PDA

View Full Version here: : Microscopes for serious beginners - which brand?


madbadgalaxyman
28-07-2013, 04:59 PM
This buyer's guide is by MadBadGalaxyMan, sometimes known on Earth as Robert Lang (but wearing his "mad bio-man" outfit)

INTRODUCTION

Some of you have asked me to recommend brands of stereo microscope that are suitable for serious beginners, after hearing that I study "micro-critters" (arthropods, fungi, single-celled animals, mosses, hornworts, etc.) and hearing that I just spent two years looking at soil samples with a stereomicroscope.

Obviously we need reliable instruments with decent optics and reasonably robust mechanical function. But this level of quality is not cheap, even in these days of "made in China" optics;
good quality instruments usually start at around $600-800 US dollars...... so save up your pennies!

To assist you in selecting a good microscope, this document gives my recommendations for reasonable-quality microscopes.

It is important to note that here I am discussing only the low power ( 5x to 90x ) stereo microscopes (binocular microscopes), instruments which are suitable for the very-detailed viewing of insects, plant materials, fungi, single-celled animals (protists/protoctists/amoebae), and the viewing of ongoing dissections of animals. Stereo microscopes are also essential for materials inspection in industry.
At higher magnifications than this, specimens may require extensive preparation and they often have to be mounted on slides, because the depth-of-field (the thickness of the specimen which is in focus) is extremely shallow; you just can't see much of your insect or micro-critter at above 70-90 times magnification, because at higher magnifications only a very thin slice of it is in focus, which is an unnecessary complication for the beginner. In contrast, at low power, you just place the specimen on the stage and then "bingo!" you see it right away.

In this document, I do not discuss or make recommendations regarding high power (100 to 1000 times magnification) compound microscopes.


THE MICROSCOPE MARKET - LET THE BUYER BEWARE!

Unfortunately for the beginner, the microscope market is even more treacherous for the beginner than the telescope market, for the following reasons:

(1) The downward price pressure in the microscope market is even more extreme than for telescopes, yet microscopes are actually very complicated optical systems that need to be made with care. Low Price + Optical Complexity does not lead to the manufacture of consistently good instruments!

(2) Unlike the situation with telescopes, there does not seem to be a very large community of people who discuss microscope optics and who endlessly discuss "which instrument is good and which instrument is not."

(3) Because of this lack of oversight of the microscope market by informed people, buying a cheap microscope is absolutely a lucky dip - some of these instruments may be OK, but some of them are very bad.

For this reason, when I needed a good quality Stereo Microscope a few years ago, I went straight out and bought a Meiji, even though microscopes made by this Japanese company usually start at in excess of $1,000. These are very robust instruments that can put up with intensive use over many years, they have goodish optics, and the chance of getting a lemon is extremely small.

However, since I made my purchase, I have corresponded with several optically-savvy microscopists, I have looked through a good number of good and not-so-good instruments, and I have spent countless hours on the internet investigating the reputation of various brands of microscope. Therefore, I am now able to make some informed comments about which brand of microscope is good, which brand of microscope is fairly good, and which brands should be avoided.


BRANDS OF MICROSCOPE - THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY

Note carefully: all prices are quoted in US dollars, as given on various American websites.


(1) The Cheapies (typical prices: $150 to $450 US dollars)

If you can physically examine one of these cheap Stereo Microscopes and you find that it has decent optics and mechanics, there is nothing wrong with taking a chance and buying it (after all, you won't be spending much money on it!). But, with microscopes, the difficulty of "making a good optic for a low price" is even more severe than for telescopes; so the cheapies vary greatly in quality.
I would never buy a stereo microscope in this price bracket without first having looked through it and used it......there is just too great a risk of ending up with a substandard instrument.
Typical brands: Amscope, Omano


(2) "Upper end" of the cheapies (up to 500 or 600 US dollars)

Typical brands: Swift, National Optical, Accu-Scope, Celestron.
- Swift was once a high-quality brand, but these days they make cheap microscopes to a low price, so it is hard to say what you will get for your money.
- National Optical and Accu-Scope are similar brands to Swift; some of the National Optical and Accu-Scope microscopes are good, but it is very hard to say which ones. This stuff is made in China, and as we all know, the Chinese sometimes do a good job.
- Celestron make a stereo microscope model which is meant for relatively serious users, model 44206 ($550 at amazon.com). This model has had some good reviews, but most of the reviewers were obviously not very knowledgable about optics..... so these reviews have low weight. It is hard to say whether Celestron's reasonable reputation in telescopes carries over into their microscopes; because in this Celestron microscope, a lot of optical and mechanical elements had to be fabricated for a low price. (it is harder to fabricate a good cheap microscope than to fabricate a good cheap telescope)


(3) Mid-range brands which have a good reputation amongst qualified microscopists and which are often bought for serious use in laboratories and commercial enterprises (typical US prices: $600 to $2000 US Dollars)

Brands: Meiji, Motic, Unitron, Lomo
These four are the only "mid-range" brands which are commonly recommended by experienced people. These four are the only microscope brands that I can recommend as being suitable for the really serious enthusiast, given the incredible price competition amongst the the mass-produced made-in-China "cheapies".
Meiji, Motic and Unitron are very popular choices for laboratories, while Lomo are very popular amongst very serious hobbyists.
- Meiji microscopes are made in Japan, and this company is noted for its stringent quality control. You usually can't buy Meiji instruments for less than US $900-$1000, and many of them are in the $1000-2000 range. Meiji do produce a "student model" (the SKT series) for half the price of their other instruments, but I don't know if it is as good as their other instruments.
- Lomo is a Russian brand, and its microscopes [[e.g. Model SF-100 (MBS-10)(MBC-10) costing from about $600 to $700 and up, in the USA ]] are very popular amongst serious hobbyists because of their good optical quality for a very reasonable price.
- Motic is regarded as the best of the Chinese brands, and they are very popular in labs. Motic even do high-end optical fabrication for Zeiss. Motic also make an 'educational' cut-price stereo microscope (the SFC-11 series) but I am not sure if these are as good as their other microscopes. Personally, I wouldn't buy these introductory models, because the zoom models of Motic stereo microscopes (e.g. the SMZ-140 series and the SMZ-168 series) start at a very reasonable $600 to $900 US dollars. Better still, if you have enough cash, my personal choice would be to get their K-400 or K-500 or K-700 series microscopes (these cost $1000 and more).
- Unitron stereo microscopes can be bought for about $550 to $1500 US dollars, dependent on model. Unitron's Stereo Microscopes have had an absolutely first-rate reputation over several decades, but I have not been able to find a good number of expert opinions about the quality of their current (most recent) range of microscopes.

Mad bio-man's commentary about quality brands: (added in an edit)
Competition from "half-price, no-name, re-branded, Chinese" cheapies that at least look identical to the famous Name-Brand microscopes.....has meant that the reputable manufacturers like Unitron have been forced to greatly cut their prices, especially at the bottom end of their microscope range; but has quality suffered?? (I hope not)
Even Meiji and Leica, which were thought of as "rock-solid high-quality mid-to-top-end" Brands have had to release cheaper models or reduce prices on existing models.


(4) "Top of the line" instruments, with very high optical quality (Very expensive!!)

Brands: Olympus, Nikon, Zeiss, and Leica .

I note that Leica now has some microscopes for US$ 500......hmmmmm.....I don't know if I trust these Leicas. This is a brand that used to sell instruments for many thousands of dollars!

madbadgalaxyman
31-07-2013, 10:35 PM
As I have just been shopping for a stereo microscope for my niece, and I was looking at getting a reasonably-good quality instrument at 'the low end of the mid-range'($500-$700 US dollars) for a young science enthusiast, I now have a few more comments about bargain-priced stereo microscopes.

- the first few pages of a "google search" for microscopes always come up with the same two or three 'big' dealers......Don't trust google to find a good cross-section of commercial dealers!......Try much later pages in the google searches, or use other search engines, to find more microscope dealers.

- Some of eyepiece designs used in microscopes are very basic, compared to the ones we are used to in amateur astronomy. This is one way that costs are reduced in these complex multi-element optical instruments.

- The cheapest microscopes in the ranges of some reputable manufacturers, can seem suspiciously cheap. One wonders where they are getting these scopes from.

- Some of the cheaper stereo microscopes in the ranges of reputable manufacturers show evidence of compromises in optical design, e.g. in the Motic model SMZ-140 (about $600-$700 US), the eyepiece design looks rather old-fashioned and perhaps relatively narrow in field. There can be little doubt that the more expensive Motic scopes are better than the Motic SMZ-140, as their optical designs are superior.

- the type of stand/stage that you buy together with the optical assembly, has a big influence on the final price of an instrument; e.g. stands without built-in illumination are cheap, stands with built-in halogen illumination are more expensive, and stands with LED illumination are the most expensive. (Halogens are OK for illuminating specimens, but they are very hot, while LEDs do not have the heat problem). The stand in my Meiji stereomicroscope contains a variable LED to shine on the specimen (reflected light) and another variable LED behind the specimen that can backlight it.....this is ideal, though it does add substantial cost compared to a plain stand with no built-in illumination.

acropolite
31-07-2013, 10:37 PM
Thanks for posting Robert, some useful info there.
I've been looking around for a good second hand microscope for a while now, now I know what brands to look for.

madbadgalaxyman
31-07-2013, 11:03 PM
Phil,

There are a lot of secondhand microscopes on the market, but I get the impression that good numbers of them have copped a lot of abuse.

There are a number of companies that deal in reconditioned microscopes; so these people are a useful source of information as to which of the older models of microscopes are worth buying secondhand.
(There are are a lot of brands that made extremely high quality instruments, but who are no longer in business. There are also a number of brands like Swift who used to produce good instruments but who now produce very cheap instruments instead.)

In the olden days, Leica and Zeiss and Olympus and Nikon and Unitron instruments were extremely expensive but they had an extremely good reputation; people do buy these brands secondhand.....but you would have to either understand the optics/mechanics of microscopes at a good level, or trust someone who has reconditioned one of these instruments, if you want to buy one and be reasonably sure of getting a good secondhand instrument.

I guess if a person is only going to spend $400 on an instrument, then it is probably OK to get one that is just fairly good, but if I was spending two or three times this amount, I would want to be sure that it was very good.

cheers,
Robert

Ric
01-08-2013, 02:22 AM
Thanks Robert for that info.

I've been thinking about a microscope for a while now, your guide has helped a lot.

Cheers

sjastro
01-08-2013, 10:40 AM
Another aspect to be considered is whether the stereo microscope is to be used for visual or imaging purposes.

I've taken a $450 "no brand" stereo microscope and tuned it into an effective imaging system by coupling a Pentax K-R to one of the eyepiece tubes.

I've made fittings that enable various camera/microscope combinations that include the use of barlow lenses, eyepiece projection as well as the prime focus equivalent to telescope imaging systems.
These combinations turn a 20X-40X stereo microscope into an imaging system capable of magnifications in the 60X-460X range.

Given the optics are "average" and rigging telescope parts such as barlow lenses should in theory produce disastrous optical quality, the key to success is the size of the camera sensor. Like many telescope optical systems, the optical quality of a microscope falls away as one gets further away from the optical axis. The sensor of the Pentax X-R is of the right size that the FOV is good enough (and large enough) for imaging.
I've been able to confirm this by imaging a calibrated grid. Apart from being able to calculate the magnification, the image of the grid is distortion free over most of the camera microscope combinations I have tried.

Regards

Steven

madbadgalaxyman
01-08-2013, 11:07 PM
Hi Steven,

As you have so well expressed, if photography is the thing, than even "modest" microscopes can perform very well.

My stereo microscope (it is a Meiji, model EMZ-5TR) is actually a 'trinocular', so it has an extra light path for the camera, in addition to the two light paths for the eyes.
There is a little lever which switches the image away from one of the two eyepieces, vertically up to the camera; this engages a beamsplitter. (I can still view through the right eyepiece/eyetube, even when the image is reaching the camera)

Here is what the optical assembly looks like:

144685

Using this (admittedly rather expensive) instrument, I can also get from 14 through to 90 power through the two eyepieces, using just a pair of 20x eyepieces. The microscope is able to zoom through this magnification range......though, in general, these 'scopes with large zoom ranges tend to be expensive!

Sometimes I change the magnification simply by changing the eyepieces, as one would with a telescope.

Alternatively, it is possible to screw in an auxiliary lens in front of the objective, in order to increase the magnification of the instrument. (I am not too happy with this particular solution; I get better optical results from changing to a different eyepiece)

Best regards,
Robert

sjastro
02-08-2013, 10:16 AM
I've used trinoculars at work for imaging.

A trinocular system makes imaging a snap since the stereo microscope optics are parfocal with the camera set up. What is focused in the eyepiece is focused in the camera.

In my set up I don't have such luxuries, I use the camera's "Live View" for locating and focusing.

Regards

Steven

cometcatcher
04-08-2013, 02:09 PM
Having been socked in by cloud here in Mackay in summer (as most summers are) I though I would get into microscopy as something I could do 24/7. I know you guys are talking about stereo microscopes, I bought a biological microscope, but low power objectives are available for biological microscopes also. This tends to blur the differences between them somewhat.

I bought a 2.5x plan objective for low power observing. With 10x eyepieces the end mag is 25x. 2x objectives are available also. The only thing missing in doing this is a top light source, but something can be rigged up fairly easily.

Mine is of trinocular design, an Omax - one of the cheap Chinese scopes probably the same as Amscope with another label.

If find the mechanical construction to be very good. The objectives are not apo's so like achro refractors there is CA. Apo objectives for microscopes are very expensive!

I also bought some camera adapters for my DSLR and video cameras. In all I've had a lot of fun with it. Definitely worth getting for those rainy nights.

madbadgalaxyman
05-08-2013, 09:55 AM
Sounds like you have a good instrument there.

Maybe this is the start of a new craze..... taking microscopes to Star Parties.

bojan
05-08-2013, 10:31 AM
I found mine on ebay couple of years back, it looks like Nikon (clone?).. Optically and mechanically very good. It came with 0.5x magnification reducer, which is also working as distance extender. It was (I think) ~$150..
Definitely a good buy!
The whole assembly was on home-made(!) stand (quite adequate) which I replaced with wall mount for LCD TV (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/17-37-LCD-LED-TV-Monitor-Wall-Mount-VESA-Bracket-with-Pivot-Swivel-Arms-Tilt-/400354657141?pt=AU_Television_Acces sories&hash=item5d36ff4375).. it is much more practical this way.
I also added white LED strip (wrapped around the lens) for object illumination.

Later, I purchased another one (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/NEW-High-WorkDist-Binocular-Stereo-Microscope-w-Light-/200606003037?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb50caf5d)(for the company I worked for then).
It was also quite good and I used it very often for SMD work in the lab.
However, it has some issues: the lamp was very bad and bulb (built in and spare) burned very quickly, so I replaced the whole illumination (transformer) system with LED torch and adequate regulated power supply.
It was also a bit harder for me to get the image in both eyes simultaneously without rubber cups.
What is good about this particular model is huge working distance (it was designed for dentistry work), so there is plenty of space between microscope lens and object to operate various tools.

sjastro
05-08-2013, 11:36 AM
Another aspect about amateur microscopy is you can be innovative about the lighting system.

I've turned my stereo microscope into a UV microscope. UV microscopes typically cost in the tens of thousands of dollars. Much of the cost is taken up in how the UV light is produced and filtered out before it reaches the detector.

http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/Standardsetup.jpg

In my set up which was designed to image thin or transparent samples, only a few hundred dollars were spent to modify the stereo microscope. The mirror came from a right angle finderscope and the UV filter is nothing more than UV blocking camera filter. The UVA source is a near UV LED torch.
Most of the research went into a finding a dispersion filter that didn't filter out the near UV light.
This tuned out to being an old Olympus camera focusing screen.:)

http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/mysetup.JPG

The system has been successfully tested on imaging luminescent paint specks.

Regards

Steven

AstralTraveller
05-08-2013, 01:34 PM
Years ago the local paper did an article on our astronomy club, complete with a photo of members next to their 10" microscope. (An f/8 newtonian 'microscope' on a fork mount.) :lol:

OzStarGazer
04-06-2014, 11:04 AM
I was thinking of getting into microscopy too, as every time I spend too much time on the balcony at night now I get sick because it is too cold... :(
I have always been interested in biology and microscopy anyway.
Any microscope for beginners (beginners, but not kids) you would recommend now? Possibly digital so I can do imaging too. Stereo is not necessary, as I am fine with mono.
Thanks.

cometcatcher
04-06-2014, 12:11 PM
Have you considered moving to north Queensland. It's still 23C at night here! ;) Only drawback, it's always cloudy. :P

With microscopes, two eyes are so much better than mono. Don't discount a good binoviewing type. Those pre-prepared slide kits are good too. Will keep you busy for hours on a cold night.

OzStarGazer
04-06-2014, 12:18 PM
I have, and I am not joking!
I am just not sure how to move up there with all my stuff, my bird etc. and how to find a place from here.
I was on holiday in North Queensland last year to see how I felt with the weather and I loved it. I loved the smell of tropical weather when I got off the plane. :)
Well, I will keep my eyes open... I just thought of a microscope yesterday. I actually have a tiny one which for its size and price works well. I had a look at a leaf yesterday and it was very nice. But it's really a toy, so yesterday I thought I could upgrade for those chilly nights ahead... :help:(And yes, yesterday and the night before yesterday I spent too much time in front of my balcony with my scope, not even outside, and here I am, sneezing and coughing... So I need more exploring opportunities. :()

cometcatcher
04-06-2014, 06:09 PM
Let me talk you out of ever considering NQ.

1. It's a sauna for 9 months of the year. DSLR cameras don't work properly here unless they are cooled.
2. Along with the sauna there are 1 million mosquitoes per square mm.
3. Everything is more expensive here.
4. The ever ongoing cyclone threat each year. Because of that -
5. Insurance companies have stopped their coverage for this area and the ones that still do, charge 10 times as much as they used to.
6. Snakes. They are everywhere in the heat.
7. It's always cloudy in summer.
8. It never stops raining.
9. Everything goes mouldy, including that nice ED refractor lens.
10. The roads. Due to the constant rain, the roads are full of potholes.

Have I talked you out of it yet? ;)

OzStarGazer
05-06-2014, 10:38 AM
I love hot weather! Hmmm.... I guess I will have to buy a CCD camera? :)



I bought an insect repellant in January and the expiry date is not so close. :)




I have never visited Mackay, but I was in Cairns, and it was MUCH cheaper than here. :D



That's a bit of a problem if I have a heavy dob in my garden. :(



:(



I've got rubber boots. :)



How did you take those nice pics? ;)



It is the same here. :help:



Here too... :(



I will have to use a cab...



I don't think so... :shrug: ;)

OzStarGazer
07-06-2014, 11:29 AM
I've got my microscope... So... after looking online I decided to contact my local Science Centre just in case they have something because I was not sure what to buy. They were very helpful and asked if it was for a child or an adult, and if it was for an adult if this adult had used a microscope before or was a beginner. So I said it was for an adult who had never used a microscope before, and they said they had a good microscope for beginners on sale, the Celestron Micro360. I had a look online and it has better reviews than most microscopes for beginners. The cool factor is that it can be used both at low and high magnifications. It was down to $119 from $269 (269 is a lot, but hey, it is Celestron Australia, and we all know Celestron Australia is not cheap). So I went to the shop today and I liked it, so I bought it.
If I can buy locally I am always happier because if there is a problem I can go there, and the warranty is fully valid (the USA Celestron one unfortunately isn't although at full price I would still prefer to buy from the US). :)
I can't wait to have a look. Any prepared slides you would recommend that I could buy online? They have some cheap ones from China, but they apparently are only for kids microscopes. :( My microscope comes with 8 prepared slides, but I could buy more..
My throat can finally heal a bit from all the cold nights outside... :sadeyes:
My next microscope will be more advanced of course, but I think the one I bought is perfectly fine for a beginner....

PS: By the way, I am currently also waiting for that cheap webcam I mentioned in another thread. Is there an adapter I can buy online so that I can also use it with the microscope? Some webcams come with an adapter, but this doesn't. Well, you can't expect everything for $12.50 incl shipping...

cometcatcher
07-06-2014, 12:23 PM
Congratulations on your new microscope. :) I get my prepared slides from ebay. I get all my microscope supplies from ebay, including camera gear.

OzStarGazer
07-06-2014, 12:35 PM
Thanks, Kevin. I just had a look at some of the prepared slides that came with the scope and I am really impressed! :)

cometcatcher
07-06-2014, 01:44 PM
Glad you're having fun with it! Overcast day here today. Looks like it will be a microscope day here too.

OzStarGazer
07-06-2014, 04:29 PM
Hmm... I am considering pricking my finger to look at some blood. It shouldn't be too painful... :D

Any eBay seller you would recommend for slides?

cometcatcher
07-06-2014, 09:00 PM
Australian Microscopes, OZhut if you want to purchase within Australia. Prepared slides are not cheap.

Here's some of my red stuff in video I took.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zetT2MqeZck

OzStarGazer
08-06-2014, 07:33 AM
Nice! :D I see you have a passion too.
I did have a look at blood through my microscope too yesterday and it was fascinating. :)
I also had a look at slides on eBay and was wondering if I buy them from overseas (for example a serious seller in the US) will there be any problem with customs? I am only asking because I know they are very strict with plants and stuff. There is obviously no danger with slides, but I was wondering if they have any rules with this sort of products? I was thinking of ordering a whole set of 100 slides, so I will be busy this winter.
By the way, concerning the webcam adapter I had an idea yesterday... I grabbed an old webcam I had that somebody had given me (a normal one) and wound a rubber band around its nosepiece, and now it seems to fit the microscope pretty well. I don't think this method would work with a telescope (too much winding), but with a microscope it seems to be fine. :)

cometcatcher
08-06-2014, 01:15 PM
You should be okay with customs and slides. I got my box of 100 from an Australian seller when they were on special though.

Are you going to show us some pics taken through the webcam. ;)

OzStarGazer
08-06-2014, 01:54 PM
Oh, the webcam doesn't work on this computer (it is an old webcam and it doesn't work with Windows 8). I also have another computer though and will have a go next week...

Today I tried a couple of shots with a point-and-shoot camera. I just tried 1 setting for these shots and it was not ideal (the outer parts are blurred), but I think if I play around with the settings a point-and-shoot camera isn't that bad either.
The lenses must be cleaned a bit too as there is obviously some dirt....
Can you recognize what these pics are? :)

cometcatcher
08-06-2014, 02:59 PM
They came out quite well. Plant cells of some sort?

OzStarGazer
09-06-2014, 07:47 AM
Thanks. Yes, they are stems of (respectively) 1.bamboo, 2. cotton, 3. corn and 4. helianthus. :)

By the way, any idea what this at the back of scope is? It is not explained in the manual. It looks like you can connect something, but I have no idea what. :screwy:

PS: Is "microphotography" the correct word for taking photos with a microscope?

cometcatcher
09-06-2014, 11:35 AM
Looks like a DC jack for powering or charging batteries.

Microphotography sounds good to me.

OzStarGazer
09-06-2014, 12:10 PM
OK, thanks. Nice feature.

OzStarGazer
10-06-2014, 04:57 AM
I must be crazy... I bought 200 prepared slides! But they are a good brand and from a reputable seller and cost less than 100 here.
I was just wondering if I should also buy something to calibrate my microscope, but for visual purposes only I don't think it is necessary?

cometcatcher
10-06-2014, 09:31 AM
Good deal on the slides.

Calibrate a microscope? As in with a micrometer slide?

OzStarGazer
10-06-2014, 10:30 AM
Yes. A micrometer slide and a reticle I think. But they say it is only if you need very accurate measurements, so it is probably not a priority right now.

OzStarGazer
21-06-2014, 08:55 PM
I got my slides and love them... :) Is it normal to see something "floating" in front of your eyes? I know that in astronomy floating has to do with turbulences (at high magnifications). I assume it is similar, as the air is obviously not static even between the microscope and the slides?

chappo
22-06-2014, 09:08 AM
I believe the correct term is photomicroscopy.

OzStarGazer
22-06-2014, 09:40 AM
Thank you, John!

Steffen
22-06-2014, 11:15 PM
I've heard that term before, and I believe it is commonly used, but is it correct? For starters, the we're not doing "scopy" anymore but "graphy". And the "photo" in the beginning is just indicating the use of light, which is the same for viewing and recording. Technically, the term microphotography would be more correct, but it may already be taken for regular photography using macro lenses at magnification ratios larger than 1. Which is more or less the same thing anyway...

On a related thought, is a photograph taken with a mobile phone called a phonograph? ;)

Cheers
Steffen.

cometcatcher
23-06-2014, 01:03 AM
:rofl: I'm keeping that one for future use!

OzStarGazer
23-06-2014, 07:54 AM
I just had a look around and I found many terms, so I guess there is no consensus yet.
I have found micrography, microphotography, photomicroscopy, and "microscopic/microscopy images".

microdog
06-09-2014, 08:10 AM
Greetings.

I notice in the intro that Swift is mentioned as being better quality in the past. I was thinking of buying a 1974 model Swift M2240 with 4x, 10x, 40x, 100x objective lenses, 10x Wide Field ocular. It's in very good order.

Is this going to provide good quality images? What should I pay for an item like this?

thanks.

http://s3.postimg.org/uzj4rtgeb/swift.jpg