Printable View
So I've spent a couple of months for this.
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1775/...d94091ba59.jpg
Belomo, Schneider, Peak, Carton, Carson, Kenko, Panasonic...
Sorry, but I have no time to make fully eng version.
Only part about Carton
myabrasive.ru ... Carton
I think google translate would be good enought :)
Pics from loupes and oth.:
microscopes review and gallery
loupes review and gallery
Table of contents
Just wanna break a bit my stagnation.
Hope it helps someone.
I will be waiting for someone to make sense of this. It's too much for me to decipher. But I'd love to hear the outcome of the experiment.
There is no short result.
I'll try try, but it'll take time.
Gold hammer
If you want to select the only one parameter that will give you absolete result - there is no such a thing.
You can buy a glass microscope that would be worse than acrylyc one :
glass optic Carton M887, M889 vs acrylic Kenko Do-Nature (the same post - see pic desc -- or Kenko review)
You can buy expensive one that wouldn't be a good one for it's price - see Panasonic FF-394 100x and photo-primers there: it's price is about 190 USD for a new one (actually I bought it for ~15USD inc shipping --used one of course), but image quality just a bit better than Kenko have and there is no way it could be comparable with Peak pen 2001-100 or 2008-100.
And also Carton produce not only garbage like M887: model M783 just a bit more expensive but it's rather nice for it's price - see pics here.
Actually -- microscopes photoprimers album could be more usefull to see the difference.
Next sad truth fact is: there is no the only one right opinion. I like Belomo loupe - one friend of mine doesn't :(
Of course some constructive points still works(that Belomo better than a no-name "30x" "triplet" in sharpness, contrast, etc)
but he likes Peak Steinheil and obviosly Belomo can't stand any comparison face to face with it..
And the last thing: 100x could give less information than 30x - it's depends on optics quality.
Just try to compare
(stone is - silicon carbide with F230 grain size)
Panasonic FF-394 100x
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1819/...fbb2c9d0_z.jpg
Or Kenko Do-Nature STV120M 120x
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1777/...f4314445_z.jpg
vs Peak 2051-60 60x
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/959/4...ee57263a_z.jpg
or even 30-40x
(there is a bit different sharpening stone with participle size F220)
Mikko 30x
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1794/...7fc3d7ea_z.jpg
Carton M783 40x
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1836/...4583c52f_z.jpg
Magnification
The next thing is magnification.
Bigger magnification is not always better.
Why?
Because:
brightness, fiels of view, вepth of field - all these things become worse.
Also it's easy to use 30x microscope but when you use a 100x microscope it's quite uneasy: magnification is bigger, details is bigger and hands trembling too.
So, actually 30x is enought for general sharpening control purpose.
If you want more details and better results - 50x is good (Peak 2008-50, Peak 2034-60, Peak 2034-40).
Experiments, some researches - it's better to think about the devices that display the picture on the screen. Like DinoLite
(Dino-Lite Premier AM4113ZT4) https://sunrisedino.com/index.php?ma...roducts_id=141
primers is here
Next to..:
Loupe or microscope,
you can't trust photo,
lead params,
loupe short review,
microscope short review.
I'm surprised at the amount of colour fringing/chromatic aberration in the Kenko example image. I think optics with good lens coatings are an aid in viewing the very edge of the blade.
Bob
Kenko doesn't have coating. And it's not a glass optic - acrylyc lenses.
Actually, chinese CN Scope (review) has coated glass lenses but it's still dark a bit. Darker than Mikko 30x (glass, no coating, a bit less magnification - just a bit).
And still uncomparable with peak 2008-50.
But _good_ lens coating definitely helps :) And a good optic with no CA(or very low) makes easier to view the edge.
Yup, the Kenko not having lens coatings would explain that. Using the right type of plastic in lens making is not necessarily a drawback consider some of the successful hybrid aspheric lenses that have been made. The "right" lens coatings should not necessarily make the lens any darker than a none coated lens if the right type of glass is used in the lens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Botanic
All in all a low powered loupe with the right type of glass in well ground lens elements with good lens coatings is about all you need for most honing purposes. Unfortunately the best of those are not inexpensive. You also get to the point of rapidly diminishing return on the money spent too as in if you can't see the difference in performance there is none and the extra cost is a waste.
Bob
yes. But I haven't met any good variants with PMMA optic if we are talknig about microscopes.Quote:
Originally Posted by BobH
Kenko, Carson - it's just acceptable level, not more.
Noname chinese and near that(Kingmax, Bresser, ..) - are not better. Still sometimes acceptable (and also if you are a lucky one) but only for extra low money ways.
Loupes - that is another field.
Actually for 1000-2000 jis grit sharpening even chinese "30x" "triplet" with mud and pieces of paper in lences - is enought.
But if you want to save health of your eyes - it's better to think about something better, like Belomo.
And Eschenbach PMMA mobilux economy (official site)
Is near the same level.
For small details(<20mkm.), if you hate haziness and if you want to enjoy the process - Peak Steinheil would be better.
Schneider is the best but it's too expensive and it's overkill.
But if your sharpening frequency is about twice in a year and optic control takes about a couple of moments - it's not so important.
I have heard of lots of acquisition disorders: razors (RAD), soaps (SAD), hones (HAD), etc. but this is the first time I have known of people with MAD: Magnifier Acquisition Disorder. That might become the next big thing in straight razor shaving. The posts are quite interesting and informative.
About chinese triplets
Chinese loupe named "triplet"(left) and normal triplet(right)
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/938/2...b6d513df_z.jpg
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1865/...451e802b_n.jpg
So it's not a 30x or 20x - it's about 10x.
and it's not a triplet in real - just a monocle system.
+ there is no CA correction like normal triplets have
+ no distortion correction
:)Quote:
Originally Posted by RayClem
and i think MAD is the best name for this, because prices aren't good
(see Swiss Axe Triplet Hawk link -- i wish to unseen this pokemon -- better to collect eschers).
...
Wait a minute..SAD? Sounds like a new hobby ;)
mad sad had in all its manifestations :D
I love seeing magnified pictures of a straight razors edge as it get honed progressively on finer and finer grit stones. What’s the best magnifying system for that?
Honestly - I don't have enought information on this theme.
Not rich enought to make another journey :D
----------
I know that DinoLite is nice (AM413T -- see video and pic review)
but it's about 300-400USD or more(link)
- i'm too greedy. That's what I think about to buy to myself sometimes..But I need to sell all(or at least first hundred of them) my stones first :D
Hozan could be good - http://www.hozan.co.jp/E/catalog/Optical/index.html
Or Nikon SMZ, Olympus VM - not enought information, but they are expensive.
Pavol Šandor(youtube) uses Nikon SMZ:
Microscope SMZ-168 Trinocular + reduction + NIKON D7000
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EiHF6TK7po
And that inexpensive chinese and near digital microscopes not good for my eyes - it's like I'm in the childhood with quake 1.
The only one inexpensive and not so bad that i know: Supereyes B008
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUAAq0avKUU)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=297&v=3gR_yP9JoNA
And there is a variant with chinese C-mount USB camera
how it looks like https://yadi.sk/d/zsLnpfEoyHFqH
Matrix size is 1/2.5, 5MP.
primers
https://yadi.sk/d/xEYbi6_doQkxw
https://yadi.sk/d/a_d_u6Trpz2kW
https://yadi.sk/d/2t1BcpnIpi3W4
it's about 200 USD
Or this one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuOWkjqVfEE&t=37m37s
it's C-mount camera too, but don't know exactly wich is.
Just know that it's something like Digital HD 16MP 1080P HDMI USB 300X Industrial Electronic Video Microscope Camera Set
So I use this
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1873/...4af81821_z.jpg
and don't want to think about new type of HAD (Photographic..PAD? mh..not original any more)
Olympus E-3 + Zuiko 70-300 + reverse ring adapter + Zuiko 50mm.
How it works
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_photography
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1874/...43c93a85_z.jpg
Focusing -- is a headache - all manual.
Result is good
Hindostan
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1818/...3e9db911_z.jpg
Omura
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/933/3...d744e2f8_z.jpg
Opinel Stainless + typic LI
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1722/...d5120c0d_z.jpg
Victorinox + Suehiro G-8
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4776/...4e34e135_z.jpg
My old set: Olympus C-7070 + Peak 2008-50
like this:
(src: http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/marimari0530/28208744.html)
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/856/4...d0370cc7_z.jpg
Result:
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1768/...e7eb86a9_z.jpg
And here https://straightrazorpalace.com/hone...ml#post1484034
you can see more (photos with scale)
My friend use Samsung NX + various lenses
https://www.flickr.com/photos/oldtor/
And that is another level :)
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1842/...8e0d68de_z.jpg
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1736/...b364c4a9_z.jpg
=========
Main theme about this How to make a photo (RUS)
but I still have not done with sorting and compiling -- it will not be soon.
If you want something inexpensive:
chinese USB isn't good variant, imho.
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1818/...83e7167e_z.jpg
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1879/...964e41cc_z.jpg
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1850/...9879ef57_z.jpg
Kenko Do-Nature STV40M - 20x
CNat Pandod JY ~2000-3000JIS
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1778/...3c0035e6_z.jpg
Kenko Do-Nature STV120M - 60x
the same
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/939/4...06ea899f_z.jpg
Or cheap chinese mini-microscope:
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/939/4...745178f1_z.jpg
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/933/4...82cc6151_z.jpg
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/934/4...5c418cff_z.jpg
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/935/2...3b257e74_z.jpg
1 div=0.5mm.
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/858/2...c8a8a8cb_z.jpg
===========
Smartphone variant:
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/929/4...e2d2a9d4_z.jpg
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/935/2...58d8c798_z.jpg
Loupe or microscope
Loupe is better when you are sharpening something not sraight. Like razor with smiling line of the edge.
So microscope isn't easy to use in this case, because you need to spend time to:
- focuse on the edge
- depth of field is small - you spend time to refocus from one area to another, from edge to bevel
- you need more light
- the angle range of lightning, that give you informative image is also more narrow
But it's not common for every loupe.
Good loupe with 10x power is nice.
15x - is darker but still good (Peak 2023 15x, Peak 1985 Steinheil 14x).
20x - is too dark and hard to focuse.
Even Peak 1964 22x, that isn't cheap, isn't better than acrlylic microscope Kenko STV40M (20-40x). Actually, Kenko is even more usable.
So for rouge honing, repairing etc - sharpening stages below 1000grit - 10x loupe is more comfortable and faster.
But if we are talknig about small details(~20mkm. and less), sharpening at 3000 grit stage and thinner, some research purpose - microscope 40-60x helps a lot ("must have").
Lead params
Sharpness, contrast, brightness.
(acrylyc optic isn't good here).
...
There could be a lot of params, but actually you can't understand is it good or not for you before use it in real.
Because even so respectable words like "glass optic lenses", "aplanat", "CA correction", "full coated lenses"
- could be just misprint. And quality of lenses doesn't depend on this words.
Sharpness, contrast, brightness - you can't see this in product description.
So all you can do - see it in real or searching for reviews etc.
Don't forget that when you buy in a store, you can check for defect can compare etc.
All helpful you can see in description:
- magnification power
- field of view (rare)
- diameter of lenses\ocular (rare, frequently wrong)
- weight
And if you wear glasses (-D) working distanse (between lenses and object) is shorter.
Buying at a store
You should think about:
- are lenses clean or not?
because items at a showcase can be smeared with fingers of previous buyers (almost always actually)
- is there enought light?
- what to see?
-- distortion
see a ruler, something with scale or just a simple list from note
-- CA
metallic ruller, razor edge or something with strong contrast like black letters on white paper
also bright ligth is needed
-- sharpness
something with small details
you should pay attention to contrast of contours\edges of small objects (grains, fibers)
note list - try to see fibers
silicon carbide stone or dark hued (not white) aluminium oxide stone like Naniwa Chosera ~ 800jis (20mkm)
If you see every grain separated - it's a good loupe.
But in common you will see something looks like more a mosaic where edges of grains are guessed but not distinguishable.
-- brightness, contrast
!Don't forget that your eyes can get tired. So you need to make a rest about every 10 min. +\-
So typically:
metalic ruler:
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1855/...8fbfce9b_z.jpg
CA, distorion
-- field of view (effective)
note paper
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1861/...7e34300a_z.jpg
distortion, details (fibers)
colorization
Sharpening stone 800 jis grit
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1838/...0561304a_z.jpg
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1746/...a02a7f3a_z.jpg
Sharpness - small details, contrast
More primers there photo samples from loupes - review [RUS]
or there photo samples from loupes - gallery
Photos
In reviews ou can see a different quality of photo examples from microscopes and oth.
But you should know that it's not so representative as you think.
Because the image depends on:
- quality of the microscope
- quality of the camera
like noise, blooming, camera inner image processing
- focal lenght of lenses of the camera
- dirt on the lenses
- light (quality, angle, brightness, side illumination, glare)
- motion blur
- focusing mistakes
- the optical axis of the microscope is'nt aligned with the optical axis of the camera
that leads to distortion, loss of sharpness, brightness
So if you have enough exp. and compare samples from one camera and under the same conditions - it could give you some information.
This is my own personal view, I hone a hell of a lot of razors, and I do not want to see more than my 10X Belomo Triplet shows me, I fail to see what you are looking for that a 10X can't already tell you.
My personal problem in sharpening is burr that less 20mkm. in size. You won't see it looking through 10x loupe.
And I want to see as many details as possible. Just because of curiosity.
I can sharp well without microscope.
I can sharp without loupe.
I can just live somewhere and not to share photos with anybody.
-- there is no practical reason to do that, right? :D
And the only answer that is right - is 42.
About current observation - it's just like short time hobby.
Like 's been said: Magnifier Acquisition Disorder.
or
Like: "Wow! Everybody use 10x loupes when I still use 50x microscope - something is missing".
Actually, it's not only one question, but a couple of dozen like:
This loupe is cheaper - what i actually paid for?
This loupe is quite expensive - is there something speciall? Just brand?
Loupe 10x - does it really help more than 50x microscope? In what cases?
...
So it's not about something practical and rational.
Just a way to spend time. That could give useful results.
Just wanted to collect everything that I've learned during last 10 years about sharpening.
Actually optics in sharpening is just a part of my conspectus.
------------
I will try to finish loupe and microscope review in this month.
In the end there are so many variables at play when discussing optics and taking photos of edges in addition to the problem of correctly interpreting what you think you are seeing as to make it a waste of time for most people using a straight razor. All you really need is a decent quality loupe and the gained ability to correctly interpret what you are seeing through the loupe.
Bob
:)
not so many, actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by BobH
Light, angle, reflectors, camera settings, blade fixation, methods of magnification - that's all.
+\- details like "using this method you should think about side lightning and how to block it".
It's not so difficult to take a good photo. When you know how.
Yup, it takes a time. And it's a waste of time in some way...
But it's not what i'm trying to say..to do in this theme.
I mean, this time all I want is just to provide some information about optics.
And I don't want to start a holywar
or to persuade someone to join to my church of "50x microscope advantage witnesses".
It's like your loupe is enought for you - this theme will be useless, sorry.
You want to buy something good - there is(will be) enought info for make a good buy due to your chose params.
Nothing to read at the weekends? - You are welcome.
etc.
As a prime: Belomo 10x loupe isn't cheapest one. You can buy chinese microscope "50x" (usually it has about 20x power in real) for only $5 that will give you the same level of information about bevel condition or even higher.
So should I say that ch.microscope is better than Belomo? No.
Because if you have a task, then you have params how task should be done --- and there is no such a thing like absolete truth for anyone and anycase.
imho
PS:
some of my friends tried to learn me to use loupe but I think my eyes just not sharp as their :)Quote:
Originally Posted by BobH
20mkm burr isn't visible directly - just fuzzy allusion of it like vague sensation that something is wrong with the edge.
And you can't see: is it mistake at bevel setting stage or it's a burr(steel problems) or it's a micro-chipping -- you need additional time to check it.
Especially if your fingers not so sensitive to provide you good info from nail test.
Especially if you are testing a new hone.
Main problem is that after seeing this fuzzy allusion I start trying to see details and it loads my eyes heavily - don't like this feeling when you are almost see something but vision isn't clear or sharp enought.
For me 50x microscope a lot easier to use for burr control and oth.
For macro-control I don't need a loupe at all.
So, is a 10x loupe enought?
- Sure. But microscope is better. For me at least.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botanic
Yes, absolutely there is more than one way to skin a cat as they say. You have to use a method that is suitable to yourself as everyone is different. It also depends on what your ultimate goal is. In my case it is a sharp edge that gives me a smooth and comfortable shave, gets the job done in other words. I'll grant you it may not be and likely is not the ne plus ultra of edges but works just fine for me. OTH if you want a ne plus ultra edge you will have a different view of the method and equipment required.
Bob
Like anything else there is what you need and what you would like to have and there is overkill. You could buy an SEM and have the ultimate in viewing informational overload. Really good optics can get very expensive and most neither want to spend the money or need to. You can spend a reasonable amount and get a great 10x magnifier which will show all you need to see. Of course if you want to see the microbes on the edge of your razor you can do that too.
So the question for most is how much do you need to see to maintain an edge?