Looking for help on buying a microscope.

[snuwagi]

Hi all,

I'm reaching out to you for your opinion on a microscope I intend to purchase. I have a narrow inter pupillary distance and intended to buy the Amscope T720Q but the scopes IPD is 55-75mm(mine is 52).

A local dealer is offering a "new" old stock scope with the same specs for roughly the same price as the T720Q.

Eyepieces- Olympus eyepiece, GSWH 10x/22 (I thought this was strange because these are for a stereo microscope)

Head -Leica 551505 trinocular ( made in ~2002)

Stand - Leica Dmls 020-518.500( made in ~1996)

Objectives - Carl Zeiss Jena GF Plan Achromat objectives 4x, 10x, 40x (made in ~1960)

Additional info- Halogen illumination, comes with Na1.25 condenser.

https://imgur.com/3JP9G6v

https://imgur.com/hOTtPom

How do you think this microscope would compare to the Amscope T720Q? The unit has been serviced by the technician. They are asking $1475 CAD. for the unit. What do you think of this purchase?

Thank you so much for your time.

[PeteM]

The DMLS is a solid stand (somewhat more robust than the Amscope), but the eyepieces and objectives aren't a good match. It's also priced fairly high, given those somewhat mismatched objectives and eyepieces.

There were two versions of the DMLS. The earlier version with "Delta" optics and a later version with "HC" optics. Since corrections are present in the objectives AND the tube lens AND the eyepieces of these Leica scopes, you want everything of the same generation. The one thing to watch with the DMLS is that the power supplies are often bad. These can be replaced with modern switching supplies if you're handy.

In checking the interpupillary distance markings of a few heads, most only went down to 55mm, including a similar-looking Leica HC trinocular head to the one you posted an image for. You may want to double-check that the dealer's version actually goes down to 52mm - and if it does, arrange for a Leica stand that's properly configured with a compatible head, objectives (ideally N Plan or better, though C Plan or Hi Plan are also OK with narrower fields of view). It could be that the head really only goes to 55mm, but those stereo eyepieces are wide enough for you to feel reasonably comfortable for a brief period of time?

An alternative to consider is to get a good camera and monitor and do your viewing, composing, and photography through a monitor. You could likely have an excellent setup for around the same price. This opens up a world of options scope-wise.

Someone else may know of a head that actually goes down to 52mm interpupillary distance. If so, that might refine your search for a good scope, that's properly configured.

[Scarodactyl]

I believe those aus jena objectives are not from the 60s. They look to be cf250s from towards the end of the soviet era. They should be fine with the olympus eyepieces but they expect a neutral 250mm tube lens so I am not 100% sure how they would work with the leica head. The Jena cf250 objectives have a pretty good reputation but I have not tried them.
It probably works OK but I would not pay that much for a mismatched scope like that unless it had been lovingly assembled by an enthusiast. Frankenscopes can sometimes be great but there are a lot of ways to connect microscope components together. You could do a lot better with a used labophot/optiphot or a bh2 or similar.

[snuwagi]

Thank you for your timely and insightful replies,

The DMLS is a solid stand (somewhat more robust than the Amscope), but the eyepieces and objectives aren't a good match. It's also priced fairly high, given those somewhat mismatched objectives and eyepieces.
It could be that the head really only goes to 55mm, but those stereo eyepieces are wide enough for you to feel reasonably comfortable for a brief period of time?

I feel the dealer is being sort of dubious if this is the case. Between the price, head, objectives & eyepieces and vague information given about the unit initially, I think I'll decline this offer.

An alternative to consider is to get a good camera and monitor and do your viewing, composing, and photography through a monitor. You could likely have an excellent setup for around the same price. This opens up a world of options scope-wise.

I have purchased an OMAX camera 10mp usb 3.0, additionally I have an IPS 144 hz monitor. I'm open to any scope recommendations.

I believe those aus jena objectives are not from the 60s. They look to be cf250s from towards the end of the soviet era. They should be fine with the olympus eyepieces but they expect a neutral 250mm tube lens so I am not 100% sure how they would work with the leica head. The Jena cf250 objectives have a pretty good reputation but I have not tried them.
It probably works OK but I would not pay that much for a mismatched scope like that unless it had been lovingly assembled by an enthusiast. Frankenscopes can sometimes be great but there are a lot of ways to connect microscope components together. You could do a lot better with a used labophot/optiphot or a bh2 or similar.

Thank you for this correction, according to what I can find online the CF250 is specifically designed for use with phase contrast microscopy techniques, which I am not doing. I'm trained in basic microscopy so buying used is not what I intended. I was putting faith in this deal/technician.

As I'm doing basic soil biological analysis, working with mostly 40x, my intention was to buy a low-end Chinese made plan achromatic trinocular scope. Some pitfalls I've accoutered are the narrow interpapillary distance, as well as living in Canada.

What would you recommend in terms of new scopes?

Thank you

[Scarodactyl]

Cf250 objectives were not designed for phase contrast in particular. They are an entire system of infinity objectives including various biological and metallurgical options.
I'm really not familiar with new scopes in that price range unfortunately. In this bracket used is such better bang for buck it's hard to recommend anything else. The ipd is another issue of course, I'd guess siedentoph heads would do best on that front but I haven't ever pushed it that far.

[snuwagi]

I am open to used scope recommendations, my only concern is I have no technical ability to service/clean/fix a used scope. Thanks.

[Phill Brown]

Not something I would consider at half the price.
It would need not to be pick and mix at least.
Good pre loved will be the way to go.
A new microscope will also need cleaning and servicing and be a disappointing fraction of the new value after opening the box.
Something more realistically priced for what it is will turn up.

[PeteM]

In checking a few more microscope heads that were out and easily accessible, I found an Olympus BX (infinity) ergo head at 50mm, a Nikon finite ergo trinocular head at 52mm, an Optika trinocular at 52.6mm, a Zeiss Standard trinocular at 55mm, a Leica HC trinocular at 55mm, and an Olympus finite "Superwide" trinocular at 57mm.

$1500 to $2000 US could likely get you an Olympus BX40 nicely equipped. Something like the Nikon Labophot/Optiphot that Stephen recommended might be half or less that - just be sure it has a good fine focus. There may be Olympus BH2 heads that will go as low as 52mm interpupillary distance, but the "Superwide" is the only one I have out at the moment. All those are excellent scopes, with the BX series being the most modern.

What do you want to look at? That can influence the recommendation of a "best" scope and its optics.

[apochronaut]

How can you have a "new old stock" microscope comprised of disparate parts from several mfg.? Right off the bat , the Leica stand has a 200mm reference or focal length and Jena used 250mm, so even if the Olympus eyepieces managed to correct or compensate for the correction differences between the Leica and Jena objectives, you are still stuck with having to purchase Jena objectives if you want to make any objective changes or additions.
I played around with infinity corrected Jena stuff in the past and the objectives were not compatible with anything else I had plus they were not R.M.S. The ones I had were an odd 19mm or something like that and needed adapters.
Sounds like a hodge podge for a lot of money.

[PeteM]

I see now that you want this to look at soil structure. Perhaps you can educate us on the requirements while we help on the microscope end?

I've had a few requests from parents who wanted to do soil biology with their kids. There were pretty vague requirements for seeing things from soil structure and nematodes, through fungi, to bacteria. For a lot of that, a good stereo microscope would be handy. They also said a minimum of 400x, though that is pretty marginal for seeing bacteria and possibly some fungal spores. It's also not clear (to me) what is expected in seeing bacteria. Just want to be sure they're there? Count 'em? ID different types (pretty hard to do with brightfield microscopy and unstained specimens).

Another question is if you want to take this scope into the field?

It might be that your budget would be best spent with most going to a good stereo microscope and then a relatively affordable and less-used scope when you want to observe bacteria??

[Scarodactyl]

I played around with infinity corrected Jena stuff in the past and the objectives were not compatible with anything else I had plus they were not R.M.S. The ones I had were an odd 19mm or something like that and needed adapters.
Sounds like a hodge podge for a lot of money.

The 19mm ones are definitely not compatible and require strong compensations. They are different from the cf250 though they have similar styling.

[charlie g]

Hi all, OP ..as has been already asked: 'what type of basic soil biology' are your plans for microscopy application?

There is so much excitement with the soil interactions/ communications between plants, fungi, bacteria in the rhizosphere /rhizobiome ...for water cycles/ mineral cycles/ nutrient sharing/ community sharing ( rather than model of: the struggles and violence in gardens...most interactions in native/ natural assemblages are collaborative interactions...community support interactions...ahh but then human global commerce mashed things up with global invasive species havoc..also an important use for biologic soil microscopy).

Please inform us with what sort of basic soil biology you intend with a microscope.

I sense phase contrast important for your microscope. I ask when have you ever used a binocular microscope? Why not pick an excellent phase contrast stand that has trinocular head...collect images for your research..use monocular observation...or computer screen observation for live time soil biology?

Your intended basic soil biology need for a microscope is important to the scope you need. Phase contrast quality used setup..with trinocular head for image captures..and you use computer screen..or monocular observations with your dominant eye for real time microscopy...this sure sounds like a path for soil biology microscopy. all the best, charlie g.

[snuwagi]

Thank you all for reaching out with your knowledge, I greatly appreciate it.

I see now that you want this to look at soil structure. Perhaps you can educate us on the requirements while we help on the microscope end?

I've had a few requests from parents who wanted to do soil biology with their kids. There were pretty vague requirements for seeing things from soil structure and nematodes, through fungi, to bacteria. For a lot of that, a good stereo microscope would be handy. They also said a minimum of 400x, though that is pretty marginal for seeing bacteria and possibly some fungal spores. It's also not clear (to me) what is expected in seeing bacteria. Just want to be sure they're there? Count 'em? ID different types (pretty hard to do with brightfield microscopy and unstained specimens).

Another question is if you want to take this scope into the field?

It might be that your budget would be best spent with most going to a good stereo microscope and then a relatively affordable and less-used scope when you want to observe bacteria??

Hello Pete,

I am a student of regenerative agriculture & conservation. We don't particularly look at the geological structure of soil i.e. sand ,silts and clays at the microscopic scale. I will specifically be doing live biological counts, based on morphology/functional groups and not species or genus, of bacteria(cocci, bacillus, ect*), fungal hyphae, protozoa, and nematodes. I believe this what people are coming to you about, most of the work is done under the 40x objective because we are simply looking at basic morphology!

My biggest challenge is IDing nematodes, high image quality is needed to easily view their mouth organs which determines functional group.


I need something with these minimal specs, as requested by my school. no field work will be conducted.

Minimum Microscope Specification

Total magnification: 40X-100X-400X

Eyepieces: wide field WF10X

Objective: achromatic DIN 4X, 10X, 40X(S) or better

Viewing head: 30-45 degrees inclined, 360 degrees swiveling trinocular

Sliding adjustable interpupillary distance: (50mm ~ 75mm)

Ocular diopter: adjustable on one or both eye tubes

Nosepiece: revolving quadruple

Stage: mechanical double layer size: (115mm x125mm)

Stage x-y stroke (travel range): (70mm x30mm)

Condenser and diaphragm: NA1.25 adjustable Abbe condenser with iris diaphragm

Transmitted (lower) illuminator: at least 3 Watt LED light, intensity
adjustable, Koehler.

Focus adjustment: Coaxial coarse and fine knobs on both sides


Here are a few scopes I was considering ordering this week because I'm in a pinch at this time with a narrowing time constraint.

One of the only scopes I can find within Canada:
https://www.coleparmer.ca/i/cole-parmer ... ac/7890404


https://microscopecentral.com/products/ ... =707319261



Thanks for your time.

[snuwagi]

Hi all, OP ..as has been already asked: 'what type of basic soil biology' are your plans for microscopy application?

There is so much excitement with the soil interactions/ communications between plants, fungi, bacteria in the rhizosphere /rhizobiome ...for water cycles/ mineral cycles/ nutrient sharing/ community sharing ( rather than model of: the struggles and violence in gardens...most interactions in native/ natural assemblages are collaborative interactions...community support interactions...ahh but then human global commerce mashed things up with global invasive species havoc..also an important use for biologic soil microscopy).

Please inform us with what sort of basic soil biology you intend with a microscope.

I sense phase contrast important for your microscope. I ask when have you ever used a binocular microscope? Why not pick an excellent phase contrast stand that has trinocular head...collect images for your research..use monocular observation...or computer screen observation for live time soil biology?

Your intended basic soil biology need for a microscope is important to the scope you need. Phase contrast quality used setup..with trinocular head for image captures..and you use computer screen..or monocular observations with your dominant eye for real time microscopy...this sure sounds like a path for soil biology microscopy. all the best, charlie g.

Hi Charlie,

Very interesting indeed, I'm glad to hear there is excitement. Phase contrast is not needed for my particular avenue of soil microscopy. I am trained in basic microscopy, but I have very little knowledge on servicing or cleaning microscopes.

Thanks

[DickensRyan]

Hi all, OP ..as has been already asked: 'what type of basic soil biology' are your plans for microscopy application?

There is so much excitement with the soil interactions/ communications between plants, fungi, bacteria in the rhizosphere /rhizobiome ...for water cycles/ mineral cycles/ nutrient sharing/ community sharing ( rather than model of: the struggles and violence in gardens...most interactions in native/ natural assemblages are collaborative interactions...community support interactions...ahh but then human global commerce mashed things up with global invasive species havoc..also an important use for biologic soil microscopy).We can read an interesting study on biology assignment help as statistics show that modern students enjoy using various services to complete their tasks.

Please inform us with what sort of basic soil biology you intend with a microscope.

I sense phase contrast important for your microscope. I ask when have you ever used a binocular microscope? Why not pick an excellent phase contrast stand that has trinocular head...collect images for your research..use monocular observation...or computer screen observation for live time soil biology?

Your intended basic soil biology need for a microscope is important to the scope you need. Phase contrast quality used setup..with trinocular head for image captures..and you use computer screen..or monocular observations with your dominant eye for real time microscopy...this sure sounds like a path for soil biology microscopy. all the best, charlie g.

Excuse me for my curiosity, but could you highlight how the methodology using a microscope with phase contrast is aimed at studying interlevel interactions in soil? I'm interested in the details of data collection and analysis, especially how the use of a trinocular head affects the quality of obtained images and the accuracy of research. Also, could you please elaborate on the advantages of this method compared to alternative approaches to studying soil structure? I'm very grateful for your time!

[BramHuntingNematodes]

Well nematodes are pretty transparent so phase can help you find them or look at stuff like their stylet bulb a little better but morphological if of nematodes is p hard but phase is good for lots of stuff in soil like bacteria shapes even but you are able to peer into transparent things and see the outlines of organs or organelles.

My preferred triocular microscope haas a switch that changes from eyepiece to camera. This way either mode receives as much light as possible. You could also try to arrange the light intensity and camera settings for simultaneously viewing through eyepieces and recording-- I havent heard that triocular setups of either type degrade image quality much, but with a switching system one can expect the fewest number of optical elements to introduce noise or otherwise degrade the image, moreso than binocular microscopes which need prisms to direct the image. Of course, I got plenty of monocular scopes, some of very high quality and all obtained cheaply. If you always rely on the camera these are the best of all.