New vs Vintage..

[Joe Henry]

Under equal conditions which will give me better images; an old scope like a B&L from the 30-40's or a $200.00 new scope by Amscope? Thanks..Joe.

[BramHuntingNematodes]

If you're talking about a lab scope from the 30s new lenses will probably give a higher contrast wider image than ones made eighty years ago. There were some very fine lenses made for research scopes then that are exceptional, but finding and using these is not always straightforward.

[Joe Henry]

So the 200.00 Amscope will have better optics than these old timers unless its a research level scope? Thanks for the reply

[BramHuntingNematodes]

On the other hand those microstars will blow a 200$ am scope out the window

[BramHuntingNematodes]

So the 200.00 Amscope will have better optics than these old timers unless its a research level scope? Thanks for the reply

Yeah I would say so. The quality of the stand, on the other hand, is going to go to the old one unless it's been beat all to hell.

[Joe Henry]

Got it, thanks for the replies.

[Dubious]

Why go back 80 years? Vintage scopes from 40 years ago can have pretty good optics. And if you are buying new Amscope, I would wait for a sale and spend more like $300-400 for something with a more complete frame.

[apochronaut]

That depends on what aspects of the image you value most. After the second W.W., there was a fairly quick revolution in the ability to broaden the f.o.v., flatten the field and with the use of coatings, improve contrast. Resolution and colour correction have been excellent since before the first w.w. and major improvements in those parameters didn't take a leap until computer ray tracing became ubiquitous, however average grade Chinese optics lag behind those of the major manufacturers. Q.C. is a big part of that and the fact that a certain amount of the designs are copies of older designs no longer used by the majors and China squeezes every last drop out of a design.
Sooo. If you were to gravitate towards a microscope made in the 1960's or 1970's, you would have the best of both world's. You would have resolution and colour correction about as good as all but the best ( and thus more expensive) Chinese designs plus a f.o.v., planarity and contrast close to being up to a par with very modern scopes. In most cases the build quality of an older scope blows that of a cheaper modern one through the floor.
For not too much you can land a Dynazoom or Balplan from B & L or a series 10, 20, 100,110 ,120 or 410 from AO . Complete ones are getting a little thin, so they are not anymore off the shelf microscopes but they are out there still and accsessories to improve them a bit also still around. Sometimes a bit of a search is necessary and patience.

[MicroBob]

I think at 200$ you just won't get these developments that were made after WW2. You will get a cheaply made version of what was good enough before the war. Many active amateurs have a few spare microscopes in the cuboard which they will be willig to sell on. Perhaps you might post a "wanted" - thread in this forum and tell where you live.

[PeteM]

It would be useful to find somewhere you can actually try a few microscopes. Stereo for viewing insects I believe, from an earlier post?

$150 is about the cheapest you can get a usable new scope - as suggested earlier. And those models with just a couple of magnifications will be more reliable than the zoom ones starting around $200. You might also find one of these newer Chinese scopes, recently used for something like home-schooling, under $100.

A good used stereo microscope from around the 1970's onward can have more working distance, a wider field of view, better construction, and (if in good shape) better optics. You might might find one locally under $200. With shipping, tax, etc. on Ebay you might have to be patient or willing to spend a bit more. As others have said before, there are a couple dozen decent models to consider -- and condition (alignment, clean optics, good focus, etc.) trumps any particular name brand and model.

[apochronaut]

The poster didn't question various poster's assumptions of his needs in subsequent posts, so perhaps not a stereo in this case?
However if it is a stereo he is looking for, Cycloptics can often be had for 200.00 or less and I doubt there is a new stereo for under 400.00 that could match it's performance and potential for excellent transmitted and vertical illumination.

[AntoniScott]

I agree with Dubious. Why go back 80 years ? I'd take a 30-40 year old Olympus in good condition over a new $200 microscope anyday.
Don't get me wrong, there must be good new microscopes from China. The problem is you don't know who is making cheap optics and who is making good optics.

I have an old ( if you think 30 years is old) long barrel Olympus BH2 and CH2 and an even older short barrel Bristoline. All have superb optics. I paid a fortune for an excellent condition long barrel Olympus 60x DPlan objective to add to my collection and was impressed with the optical quality. Circumstances necessitated that I purchase a second 60x objective for different uses and purchased a less expensive Chinese made objective. It gave me an opportunity to do a side by side optical quality comparison by putting both 60x objectives on the same turret and viewing the same subject under the same lightng conditions. It was clear to me that the Olympus 60x was superior in image quality. I would guess that other magnification objectives would suffer from similar optical quality issues comapred to similar Olympus versions.

This comparison gives me the confidence to claim that Vintage ( 30 year old Brand name) objetives are better than new inexpensive Chinese equivalents.

[Jemiez]

check out my vintage microscopy.

It is very different from the aviation aerospace microscope.

[GerryR]

That looks like a vintage sextant (telescope) not a microscope!

[perrywespa]

Nice transit!