Change in Recommendations on New Inexpensive Stereo Microscopes

Gordon Couger

Friday the 13^th, 2008

updated July 1, 2008

My point of view for recommendations has always been and will continue to aimed at the serious amateur microscopist that intends to work with microscope over a long period of time. My personal interest are mostly with  the construction of microscopes, modifying them to do what I want mostly to explore the practical nature of plant life and soil under visible, near Ultra Violet and near Infra Red light  light in the 300 to 1,200 nm sensitive of silicon sensors. Along the journey I have become involved in a great deal more including the physics of light right now I am interested in the nature of the light source

Over time all things in life changes and and we all learn more about the things we work with if we pay any attention at all to what we do and the world around us. As I learn more for the people that use buy and sell and deal with t microscopes and I work with more different microscope myself I have found many of the things I was taught and that I learned on my own have changed.

I formed my opinions during the technology crash of 2000 when microscopes were literally showing up on my doer step without any information where they came from. The scopes from the Pacific Rim at the time were just starting be marketed in the USA.

I am don't use a stereo microscope for photography because the unavoidable built in distortion of viewing an image from an angle that is absolutely necessary for the stereo microscope to work. instead I use normal methods of macro photography that work very well with a digital camera if the camera display is turned upside down the subject moves in the right direction on the LCD or monitor. For magnifications larger than can easily be done with a macro set up I use low malediction's objectives and macro lens with an eyepiece on a variable length compound microscope tube using objective from 1/2x to 20x and  10x eyepiece. With a tube length of 80 mm I get 2.5x total magnification to a theoretical 293x with a 20x objective and 135 mm tube. So far I have  only used it up to 50x as I don't have good enough stand to control the vibration. I discuss this in Micscape in Macro Photography with a Short Tube Microscope.

In retrospect my opinion on Pacific Rim stereo microscopes is out of date and was probably over balanced in favor of older brand name scopes in the first place. To much of it was based on my own bad experiences, my experience with compound microscopes and too much second hand information.

In short I am guilty of comparing apples to oranges[compound to stereo] and I know better than that. I was also gradually finding it more difficult to make my case for used brand name stereo scopes over new imports. I am not incapable of changing my mind and admitting I am wrong but good right cross makes it much clearer in a much shorter time.

My reasons for bias for brand name scopes from the end of WWII to the first scopes that used plastic gears in the 70's are based on several things. When I work on older black scope there is no question in my mind of the superior mechanical quantity, workmanship and fit and finish of the scopes compared with ones made after the early 1970s. I find the the availability of upgrades and attachments and parts for Zeiss, Leitz and AO Spencer out number any other microscopes. The fact there is much less depreciation on a used microscope if you trade it in than a new one. I also feel there is more function and quality for the dollar spent in good used brand name scopes from that era than there is newer scopes.

Of those only the part about deprecation really apply fully to stereo microscopes. While my interest is in black microscopes based on designs by men that learned their art well before Word War II almost all the stereo microscopes came to market during that last years of the scopes I follow near the end of their life when stereo microscopes were just starting their life. In stereo microscopes function for the dollar is not as pronounced as it is for compound black microscopes.  Far a lager part the the qualities I like in the older compound microscopes only exist in a few stereo microscopes. Stereo microscopes are differentials scopes designed for a different time.

After careful reflection I think transfered too much of my experience and reasoning from compound microscopes to stereo microscopes. I was wrong to do that in the first place. They are different tools for different uses. With the exception of a very few stereo microscopes such as the Wild M5 the availability of upgrades ether doesn't exist or possibly is easier to find in new scopes than used ones.

One thing that hasn't changed is unless you are willing to take the risk and duties of a dealer buy from one that sells, services and has experience with how the the scope you are buying should work. This does not rule out Internet and mail order dealers at all. How ever I have yet to find or hear of a store font in a mall or shopping center that has the staff that can tell if microscope is working right or not. I am sure there are some out there but not many that work for store clerks wages. The same is true when saving money ordering from discount dealers that sell all kinds of merchandise. The best you can hope for in them is a money back guarantee and it up to you to decide if the scope works or not.

Buying a microscope is not like buying a wrist watch or TV. This is especially true for the first time buyer. Without know what a microscope can do and what is available it is very difficult to pick the best one for you needs. Looking at a number of different ones at relearns show room  and talking with a knowledgeable and experienced dealer is hard to replace long distance via the internet.

Gordon Couger