Microscope-related help and advice! Everything that relates to microscope hardware, microscopy as a hobby, amateur microscopy and citizen science. Videos cover also specimen preparation and other more technical aspects of microscopy.
My first name is Oliver and I have an MSc in Microbiology. My fields of interest were systematic bacteriology and also molecular biology. Currently I work as a teacher for Biology where I teach students, among many other things how to use microscopes.
My Microscopes: Olympus CH40, Olympus CHA, Olympus BX53, Euromex iScope
I want to invite you over also to my other RU-vid Channel, where I do observation with the microscope: ru-vid.com
Visit my Affiliate Amazon Microscopy Shop: www.amazon.com/shop/microbehunter
I also have other social media pages: Instagram: instagram.com/microbehunter_microscopy Website: www.microbehunter.com
A light bulb lit up for me when you brought up continually learning and re-training into new areas. I think that would be really fun for me. I know it's a double-edged sword but I love to learn about new things.
I know these. The apertures are too large anyway to make a difference. In this case you can not do darkfield. You can attach other filters there (polarization, color etc). or a cut-up credit card (etc) with a larger pin hole. The aperture is then very small (dark) but the depth of field goes up greatly. Off-center pinhole might give you oblique, but not sure.
The problem is, we know we are sick and don't feel well. Then Dr's gaslight you and tell you it's all in your head. Come to find out I had mold in my house and I also had/have lyme disease. The immune system is being shut down by the fungi (there is published research for this) and the infections start to run wild. People end up going to Live Blood Analysis because our health care system is ranked like 35th in the world. Another way to put it, it totally sucks. Immune systems are being taken offline by the microorganisms who are much smarter than our Dr.'s and PhD's and people are getting more sick. Instead of acknowledging the fact we are begin outsmarted by bugs, we spend money creating stupid medicines to treat symptoms. Why do you even have a microscope if you can't make any conclusions from it?
You did a similar video on this topic, but did not cover the angle of view with example. This is better in my opinion! I hate when specs are misleading and impossible to compare before you buy it. "WF" is meaningless, it should be replace by real viewing angle. Same thing with the sunglas symbol: we should have the real eye relief in mm. I have 3 set of eyepiece: from SWIFT380 10x 18mm and 25x who give me the exact same viewing angle, but different magnifications. And I've bought an extra 10x 24mm (on the same 23.2mm barrel standard). It gives me a little more angle of view. I wish I could know theses angle of view before buying.. Unfortunately, for the cheap eyepiece, we don't have this info. Maybe we can find a thread within the MicrobeHunter on this topic?
I’m not able to use an eye piece for most uses because of vision problems. I do have a USB camera that I use as well as using a phone camera through the eye pieces with some success. I’ve watched many of your previous videos and one thing that you haven’t covered is the differences in the camera sensor size. You’ve covered the resolution quite well and using a dslr for imaging but I’m looking at an industrial camera that has a very large sensor compared to the usb cameras more similar to the sensor size in the dslr. I have read that the larger sensor can give you increased contrast in your images. Could you cover this in a future video?
I'll give you my insight if you promise not voting Trump! I've spend a LOT of time searching on this topic: trust me, it's not easy! First: Calculation to get the pixel size are made for a black and white sensor. Common camera such as DSLR or phone and most affordable microscope camera are colour camera. Theses color camera have a filter (search BAYER filter on Wiki) that basically remove a lot of spatial resolution and light intensity. So, the megapixel calculation is off by a factor of about 4x (we need 4x more pixels and smaller pixels to get the same image of a black n white sensor). Off course, it's even more complicated... Smaller pixel will get less photons, so they will be more noisy and less sensitive compare to large pixel. GETTING CONFUSE? That's ok.. I'll keep it down to earth from now... My guess: you want to see live video of your microscope slide on your PC screen with the best quality at an affordable price. And your internal diameter tube is 23.2mm . Unless you want to buy a 10,000-50,000$ camera, this is my recommendation... THE SHORT STORY: Avoid all the cheap dedicated microscope camera: unless you want a lower resolution and a heavy crop image. They are worse than most phone + adaptor on the eyepiece. Get a regular 4K APS-C camera with 12-20MP. Match the phototube with the proper reduction lens and plug it to your monitor with HDMI. Boom! THE LONG and confuse STORY without proper editing.... A 4k colour camera will get you more resolution compare to a 1080, regardless of what Oliver said in a previous video (no dead resolution, because we don't use a 4k Black n White) You plug the HDMI output directly on your monitor. If you don't have clean HDMI from your DSLR, it's ok, but you will have some distracting numbers. If you wanna use software to get more options, you need a good computer with proper USB3 and a video transfer card that don't downgrade to 1080 (ex 4K Elgato) Ok, what 4K sensor should you get? First, this is not like regular photography: a larger sensor will not get you more light for the same field of view. The maximum amount of light in microscopy is whatever the objective gives you. So, you can either make this amount of light wider or narrower (with lense inside a phototube) to adjust to the size of your sensor, but you won't change the total amount of photons per pixel on the sensor. A larger sensor will only 'dilute' the same amount of light and a smaller sensor will concentrate this same amount of light. Axiocam 820 color camera (+15,000$) use a 20MP APS-C sensor with high dynamic range, 14Bit , 4;4;4 color subsampling. Off course, this is overkill for your application, but use it as a reference. What you want is the smallest sensor to get the smallest pixel, but with the best noise ratio per pixel. Unfortunately, colour camera use computational magic to get the final image and we don't have all the number to compare them properly. So, get a regular 4K DSLR camera with an APS-C sensor, around 12-20MP. 8Bit is fine and don't worry about the other numbers too much. Just makes sure the 4K is not a crop version of the 1080. Otherwise, you will get unwanted crop, lower image resolution. THE PHOTOTUBE... If you have a large sensor, it won't fit inside the 23.2mm tube. Therefore, you will need a phototube with the proper reduction lens (0.25x or 0.33x or 0.5x) to match the size of the sensor. If you don't reduce enough: you will get an unwanted magnification (crop image) with less light and lower resolution. If you reduce a bit too much: you will get a small circular image in your screen; missing most of your sensor's pixel. The optimal would be to get the edge of the circular image just pass the 4 corners of your rectangular screen. The phototube will also depend if you have an infinite objective (if you paid more than 1500$) or 160mm objective (most entry level) Go to MicrobeHunter Forum to know more about this topic or ask questions. WHAT I WILL DO (not for the faint of heart): I have a SWIFT380B (binocular version, without the 3rd port on top) I will replace the head and eyepiece with a **custom 3D printed head to include a C-mount for an APS-C camera on top. How to know the projected image size? I needed to know what was the size of the projected image above the objective (when you remove the head) to know what size of sensor I should use to avoid getting a lens in my phototube. The purpose is to save on cost and avoid any degradation of image since there is no optic. I put a calibration card (it could be a transparent ruler) in the microscope and adjust the focus. I noted the field of view in mm. Then I remove the head (it's only one screw) and I put a piece of paper about 150mm above the top of the objective. This gives me an image of my calibration card on this piece of paper. I measured the size of the projected image for the same field of view. In my case, it's just a little bit larger than an APSC sensor. So, I will buy a camera with APS-C sensor and I won't need any optic in the phototube. Cheaper and less error. I have no clue why I wrote this enormous comment. I'm tired, I won't edit.. So, sorry if it's a little confusing. Just ask me more question I'll be please to answer you. Alex from Montréal FYI; *1080 video only have 2MP.. Its ok, but not enough if you want the best resolution from 4x to 40x *FYI: 4K image only have 8.3MP, regardless if the sensor has 60MP or 12MP. **Custom 3D printed head: I will design slits to put various filters and module with dichroic mirrors to get epi-illumination, maybe fluorescence, polarization. Basically getting the features usually available only on infinite objective scope for a fraction of the cost.
@@alexandrevaliquette3883 thank you for the detailed explanation though it’s a bit confusing. I have a touptek iuc26000kpa 26mp aps-c usb3 sensor that I’m setting up for imaging. It’s setting up the imaging tube properly that I’m looking into. I have an imaging port in my microscope all ready and a few different reduction lenses to choose from but I think I should be able to use it without the extra lense. I believe I understand your explanation of using the calibration slide to estimate the image size on the sensor.
@@texaspowerman Wow, that's a very impressive camera! They don't lie when they say "everything is bigger in Texas!" Good for you, it's way better than a regular DSLR; I'm jealous! Do you also use it for astrophoto? How much does it retail? I'm glad you understand some part of my previous message. I've spend few hours writing it (just out of passion!). English is my second language and I was tired, so I agree it's a bit confusing! So, yeah, using a calibration slide (or transparent rule with 4x objective) and a paper to compare the image you have on the eyepiece and the image projected above the imaging tube, it should be easy to find the best lens. The perfect fit will be the 4 corners of your screen having a slightly less than perfect image (beginning of vignetting or not plano image). And, accomplish this without any lens would be the ideal situation. This would be for someone who have not buy his sensor yet. I'm very happy if my comment helped you out! Please let me know when your rig is on point! Or if you have any other question. Alex
Hi ,I am new to this , I got an old Compound Microscope , C. Baker London 1944 in very good condition . One thing I don't understand is , why are the Objective Lens are so close to the Stage? it is very easy to brake the slide . Cheers
Unfortunately, this is how physics works. To get a higher magnification, you need a higher numerical aperture (NA). NA is basically an angle or cone of light getting out of your objective. A very pointy cone of light will give you 4x and a very broad cone of light will give you 40x. So, 4x have a lot of free space and 40x has almost no working space between the sample and the objective. Hope it's clear. Does your 1944 use oil lamp or a mirror to get the light? Does it have a condenser? You can ask question on MicrobeHunter Forum. There are some collectors of antique microscope. My guess is this microscope won't get you a great image quality compare to current standard (such as SWIFT350). But, you can have fun for sure!
Also, if you break an objective with your lens, most of the times the lens is also scratched and even though you might not immediately become aware of it, suffers immensely in quality
I bought a pi camera/web camera and then plug into a microscope eyepiece, however, what I get is a nearly black view except for the center has a small right spot. I am not what is the exact cause and can only suspect this is because I need a lens in-between the webcam and the objective lens. Do you have any suggestions?
Med Tech of over 40 years in labs and the industry. I had a lab very proud of their maintenance regime, but couldn't understand why their low pwr (20x objective) was so blurred relative to high pwr. I had to beg to use Pathologists private scope and showed them a good one. The maintence guy had been putting lens cleaner on the lens & TWIRLING a cotton tipped applicator on it! This destroyed the lens but they had no idea until I counseled them. My heart sank when I first saw it done, had to bite my tongue.
In addition to the concerns mentioned, there is the perhaps not-so-obvious issue of stolen microscopes, with a brisk market among med students and others on tight budgets. We came to work in hematology in a 1,000 bed hospital one day to find the scopes missing. All of them. It was quickly obvious that it was not a prank. This was also a med school with ready customers at hand. Also had a couple go missing from a biology dept. at university.
Also, you should take into consideration the glass itself. You have coatings, polishings, glass manufacturers, glass thicknesses, diffraction measurements, even the quality control of the eye piece itself, and much more, all come into play when any technical instrument is being discussed.
Microscope manufacturer should include theses cheap filters: darkfield, oblique illumination, Reinberg, polarisation instead of useless equipment such as 25x eyepiece. They should also put a QR code that link to a video to explain how to use these filters. But... I know... Most people who buy microscope under 1500$ generally don't know much and they are more excited about a 2500x on the box or description. Unfortunately, if they don't do this 'stupid 2500x magnification marketing'; they will lose sales. So... this put the emphasis how important this channel is!
10:58 I would love to see the difference DIC Vs phase contrast Vs Oblique illumination for 🔬 smaller organism, like bacteria.🔬 Very impressive and best ROI of course!!! I will print some for sure. THHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHANK YOU AGAIN for your tremendous contributions to build the amateur microscopy community.
In my 100 there are tiny little dots like almost looks like tiny little water dots but they're all in uniform like it's not sporadic. It's all together and it won't come off. I don't know what that is.
Microbehunter: I think you are off by a factor of 4 Your calculation are good for a monochrome sensor; but we use monochrome sensor cover with a RGB "Bayer filter". A 8MP camera have 3x8=24 Mega smaller photosites or subpixels. In addition, it's not 1/3 of each color. The Bayer filter use 1/2 of green filter, 1/4 of blue and 1/4 of red. (Click to get more info) For a 4K or roughly 8MP camera (3x8=24 individual Mega subpixels): 🟩🟩12Mega are green 🟦6Mega are blue 🟥6Mega are red BAYER FILTER🟦🟩🟥🟩🟦🟩🟥🟩🟦🟩🟥🟩🟦🟩🟥🟩: Each of theses 24Mega individual subpixels only cover 1/4 of the space of a "regular pixel" size. Therefore, such individual subpixels don't get any information related to his respective color for 3/4 of the size of the "regular pixel" (for red and blue at least). For blue, it's like having a monochrome sensor with 4 times more pixel (compare to a same size regular sensor) and with 75% of dead pixels ⬛⬛🟦⬛⬛ and only 25% of working pixels spread apart by empty space. Each of theses bleu photosites would also be 4 times smaller compare to a 'regular pixel' ◾vs ⬛. Dam, it's hard to explain this properly! All wavelength are not created equals🏳🌈: The calculations of pixel size should use the worst case scenario. Instead of green 550nm light, we should use shorter wavelength such as blue 450nm or even purple 400nm light. The Nyquist Criterion〰: Half the wavelength is the absolute minimum for a perfect sensor and a perfect lens. If you get more data than that, it will gives you more info (not more resolution) that can be use to compensate for some of the noise. What does the electronic hardware and AI software is doing with this info? From there... the math goes sideway in mystery... My guesstimate: Consider all the above, your number seems to be off by a factor of at least 4x (just for the Bayer filter alone, not consider the wavelength and magical noise stuff). So, in worst scenario (mainly violet sample and 4x objective), a camera sensor should have about 19MP Since 4K is 8.2MP, it should be good enough for most video application in visible light microscopy, but 6K would be optimal at 19MP for the lowest magnification. This is a very big difference with the numbers you calculated in the video (monochrome sensor). Maybe you should consider doing an update (unless I made mistake???). A curious mind from Montréal I've spend more than an hour to write this down.. I hope somebody will read it!
Eye opening, wow, I am currently a student of Microbiology, I really love it. There's so many different field in which one can specialized after getting a degree, at times it becomes overwhelming and confusing... love this video.
Agreed. Buying is the begin of trouble. I just sent my sv bony 201 back. Not even a package list. No manual. And after calling CS, nothing. I never succeeded to focus anything.
5,891$ for this scope in 2024 250-400$ for SWIFT350 or 380 or comparable AmScope 75$ for Amazon Basic compound monocular microscope The Amazon Basic is a nice gift to a kid or newbie. The image quality is way better compare to "Fisher Price category" microscope. But without a proper condenser, the 400x is bad. However, the gap between the SWIFT350 and the DELPHI-X is not as big. We are lucky to live in 2024 (and beyond) where we can buy relatively cheap, but powerful scientific instruments. 2024 Price in US currency
I agree, I have the sw380t, and im very happy with it. This microscope is too much for me for now (i started with microscopy only half a year ago). I think it's a nice upgrade from the sw380t, but the price...
@MicrobeHunter, you should make more promotion to your 'old' video, your Website and your Forum. The amount of information is incredible.. And we don't have to wait until you make such video: you already made it most of the time!!!! You should systematically make cross reference and publicity to theses information channel. It will help build the worldwide amateur microbiology. Love and deep respect from Montréal!
For electronic rework/soldering, you only need 10x-40x magnification... are there any USB based microscopes, true 4k/optical-zoom that you'd recommend? For example, one that can output video 1) wirelessly to a android/monitor receiver (Miracast/Wireless-HDMI) 2) Wired USB to latptop/tablet device 3) Wired HDMI Dual-lens for seeing depth.. and a large Field-of-View would also be nice. Unfortunately, the ones I've seen are very expensive, presumably because they have way too much zoom (130x-180x lens), or come with their own 10" display, or gimic features like remote-control, etc.
I've asked you to make a video on this exact topic few days ago.. Obviously, you listen to my suggestion, travel back 4 years, made that awesome video, posted it and come back to present time. Congrat! Your microscope is so advanced and immersive; you can use it for time travel.
Is there new/better free software 5 years later? Any other microscopy related software would be a great asset as well. For example, a software that automatically count bacteria in a screen shot. Or other that I just don't know exist yet.
Everyone looks at stars once in a while and there is something spiritual about it so people want to explore it more. Being astronomer is considered cool. Using microscope is considered to be more scientific and medical which is not that attractive. But the fact is that amateur astronomy is very limited - you can observe moon and sun but anything else will appear like small icons or dots. You need to invest a lot of time, money and energy to get average results in astronomy. You can also buy cheap microscope and have great results with endless subjects to observe.
