difference in quality of Dissecting scope?

[microscopeboi]

Hello,

I recently starting working in a research lab as an undergrad and have worked with some pretty impressive dissecting scopes such as the nikon SNZ 1500. I perused ebay and found that they are like 5k on a good deal. My budget is more in the <$500. I want something that can give me anywhere from 80-100x zoom with a max of like 160-200x if I have a 'lens magnifier' on. (im not really sure what to call it but its like a thing that goes onto where the objectives are on a compound scope that adds 2x magnification).

I have found a decent looking amscope model for like 360 + 40 for the magnifier which is all well and good but I want to know, before i pull the trigger on a amscope scope, how large of a quality difference exists in dissecting scopes? I know for compound light microscopes there are many important things specified on the objectives like NA, plan, apo etc. but what is a good measure of quality for a dissecting scope?

I want very sharp images, im going for max resolution (if thats a thing with these scopes)

[PeteM]

You might search the archives - the question has been asked and answered before.

Compared to the AmScope a better stereo microscope will likely have more working distance, a wider field of view, more robust mechanical construction, flat field achromat, plan achromat, or plan apo objectives, a higher numerical aperture, a wider zoom range, parfocality throughout the zoom, more options for customization, etc.

The high end magnification ranges you're hoping for will end up in "empty magnification" for all but the most expensive optics. IMO, once you get beyond about 80x you might be better switching to a compound microscope for better resolution at higher magnification. The benefits of a 3D stereo image and longer working distance begin to disappear as magnification increases, while the price of optics with a high enough numerical aperture - especially if corrected for chromatic aberrations and flat fields - begin to rise almost exponentially.

[zzffnn]

I second what PeteM said.

For <$500 and good resolution/ sharpness at >80x total magnification, you are much better off buying a compound scope.

Amscope plan 4x and plan 10x achromat objectives are pretty decent for the price.

A used Bausch & Lomb Steremzoom 7 can be found for less than $500 in good shape, but even with 2x Barlow lens, above 80x you still won’t get high resolution.

Use a compound scope and do focus stacking, if you want true high resolution.

[dtsh]

Hello,
I want something that can give me anywhere from 80-100x zoom with a max of like 160-200x if I have a 'lens magnifier' on. (im not really sure what to call it but its like a thing that goes onto where the objectives are on a compound scope that adds 2x magnification).

I believe the common term for that is a barlow.

I have found a decent looking amscope model for like 360 + 40 for the magnifier which is all well and good but I want to know, before i pull the trigger on a amscope scope, how large of a quality difference exists in dissecting scopes? I know for compound light microscopes there are many important things specified on the objectives like NA, plan, apo etc. but what is a good measure of quality for a dissecting scope?

I want very sharp images, im going for max resolution (if thats a thing with these scopes)

My experience here is limited, but the differences between a stereo and a compound microscope are efffectively the same in this regard; the choices in type of glass, coatings, and the design all contribute to the fnal image. For example, my stereo microscope's objective is an apochromat. Mine is a microscope from the past, so doesn't compete with today's high-end scopes in other regards. Assuming they have a return policy that allows you enough time to test it and return it without significant loss, might be worth trying. The Chinese can make excellent instruments, but I suspect at that price point it won't compare favorably to a high-end model.

[Phill Brown]

For high magnification observation it's a compound.
Unless using a micromanipulator the high magnification may not be useful.

[Scarodactyl]

A basic amscope won't compete with an smz1500, though they do sell pretty good copies of the smz line (for pretty high prices). Something like a used smz-u, olynpus szh/szh10 or similar would be in a similar tier.