Microscopes Revisited

I have been getting more into using a Norton and my barber hones over the long weekend and once again thought about getting a real microscope instead of using my Radio Shack version.

I thought about the Digital Blue QX5 but see there are other options out there in basic student and inspection microscopes. What has been the general concensus on ultimate power needed to effectively hone a decent edge? I don't really need to see the bacteria on the edge itself or the structure of each individual scratch line but a happy medium is desired.

I am also curiuos about your experiences with each type....the conventional style where the light is below the speciman and the "inspection" type where the subject is usually illuminated from above such as those for inspecting circuit boards etc....

I kind of want something more substantial than a QX5 though as this can be used for other examination related to my "real" job.

Tony

Hi Tony:

The QX5 has a maximum magnification of x200 and the camera resolution is 640x480. The scope is digital only (view image on the PC, no optical viewing). The construction is all plastic, and you have to fiddle with the focus a bit. The x200 magnification is more than enough for blade edge inspection, but the low resolution of the camera and lenses makes for a low quality image. I can see more detail in my optical hand held x50 quality scope than at x200 in the QX5.

You have a choice of incident or transmission mode (light on top or bottom). In both cases these are white superbrite LEDs. For blade inspection incident light is the way to go. Incident light is fixed in the QX5 so you have to shift the blade around to get the light at just the correct angle. It is not an easy matter to balance the str8 on the viewing platform and get it at the right orientaion for the light and have it just in the right position under the lens.

I am thinking of using one of those USB LED lights for laptops as a flexible incident light source. They come on a flex tube so you can place it as you wish. That way at least the angle to the light would be adjustable separately.

I only bought the QX5 because it was cheap ($79.95) and in the worst case my kids could use it for fun.

I would think that for anything other casual usage you would be better served with a bit higher quality scope. The image quality of the QX5 is very low. There are other digital scopes with the same camera resolution but the quality images in their "gallery" would blow the QX5 away. Quality of lenses matter. Quality of the digital camera matters. There is only so much you can squeeze into $79.95.

Olympus digital scope ($795)

ProScope (handheld) ($289)

Another options is an optical microscope with a digital camera built in. You will have higher resolution visually and even if the digital camera is 640x480 just like the QX5 it will only affect the quality of the images you record not the quality you see. You can also use it without a PC.

Optical with digital camera ($799)

Digital Microscopes on e-Bay

If I could justify the expense I would opt out for a better quality scope.

I have a qx5 and it's decent but I am really wanting to upgrade to something better.

I agree that incident light is the way to go and a nice featire of the RS hand held scope. I saw quite a few on eBay that were "normal" scopes with digital cameras added. Most are setup for transmitted light and those that are for incident light like the inspection microscopes all are lower power with 60x near maximum. Quite a few in the $200 range that I suppose would still e better than a QX5.

Tony

Well I'll tell you I've been having this go around with Joe Lerch about magnification and resolution he maintains you need at least 100x or so to see the proper detail but my position is that you don't need anything near that. Resolution and light gathering power is far more critical than magnification.

I have a Nikon Stereo microscope I bought 30 years ago while I was in the navy in Japan. I think I paid about $200 for it with accessories of course it was 360 yen to the dollar then but I can see more with that scope at 20x then most of the pictures I see here at 100x because of the resolution. Before you buy do yourself a favor and try and examine a razor with a quality scope at low power and you'll see what I mean.

I'm into amateur astronomy and its a well accepted fact that a better quality scope at lower magnification will resolve much more detail than a cheaper or cheaper and larger scope at higher magnification. Its all resolution and light gathering power not magnification. I think its the same with microscopes.

I just realized that the QX5 is advertized as 640x480 but gives only 512x384 image. That is 36% less pixels.

A microscope. I have three different models. two of them are 30X and the Radio Shack 60X-100X. I do not use the RS anymore. The resolution is to poor.
The 30X has served all my needs. It tells me the starting condition of the bevel, width, nicks rust spots etc and shows me the changes as I hone the blade.
While I am honing I look for:
1.The removal of the nicks and rust spots
2.The uniformity of the bevel, width, and most importantly, that the entire length of the edge is coming into contact with the hone. This is because of some razors having a slight warp or bend in the blade or the razor has been honed improperly in the past.
3. Color, I want to see a uniform brightness on the width of the bevel. If the edge is darker than the rest of the bevel than the bevel is not fully formed.
4. Wire edge


All of the above can be seen with a 30X handheld microscope. A 10X loupe, bright light, back honing and the thumbnail test can be used for most of the above.

The 100X and up scopes would be a great learning tool, and really cool:), but are not necessary for successful honing.


Just my two cents,

Randy,
I have other uses for one as well and was most interested in the ones without the movable stage, typically labled as inspection microscopes. They seem to top out at 60-80x which I felt would be enough based on what I see with the RS scope.

At work I examine or foundry sand structure as well as the fracture structure of metal tensile test specimens and a lower power incident light scope would be handy there too.

Tony

I agree with thebigspendur. You don't need digital microscope for your blade examination. You will be just fine with student optical 400x, cost about 50$. I like durfee's 1000x pics :)

http://straightrazorpalace.com/image...b_2_detail.jpg
no fins here!

Nenad

There must be somebody on here with access to an electron microscope!
To be honest I make do with a 30x loupe. It is more than enough for my needs. The key is proper lighting and angle.
I'm sure for really detailed research the equipment needed is too expensive for any of us to bother with.

I have a microscope that connects to my computer via a USB cable. It magnifies at 50X and at 200x. It cost about $75 but in the UK.

Some of these microscopes are rubbish and some are of a higher quality. Mine is solidly made and gives great images. I agree X200 doesn't add much value because of the shadows and light reflections.

To be honest, I get the information I need using a 10x loupe. Not all loupes are made equal. Again they are either high quality or poor. Poor ones don't let the light do its job and usually are marked 10x but often only give about 6X magnification.

The BelOMO 10x Triplet Loupe Magnifier is absolutely top class and can be found at www.belomo.us It's reasonably priced compared to Bausch and Lomb and Nikon who also make good quality loupes. Sometimes a search on the net will get a lower price.

The trick when using a loupe is to hold the loupe near the eye and bring the razor to the loupe.

I agree with thebigspendur too - optical quality (resolution) is what counts, not just magnification: if you have a fuzzy image due to poor resolution, magnifying that image just magnifies the fuzziness, it doesn't improve the resolution. You can utilise a desk lamp for overhead lighting of an optical scope's stage - plus you don't have to lug the computer around with you if you fancy using the scope in a different location!

Regards,
Neil.

I've been involved in watchmaking for over 20 years. Using a loupe and having your hands free is essential. Try here:Magnifiers & Eye Loupes for Watchmakers

I use the headband with a 4x and a 10x loupe working on watches and have found it helpful examining razor bevels.

I just bought this :D

AmScope Stereo Microscope. 20,30,40,60x 10w Halogen Light & 10watt Tungsten light


BINOCULAR STEREO DISSECTING MICROSCOPE 20X-30X-40X-60X - eBay (item 200261446069 end time Dec-07-08 00:09:20 PST)

http://www.amscope.com/images/Picture_36552.jpg

I definitely agree that a stereomicroscope, like the one above, is the most versatile and useful for razors. The greatest advantage of it is that you don't ever have to bother with focusing. Instead, you just move the razor up and down to put the region of interest into focus. This allows you to quickly place the razor into the field of view and then quickly scan the entire length of the blade. Another advantage of stereomicroscopes is that they are optically designed to have a greater depth of field. This again allows you to see what you want to see without any fiddling. My stereomicroscope has an infinitely variable magnification ranging from 8x to 64x. I have never felt the need to use any greater magnification than that for a razor, despite having ready access to scopes that can do optical 1000x magnification.

One suggestion: The optics on an old teaching stereomicroscope from a used lab supply store or a university surplus store is likely to have much better optics than any modern low end scope.

I've got an old B&L binocular microscope that goes up to 30X and a variety of eye loupes from 14 to 30X. I originally used them for checking tattooing needles for hooks and blunt tips and still do but now they serve me well for the razor's edge. I got the 30X that Kaptain Zero recommended from Widgit Supply. Real handy as it is large and gathers plenty of light. Eventually I would like to get a higher power scope to check out my scratch patterns more closely and perhaps take photos but the 30 allows me to be sure that my bevel is set, see chips or a burr on the edge so it serves me well. I find it an indispensible asset for checking my progress when I'm sharpening my razors.