication one can do a lot on it, such as this: viewtopic.php?f=12&t=10551

[krame]

That's fair!

So obviously there isn't an easily available alternative brand that plays nicely. Oh well. I did a 3 second search and like you said, no 60x, but they do make 50x. That would be close enough.

I should probably actually just use the scope first before looking for other stuff.

.... what about racing stripes? I heard that you can get better DOF with the right color of racing stripes. Or maybe a spoiler.

[MicroBob]

.... what about racing stripes? I heard that you can get better DOF with the right color of racing stripes. Or maybe a spoiler.

There is an online shop for every need: https://etel-tuning.com/

[krame]

Oh. My. God. Yes.

[hans]

Good to hear it is working out, looked pretty clean in the photos in the listing. You could get the 4X and 100X for starters to fill out the nosepiece, those came standard on most configurations, I think, and should not be too difficult to find or expensive. The 4X is nice for finding stuff in water samples and is handled already by the illumination system -- no need to have the swing-in auxiliary lens under the condenser.