Learning Center What is a mineral?The most common minerals on earth Information for Educators Mindat Articles The Elements The Rock H. Currier Digital Library Geologic Time

Minerals by Properties Minerals by Chemistry Advanced Locality Search Random Mineral Random Locality Search by minID Localities Near Me Search Articles Search Glossary More Search Options

The Mindat Manual Add a New Photo Rate Photos Locality Edit Report Coordinate Completion Report Add Glossary Item

Mining Companies Statistics Users Mineral Museums Clubs & Organizations Mineral Shows & Events The Mindat Directory Device Settings The Mineral Quiz

Photo Search Photo Galleries Search by Color New Photos Today New Photos Yesterday Members' Photo Galleries Past Photo of the Day Gallery Photography

Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

╳Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

Groups

Recent Images in Discussions

Techniques for CollectorsUSB Microscope for ID?

24th Sep 2015 20:14 UTCDoug Schonewald

This may seem like a ridiculous question to the more seasoned mineralogists on this site, but as a beginner I have to ask.

I am on a very limited budget (<$200) and need to purchase a microscope of some kind for ID purposes only. I do not expect to get good photos from anything of that quality. I have researched stereo microscopes and USB microscopes. It appears that finding a stereo microscope with any kind of camera in that price range is next to impossible (searched online and craigslist).

I am considering a USB microscope with a 5mp camera. It is in my price range, it will hook up to a laptop in the field, and might provide enough illumination and power to ID the very small minerals that I encounter every day. At the same time I don't wish to waste $100+ just to find out it is not even adequate.

Has anyone used these instruments, or is currently using one for this purpose? Have you found it OK for this explicit purpose?

Tim

24th Sep 2015 20:53 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis

Tim,

If you search the photography topic area you will find several informative threads on this very topic. To summarise, opinion is sharply divided :-) What is OK for you depends on what your needs and expectations are. Personally, I belong to the school that says you get what you pay for in this life - no free lunches. Good microscopy does not come cheap and - if the bug bites you - if you buy a cheap one you will only end up passing it on and buying a better one is a coupe of years or so.

That said, the only cheap model I know of that does quite a lot for the price is this one http://www.stuller.com/products/29-4740/?groupId=16916#pr-header-back-to-top-link . It's widely available from a range of reliable retailers in the US and elsewhere. To use a camera with it, either get a lightweight eye-piece camera or have a local machine shop, turn an eye-piece adapter for a consumer camera for you out of aluminium stock.

Start here and work out? http://www.mindat.org/mesg-13-357984.html

24th Sep 2015 22:47 UTCDoug Schonewald

Thanx Owen. At this time I am much less interested in the photography capability of the scope and more interested in using it as a ID tool, hence the reason for posting in the Mineral ID forum. I can see why there is some division in the use for photography, but I did go through and read all the threads associated in the photography forums and I think that the photography I did see was OK for what I need for the present. The future may bring something significantly better, but for the present I have boxes of rocks with small minerals that I can't see well enough with a loop to even begin the ID process. I hope to sit at the computer through the winter and sort some of these out.

24th Sep 2015 23:34 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis

Timothy,

Your eyes are pretty darn smart. It you cannot resolve adequately features with a triplet x10 loupe, a microscope will not show you appreciably more until you get above x30 magnification. Don't forget good lighting. That and x10 loupe will show you more that a microscope with the wrong lighting. The built-in lighting with USB microscopes is very limiting. But only you know what it is you are trying to achieve.

25th Sep 2015 00:50 UTCDoug Schonewald

Thanks again Owen. I haven't gazed into a microscope since college. I assumed it would be a dramatic improvement in determining crystal habit, color, etc. maybe I was wrong on that count. A triplet is a lot less than a microscope of any kind. Maybe I have found the starting point even though it was unintended.

25th Sep 2015 05:21 UTCJoel Dyer

Timothy,

Are you sure you want to use a USB microscope? Any good enough, truly useful USB microscopes would probably cost over your budget limit. Also, zooming in / out and working with a USB microscope is a lot more difficult and limited compared to normal microscopes. Why not consider an affordable stereo microscope, perhaps even pre-owned one?

I got my first stereo microscope just a couple of years ago & had a very, very tight budget. Got a old russian MBS-9 scope, because a rock friend of mine couldn't use his anymore, due to eye problems. Now I have a better used scope (Jena, from DDR times...) thanks to a sponsor. Later on, I purchased a cheap USB microscope (can't afford a Dino-lite yet), but it's akward to use & I use it only on field trips.

Using a stereo microscope instead of a loupe or USB microscope opens up a totally different world! IT gives you 1) the possibility to view small crystals in a more 3D way and 2) gives you a far better working distance. I normally use 20x-32x magnification for small crystals, sometimes more for really difficult cases.

For instance, Gene from Mineralogical Research Company might be able to point you to an affordable new or pre-owned stereoscope. Also, you can get pretty good deals via Ebay.

As for connecting a camera to a microscope, you have much more possibilites with a stereoscope & I've made a couple of adaptors myself, using plastic, black thin cardboard etc. etc.

Also, you could ask around at schools, colleges and micromount societies: surely someone might be able to loan you or sell you a used microscope cheaply. Good luck with your searches!

25th Sep 2015 15:02 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

In my opinion you are far better off with a cheap stereo microscope than a cheap USB microscope.

25th Sep 2015 15:25 UTCDoug Schonewald

Owen/Joel/Reiner

A stereo microscope seems the way to go. Waiting and saving is the best option.

It never hurts to have a set of loops and a friend has already taken care of the 10x & 20x, but I still love the idea of having a field unit microscope.

Also I figured out the search feature (new to the site) so I can search prior to asking questions that have likely been asked many times before.

Tim

25th Sep 2015 16:01 UTCDavid Von Bargen Manager

Decent optics and dust and rough handling really don't do well together. You also need a decent light source (although the LEDs do make this feasible). The problem with the higher magnification loupes is that you get a very small working distance and a lousy depth of field which makes lighting the specimen even more difficult.

25th Sep 2015 16:49 UTCDoug Schonewald

David - I've already rigged up a couple of high intensity LED lights for field work that utilize a small 12v battery. I also use them in the shop. Already I find the loops shaky and difficult to use in the field but they are much better than nothing. Setting up a portable table with a black cloth covering it has helped. I has allowed me to sort and eliminate most small items.

25th Sep 2015 17:38 UTCIlkka Mikkola

Timothy

I have used succesfully 6x loop in the field. It has a good working distance and depth of field.

Ilkka

25th Sep 2015 18:01 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis

T. Douglas Schonewald Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Already I find the loops shaky and difficult to

> use in the field but they are much better than

> nothing. Setting up a portable table with a black

> cloth covering it has helped. I has allowed me to

> sort and eliminate most small items.

Forget x20 and x30 loupes. Stick with just a *good* x10 and learn how to make it dance for you. Max depth of field and min 'shake' effect. Think hunting. Don't try sighting if you are out of breath or your heart rate is raised. Rest your wrists on something immovable. Resting your forearms is better. Failing all else,at least keep your elbows clamped to your rib-cage. Using a loupe (or a microscope) to best effect is something to be learned by lots of practice.

As already said, seeing more clearly is to do with quality of optics and arrangement of lighting than it is higher magnification. Learn how to diffuse your light sources when examining any crystal with fracture surface lustre of vitreous of higher.

25th Sep 2015 18:07 UTCDoug Schonewald

Thanks to everyone. What started out as a novice question about optics has turned into a great tutorial on field work, lighting, AND optics. Since you were all where I am now once-upon-a-time, you can't imagine how helpful this information is. These hints are likely rudimentary, and second-nature to you now, but your helpful pointers will make my journey much more enjoyable.

25th Sep 2015 18:17 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis

Just so long as you find the journey enjoyable ;-: There is no journey's end for any of us.....

11th Oct 2015 00:15 UTCDonald Vaughn

I think this is one of those times where looking to what a field Geologist of days past will give you the best Idea of what type of tools work best in the field and which ones should be left inside. A 10x triplet of good quality is as others have posted the best option for field work, even if you don't have maximum magnification it helps narrow things down till you get to higher magnification tools. another thing to think of, is with everything else you might be carrying into field do you really need another potentially delicate piece to carry and set up.

12th Oct 2015 12:16 UTCGary Moldovany

My suggestion to you, Doug, is that you do what most of the field collectors I am acquainted with do. Purchase a good, used standard microscope. It needs to have a stage large enough to view specimens. Mine is a Paragon from LW Scientific. Take your large specimens home and do your viewing there. You can trim out the smaller pieces that you are interested in and discard the rest. I am not an experienced mineral photographer so I can't give you any advice there but there are plenty of topics in the message board on that. The key to using a loupe is to hold it as close to your eye as you can, bracing your hand against your face. I have been using a 10x for years and it's just fine for most small crystals. Good luck and happy hunting. Gary

13th Oct 2015 02:34 UTCDoug Daniels

As another geologist/collector, when in the field there's nothing better than the tried and true "10X" .......even a poor quality one. Anything higher is just hogwash. At home, you can have whatever higher-powered optics that you want; heck, even anelectron microscope. But those things are just too much in the field, especially when you start carting a few pounds (think about it) of rock back with you.

13th Oct 2015 15:28 UTCD. Peck

And "back" always seems to be uphill !:-(

13th Oct 2015 16:03 UTCTom Henderson

I have had one of those inexpensive USB scopes for a few months. It's small and portable, and quality of the images is decent, and it makes photography easy. I am pleased with the purchase. That being said... I have several hand loupes that I use frequently "in the field", and an inexpensive binocular scope on the bench. I agree with the other replies: The USB scope compliments these other instruments, and is not a suitable replacement for either. I consider the USB photos only "snapshots" on a level comparable to a cheap camera. Invest a limited budget accordingly. -TomH

13th Oct 2015 16:47 UTCDoug Schonewald

Thanks to everyone. I have purchased the loupes and use them to sort through stuff in the field. I only cart back to the truck what I think might be interesting Usually three to six 5 gal buckets of rocks :-). I haven't ordered a USB microscope yet and I may not. I am saving to buy the best used stereo-microscope I can find, and will likely end up buying a B&L or something in that price range.

I have found two microscopes that are in my price point. Both have 'boom arm' mounting systems. It appears to me that this would not be as stable as a regular stand. On the other hand it appears much more versatile than the typical standard stand. I would like to hear what others think about the type of mount that is most stable and useful. I don't want to purchase a boom stand and find out that the versatility is offset by excess movement and 'shakiness'.

13th Oct 2015 16:48 UTCDoug Schonewald

13th Oct 2015 16:50 UTCDoug Schonewald

14th Oct 2015 15:44 UTCD. Peck

I used a boom arm for years, and liked it very much. It is convenient in that you can swing the scope out of your way when you need the space. Mine was extremely stable (it was an old B&L). The base weighed about 40 lbs. I bought a used Meiji trinocular a few months ago, but could not afford a boom mount for it. BTW, the Meiji is a very good scope.

10th Nov 2015 23:17 UTCcascaillou

I'm reacting a bit late, but about the gemoro 1030pm gemological microscope:

pros:

-very cheap (250$)

-features a real darkfield

cons:

-the head cannot rise high enough to focus on the surface of any object exceeding 2cm in height (which is fine for faceted gems, but is a serious problem for larger rough or mineral specimens). That is the main concern about this scope.

-objective is 1x/3x (imho 2x/4x would have been better)

-darkfield halogen light bulb is only 10W which is weak (but one could try and improve things a bit by replacing it by a 20W bulb, I wouldn't try a 30W however as I'm not sure the scope internal parts would handle the heat)

-some internal parts are glued (not screwed) to the structure.

Mindat.org is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2024, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: April 25, 2024 14:34:47

Go to top of page