Microscope Test aka the Scope Showdown!
- This topic has 65 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 01/16/2022 at 7:33 pm by
.
-
Here are some comparison photos:
Dino-Lite 230x
Dino-Lite 500x-Clay
1 user thanked author for this post.
AmScope 200x
AmScope 800x
AmScope 2000xThe neat thing about the 2000x image is the transition from a nearly perfectly polished shoulder to a semi-coarse, 400# micro bevel.
-Clay
AmScope 2000x The neat thing about the 2000x image is the transition from a nearly perfectly polished shoulder to a semi-coarse, 400# micro bevel. I can understand the shallow focal depth but at that magnification its just awe inspiring, exactly what I was hoping was technically possible(and totally out of my price zone).
I am gonna mail the slide to Josh and from there it can travel as it will. Although Clays scopes will be tough to beat I still think an apples to apples comparison may reveal a standout mid-price unit. Who knows?
Anybody else interested in giving the test slide a sampling please chime in and Josh can send it on from there next week.This is a great way to really see what equipment, can do what, for what price. Invaluable information IMHO to help people in the future make informed purchase decisions.
Clay thanks so much for posting your images and I hope if your not too super busy the calibration slide can make it to you for a few quick side by sides as well. Im dying to see what it looks like under your x2000. Amazing gear, like peering into an alien world…that we are terraforming blindfolded, well some of us are anyway.
My experience with my scope (an older VEHO, but I’ve heard similar stories from others) is that the main challenge is not so much magnification/resolution, but getting an adequate focus. Even if the depth of focus is really small, how are your experiences with this?
My only experience has been with the $20 no name “x400” scope. It’s definitely better then nothing but leaves much to be desired for resolution. It reminds me of trying to watch standard definition TV or youtube in 480 mode. Grainy n makes my eyes strain to see between the pixels.
Compare my first picture to Clays and you can see whereither my grid is fuzzy his is super crisp edged. I guess to answer I’d think they are both important. Mine has adequate magnification but the resolution is holding it back. Ofcourse I want BOTH a high mega pixel CCD and high magnification…at the lowest price possible naturally.
Actually, the high mega-pixel sensor doesn’t add anything from what I can see, if you’re going to be using a computer monitor at wide-screen high def, 2 Mp is about all it can display anyway at 1920 X 1080. And that’s a pretty good image. Even when zooming in on a photo image, 5Mp is only about double the resolution and the improvement is barely noticeable from 2Mp.
My Celestron 5Mp focuses at about 50X and 180X when displayed on my monitor. I almost never use the higher magnification setting. The lower setting has a better depth-of-field and clearer image than the higher setting. Much less frustrating to use. It seems that at the higher setting, every time I move the camera I have to re-focus.
I’ve tried four different ‘scopes and found one of the most important features is having a tight but smoothly operating focus adjustment. A loose adjustment will move out of focus almost every time you take your finger off the knob.
3 users thanked author for this post.
I agree about the camera resolution. 2 mp to 5 mp is perfectly adequate. The magnification and focus are most important. For focus, I mostly rely on a good stand. Here’s the one I use nowadays: http://www.digital-usb-microscopes.com/dino-lite-digital-microscope-MSRK-10A.html?gclid=Cj0KEQiAl5u2BRC6yszC1_75v5wBEiQAD-hdz4JcJqNFHDTf1owhI7KynUUWBDIHutmL_mWqTiT4wgMaAgc18P8HAQ and it’s terrific, makes it really easy to focus. I also have this one: http://www.microscope.com/dino-lite-ms35be-esd-safe-rigid-tabletop-pole-stand.html?gclid=Cj0KEQiAl5u2BRC6yszC1_75v5wBEiQAD-hdz5v0CroyxevWfchAMlsWaVWV5EB8I8fcyzUu9LE1uxwaAowW8P8HAQ and it’s good too, though not as easy to work with because the fine adjustment is not as fine as the other. This one looks very intriguing for viewing while the knife is in the sharpener: http://www.microscope.com/dino-lite-ms72b-table-top-dual-pole-stand.html?gclid=Cj0KEQiAl5u2BRC6yszC1_75v5wBEiQAD-hdzyJelYkpiU_H25i9gFjbfMc2DFivOUHrpuq9sVRNFDEaAqPV8P8HAQ. None of them are cheap, but I think they can make any of the USB scopes and make them work better.
-Clay
1 user thanked author for this post.
Can any of these setups measure the sharpened angle ?
The only way I would know how to do so is in cross section. Then it’s pretty easy but I don’t know of any way to do it without creating a cross section of the blade.
I agree… I still think you need an SEM Clay 😉 Here’s a good cross section shot from the Science of Sharp blog
This is as good of pics as my Dinolite AM3011 (discontinued) will take around it’s max zoom at 230x… I have tried the Dinolite and the Veho and the Veho was horrible at focusing – the adjustment knob was driving me crazy. The Dinolite is very tight and very easy to control… I still love it even after 3 years of use! The SEM pic above puts mine to shame lol
1 user thanked author for this post.
I’ve just been playing with the 930x Dino-Lite. In this photo, I’d been using Cliff’s technique of horizontal sharpening:
-Clay
Here are a couple on the AmScope at 800x and 2000x. I used the same blade with the horizontal pattern and added a micro-bevel at 1000#:
-Clay
1 user thanked author for this post.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.