Recommend a good portable microscope?

[benjamind2014]

I've been thinking about a portable microscope as I want to be able to carry it with me to examine subjects anywhere I happen to be.

Is there a really good quality portable microscope that I can use that can view both opaque and transparent objects at magnifications between say 30x and say 600x and can also view subjects on slides or glass plates in both brightfield and if possible darkfield?

I'm absolutely stumped as to why I cant seem to find one. Being digital is not necessary as I can purchase and use a DSLR camera with a microscope adapter.

Does anyone have any ideas. Budget is not all that much of a problem so perhaps a variety of different options would be useful for me to work out what is best for me.

[Chris S.]

I dimly recalled some instruments called "field microscopes," and checking just now, this search term turns up some possibilities, though I don't know if any meet all your requirements. Checkout this nicely-done write-up on the Nikon Model H field microscope by Gregory Guida, The Model H revisited. At the end of this article, Guida also provides a useful rundown of some other field microscopes.

A model he didn't mention, which I stumbled across in my brief search, is the Steindorff Field Scope.

Good luck! If you end up getting a field microscope, I hope you'll give us a user report.

Edit to add another interesting field microscope: the TWX 1 Chinese Army Field Hospital Microscope. A exceptionally complete review of this instrument by Martin Mach is in issues 116-120 of the Water Bear Web Base.

Cheers,

--Chris

[Ichthyophthirius]

Hi,

What size of microscope would you be prepared to carry (once packed)? Maximum weight?

There are dedicated field microscopes as Chris said (that you could carry in a backpack) but other people have travel/expedition microscopes which have all the functionality of a compound microscope but on a small stand (can be carried in a suitcase or a car on holiday).

A great choice for a travel microscope would be the Zeiss Standard Junior / KF / KF2 with a homemade LED illumination. http://s380.photobucket.com/user/wilfri ... p.jpg.html

In contrast to the Zeiss optics, the Junior / KF / KF2 stand is almost indestructible and will travel well. You can attach a camera via a monotube or a trinocular tube.

Regards, Ichthy

[Beatsy]

I have a Trecker field microscope that I find quite useful. Not much cop for photography though (except perhaps afocal using a smartphone). There's a review here http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/ind ... ekker.html

[benjamind2014]

I am wondering if anyone has ever seen this:

http://microscopegenius.com/omax-micros ... s-m615inv/

I looked at the review, but still not entirely sure if it would fit the bill, as I'd like to see first if anyone here has any experience with it.

I'm sure with the limited magnification it's possible to do a simple DIY darkfield setup, by projecting an LED up towards the slide. 400x is possible with DIY darkfield but I know that it's definitely not doable at anything significantly above that magnification. DIY darkfield is just impossible at 1000x.

[Chris S.]

No experience, but I do see that this unit looks identical to what Ted Pella sells as the "Evolution" microscope. What is far from identical is the price. The Omax you've found sells for $300, with free shipping. Ted Pella charges $1800 for it--nice markup, Ted. Of course, his version has "evolved"--he includes a handy carrying case.

Must admit I'm skeptical about any microscope manufactured to sell for $300. With optical equipment, you get what you pay for--if you're lucky. Very few of the wonderful images in our micro gallery were made on instruments that were cheap when new (though they can sometimes be had for much less on the second-hand market, if one looks hard enough, is careful, and perhaps a bit lucky). Cheap microscopes make microscopy un-fun.

--Chris

--Edited to fix typo that broke URL

[benjamind2014]

Cheap microscopes make microscopy un-fun.

Oh yes, I'm sure I'd agree with that.

I think I'm basically running around in circles.

I've been looking at the AMSCOPE B690A-DK-PL for some idea of what to expect in an average quality microscope.

I think they're all decent enough to get OK quality images out of.

I've been looking at the Newton nM1 field microscope. Admittedly, it's Brightfield only, but it looks appealing since it has 10x, 40x and 60x or 100x OIL objectives, and from the images I've seen of it, it looks OK.

But of course, I defer to others on this forum for their opinions before I make any decisions regarding a purchase.

The deal is, I've set a budget of about $2,500. I would like something that is portable, and allows me to use both incident and transmitted light, with both darkfield and brightfield options for transmitted light, and the ability to have oblique illumination so that I can see relief of magnified subjects for both the transmitted and incident light.

Now, admittedly, that's a tough nut to crack. If anyone can come up with anything that fulfils those roles at a reasonable price with OK optics, I'd be very happy.

[GemBro]

Chris has already suggested this scope ... but there's a beaut example of the Nikon Model H field microscope on FleaBay at the mo for £220 ...

Nikon H Field Microscope with Leather Bag(Israel):
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/161463315814? ... EBIDX%3AIT

Gem

[Chris S.]

I've been looking at the AMSCOPE B690A-DK-PL for some idea of what to expect in an average quality microscope.

Most of us at this forum, I think, view Amscope products not as representing "average quality," but "low quality, beneath serious consideration." Though let me strongly qualify this assertion. First, I have zero personal experience with any Amscope product. Second, my sense of other forum members’ opinions may be incorrect. Third, even if this sense is correct, perhaps we’re communally wrong, operating on prejudice ungrounded on fact. But I think it’s useful to bring this up, as a warning that you proceed with caution. If you purchase a solid, second-hand instrument from a respected maker, you’re following a path that’s been successfully and repeatedly traveled before. With an Amscope or similar cheap instrument, you’re testing new ground. Much of my skepticism lies in the fact that microscopes require precision optics and precision mechanics--neither of which are easy targets for inexpensive production. There can, of course, be breakthroughs that lower production costs--but any such offering should be subjected to a rigorous burden of proof.

I believe Rik purchased an Amscope for test purposes, though know little of what he found. But it is an observable fact that the majority of stunning images in our micro gallery are produced with instruments from long-trusted names, such as Olympus, Nikon, Zeiss, Mitutoyo, etc. Not too many Amscope images, apparently.

I've been looking at the Newton nM1 field microscope. Admittedly, it's Brightfield only, but it looks appealing since it has 10x, 40x and 60x or 100x OIL objectives, and from the images I've seen of it, it looks OK.

Viewing the company’s Website, their example photographs through this instrument look awful to my eye—tons of CA and poor resolution. My sense is that this instrument’s purpose is to facilitate low-cost, convenient specimen identification under difficult conditions—a laudable goal. But getting good photomicrographs in the field is a very different goal from basic identification.

Ichthyophthirius brought up a great point in asking what you want in the way of portability—an instrument you can carry in a backpack vs. an instrument in a suitcase. For the suitcase option, his suggestion of a Zeiss Standard Junior looks wonderful—and gives you access to a variety of Zeiss optional equipment, which I’d expect to be of high quality. For the backpack option, I’d be looking at either the Nikon H or the Chinese Army TWX.

Gembro, I PM’d benjamind2014 a few days ago to alert him to this particular Nikon H, when it was offered at what looked like a very attractive BIN price (a thousand US dollars below similar instruments that had been sold). This instrument strikes me as so cool that I thought a bit of buying it myself, if benjamind2014 didn't—even though it doesn’t fit my subject interests at all. What an exquisite piece of work it seems to be!

For me, choosing between a revered Nikon model and something like an Amscope would be a no-brainer.

Cheers,

--Chris

[rjlittlefield]

I believe Rik purchased an Amscope for test purposes, though know little of what he found.

I haven't formalized anything except the bits I cared about, which were only the mechanics of the focus block and stage positioning. The mechanics test OK, though I can't vouch for robustness or longevity. But on quick evaluation, the basic achromat objectives that I purchased seem to be the second-lowest-quality I've ever tested. Optics in the Amscope's trinoc port also have an annoyingly limited field of high quality view, with significant aberration outside that.

For me, choosing between a revered Nikon model and something like an Amscope would be a no-brainer.

No disagreement there.

--Rik