Wild M8 vs Wild MZ3

[erikwetterskog]

Since I maxed out on compound microscopes, I’m now contemplating buying a stereo microscope.

I am choosing between a Wild M8 and a Wild M3Z. They are probably both in nice condition and fully functional.

Can somebody tell me the difference between these two scopes? I’m pretty clueless when it comes to stereoscopic microscopes. Which one would you get?

I tried a M3Z at the natural history museum today, and it was very nice. Bright and crispy, but I guess this is in part due to the choice of illumination.

The Wild M8 is a bit less expensive than the M3Z, they’re sold by the same dealer.

[PeteM]

Erik, The M8 has a wider zoom range and is generally considered more valuable. However, both are excellent stereo microscopes. Your choice probably comes down to the quality of objective that is present, the condition, and perhaps extra features such as a transilluminated stage. Given that a presumed knowledgeable dealer is selling the scopes, it could be the M3Z has better optics or condition.

[Scarodactyl]

The m8 is a little higher tier than the m3z optically but they're both very solid. Especially if the m3z has a normal 1x and not a plan 1x the m8 will definitely outperform it in a very noticeable way. The m3z does have more optional accessories though, including the s stand and even a native planapo 1x objective (unfortunately quite rare). The m3z has Wild's late 80s proprietary track stand vs the more universal 25mm post an M8 takes. All depends on how they're set up in the end and what your needs are.

[erikwetterskog]

Wow thanks! I’m not fully sure how they are equipped. Will find out.

The dealer/repairman says that the Wild system is very flexible and stuff can be interchanged between bodies of various vintages. He also praises the mechanical construction of both scopes.

Is the 1x objective the standard? Is it common to use more than one objective?

[PeteM]

1x is standard and all that many ever need. The objective may be an achromat, a better and desirable plan achromat, or possibly even better plan apo. There's usually a tradeoff between working distance and resolution. A Plan Achromat might be the sweet spot in terms of excellent performance at reasonable cost from a dealer.

If you need an extra long working distance, there are fractional objectives (e.g., .63x, .5x, etc.). If you need still higher magnification, there are 1.5x, etc., up to 2x. It sounds like you might be able to try them both out?

[Rorschach]

Which one did the OP end up getting?

Had I seen this topic in time, I would have said the same thing as the above posters: both scopes are very good choices and a lot would depend on what they are equipped with, plus condition of optics. Those things being equal, can't go wrong with either

[erikwetterskog]

Hello again,

Both me and the seller fell asleep at the wheel, but picked up the conversation today.

It appears that he did not have a suitable lens for the M8. Now he offered me a M3B in very nice condition. I have nothing against hopping between different magnifications, so I think I will go with this one. Apparently, the microscope is in excellent condition and comes with the stand but lamp in the base. It will cost me 6500 SEK which is roughly equivalent to $600. There is also the M3Z which has darkfield, and a base with illumination and that is 9500:-. I'm guessing I will use it mainly with gooseneck LEDs, so I'm thinking about choosing the cheaper option. I think there is some extras too.

I guess it's the simplest lens in the scope, so I am assuming an achromat. He is in another part of the country so cannot test the scopes unfortunately. I'm mostly going to use the scope for prep work and insects and goofing around.

Anyone can weigh in? The M3B is a WILD and thus older than the M3Z which is a LEICA WILD. I'll get pictures on Monday.

Here is the link to the Swedish craigslist: https://www.blocket.se/annons/goteborg/ ... 1203702582

[erikwetterskog]

The other option would be to buy the M8-stand and the Plan 1x lens seperately. But I don't know the asking price for the lens-less stand.

There are two lenses at %Bay now at $250-300 + shipping and taxes. What is a reasonable price?

[Scarodactyl]

Don't get an M3b imo unless it is quite cheap. Being a step mag isn't bad but only having 3 settings is a bit of a bummer vs 5 on the m3c or continuous on the m3z, the C is a basically strictly better with no optical downside, the m3z is somewhat nicer to use even if the zoom probably has some optical cost and the Leica equivalent of the m3c (ms5) is often pretty inexpensive.

[Rorschach]

I agree with Scaro. Plus the darkfield base is a big advantage to have as an option, even if you mostly use gooseneck LEDs. Darkfield really improves things on a number of different subjects, compared to reflected light or transmitted brightfield. In fact, darkfield on a stereo is almost my go-to light.

[erikwetterskog]

It leans towards the m3z then!

If you only knew how much stuff I spent on this hobby the last few years. $$$

[erikwetterskog]

I ended up getting the M3Z with a darkfield base and trinocular head.

I will post some pictures later . Thanks for your advice. I figure I can always upgrade to a better objective lens later if I find one for good price.

[Scarodactyl]

The trinocular addon is quite valuable in its own right. You did well.

[jfiresto]

The Craigslist photo looks to me a like a dual-iris diaphragm (I can not see a third tube) but I do not have the brochures near me to check.

[erikwetterskog]

Yes you’re right. He switched out the tube to a trinocular tube for me! I’m really happy about this, it’s not that straightforward to find. I figure it will be easier to find a better lens later, when the opportunity presents itself.

Does anyone know what a typical price and working distance is for the native plan apo?

I’m hoping to have it with me next week.

[Rorschach]

I think you might be able to find a Pl Apo for the Wild probably for around 300-400 euros, depending on condition. At least if you have time to wait on deals. If in a hurry, might cost double that. If I recall correctly, the WD for a 1x Pl Apo is around 40-50mm.

[jfiresto]

Yes you’re right. He switched out the tube to a trinocular tube for me! I’m really happy about this, it’s not that straightforward to find....

Excellent. Have a lot fun with the coming microscope!

[erikwetterskog]

Here it is!



https://imgur.com/a/v749xGr

I'm really about the darkfield base, adds an extra dimension to the experience. Very useful to check for dust as well in your prep.

Now I'm wondering about the trinocular tube, how do I adapt a M43 camera to it? The camera port is much smaller than what I have seen before.

[Rorschach]

Here it is!



https://imgur.com/a/v749xGr

I'm really about the darkfield base, adds an extra dimension to the experience. Very useful to check for dust as well in your prep.

Now I'm wondering about the trinocular tube, how do I adapt a M43 camera to it? The camera port is much smaller than what I have seen before.

Here you can see the original Wild parts that would be needed to put any DSLR on it. In this case they are on a phototubus attachment that goes between the optics body and the binocular but the same parts go on the trinocular that you have: https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/ ... hp?t=39245

By the way, you can look for a S-Type carrier for your M3Z, which enables you to displace the scope body so that only left or right optics path is used. This will enable you to get rid of parallax and some chromatic aberrations, plus slightly improve resolution (by using the sweet spot of the main objective. Combine that with a Planapo main objective and you are getting close to a Wild 400-series macroscope in terms of image quality.

[Scarodactyl]

Oh wow, it's an actual trinocular head, not the photo addon. That's a valuable piece of equipment.