Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
  1. #1
    < Banned User >
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,763
    Thanked: 732

    Default $0.99 microscope



    Less than a buck?

    I bought it!

    100x. 200x, 300x. Now I'm off to find a USB camera for it....they have a bunch listed for $49...

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    603
    Thanked: 143

    Default

    From eBay?

    Looks exactly like one I had as a kid back in the late '50s or early '60s. No idea where it is now. Maybe that's it!

    I do remember I put it to good use. There are lots of things that are interesting under magnification. At high magnification I found a dedicated light source was required.

  3. #3
    < Banned User >
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,763
    Thanked: 732

    Default

    I figured a good old "classic" like this would be much better made than a $49 modern plastic one that are often being sold.

    Even the cheapest made in China 200x USB microscopes (hand held) go for about $45 or so, and won't have good focus adjustment. And it is not clear whether the magnification is digital or optical (from what I can tell it looks like 10-60 is optical, the rest of the way is digital).

    We'll see how my little side project goes....

  4. #4
    Senior Member singlewedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    1,568
    Thanked: 203

    Default

    Mount one of these on the side. And you got yourself a light source.

  5. #5
    < Banned User >
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,763
    Thanked: 732

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by singlewedge View Post
    Mount one of these on the side. And you got yourself a light source.
    $20??? That would blow my whole cheapo scope budget!

    More likely I'll get something like this at a local Walgreens. LED lighting is cheap these days.

  6. #6
    illegitimum non carborundum Utopian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Rochester, MN
    Posts
    10,911
    Thanked: 3507
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I hate to p*ss on your parade but you might face two problems.

    First, that microscope has objectives that have a very short working distance. The plane of focus is going to make it difficult to get your razor safely in place. This will be especially true for the higher mag objectives.

    Second, this scope is designed for transmitted light. That is, light from underneath the stage passes THROUGH the sample on the way to your eye. Unless you are working on modified transparent ceramic blades, you are not going to see anything except the sillouette of the blade. In order to see the top, objective facing side, of the blade, you are going to have to rely on a light source above the blade to provide light reflecting off of the blade. This might be made more difficult because of how close the objectives will be to the blade, as the light will have to be shining almost horizontally and will lead to shadows.

    Hopefully, I'm wrong and you'll get some use out of it. In the mean time, watch out for a cheap stereomicroscope!

  7. #7
    < Banned User >
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,763
    Thanked: 732

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Utopian View Post
    I hate to p*ss on your parade but you might face two problems.

    First, that microscope has objectives that have a very short working distance. The plane of focus is going to make it difficult to get your razor safely in place. This will be especially true for the higher mag objectives.

    Second, this scope is designed for transmitted light. That is, light from underneath the stage passes THROUGH the sample on the way to your eye. Unless you are working on modified transparent ceramic blades, you are not going to see anything except the sillouette of the blade. In order to see the top, objective facing side, of the blade, you are going to have to rely on a light source above the blade to provide light reflecting off of the blade. This might be made more difficult because of how close the objectives will be to the blade, as the light will have to be shining almost horizontally and will lead to shadows.

    Hopefully, I'm wrong and you'll get some use out of it. In the mean time, watch out for a cheap stereomicroscope!

    Good points.

    I'm aware that it is designed for bottom illumination, and after I get it in my hot little mitts I will find a good place for an illumination source. I plan to created an angled holder for the razors, much as Tim Zowada describes on his site, so that I would be focusing on the edge so that the main body of the razor will be tilted away from the objective, so working distances shouldn't be a big deal.

  8. #8
    illegitimum non carborundum Utopian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Rochester, MN
    Posts
    10,911
    Thanked: 3507
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Wait, does this mean you're NOT making transparent ceramic blades???

  9. #9
    Senior Member blabbermouth hi_bud_gl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    4,521
    Thanked: 1636

    Default microscpe

    UTOPIAN IS absolutely right on his points.
    i have been in that road and let me tell you .
    Don't try will waste your time.
    you will get the magnification but focus wont be as good as you like.You will need to take out top magnification lens out of the microscope and place usb in that place then again all problem comes out with focus.

    hope you will do great
    .GOOD LUCK

  10. #10
    < Banned User >
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,763
    Thanked: 732

    Default

    Ok, well thanks indeed for the helpful hints & warnings of things to watch out for.

    $14 delivered, I figure I can't go too far wrong!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •