Date   

Re: OT: microscope source?

Vince Vielhaber
 

I use one like this:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/143647752810

I suspend it above the bench and have it showing on the 23" monitor in front of me. I did some component level on a Yaesu 857D where some of the parts were so tiny my SMD pickup tool ate em. Using an exacto knive I launched a few across the room never to be found again. Good thing I bought the parts in quantities of 25+, I lost many!!

Vince.

On 04/15/2021 04:52 AM, cheater cheater wrote:
There's only one microscope you should be buying and it's the exact
one Louis Rossmann sells, bought directly from Louis Rossmann. He has
a special version that isn't sold anywhere else. He explains it in his
videos at some point, hell if I can find them.

If someone can point to a better scope, at this sort of price, I'm all ears.

Here's a trick though. My vision isn't that great either. But I can
solder 01005 without a problem. How?

I have some large windows looking out into the northern sky
(important), and I solder on the window sill. The light is just so
much better than any artificial source you can get, and it improves
your vision dramatically. Do yourself a favor and try this trick.

Cheers

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 10:36 AM Tom Gardner <tggzzz@gmail.com> wrote:

Welcome to that club :(

The choice is going to be very personal; what suits my eyes and working habits
may not be suitable for you.

Since you /will/ end up doing some experimentation, I suggest it might be worth
some quick and cheap experiments to help you decide on your equipment. In that
vein, I suggest you try these
https://www.amazon.co.uk/COVVY-Magnifier-Magnifying-Detachable-Electronic/dp/B07P957H9Z


* cheap enough to be regarded as disposable
* very widely available under many brand names from many sources
* work with your spectacles
* no problem getting a soldering iron between the lenses and the UUT
* flux residue not deposited on lenses
* work at any angle, including peering sideways into equipment cases
* multiple magnifications
* useless LED light



On 15/04/21 02:36, Brad Thompson wrote:
Hello--

Given shrinking component markings and deteriorating vision, I'm
interested in purchasing a stereo microscope with long working distance.
I stumbled across a company (Amscope) that offers a range of scopes that
look promising.

Has anyone in the group purchased from that company? Please reply
privately.

On a broader level, what's the group's experience and recommendations
for peering, say, into a plug-in's innards?

Thanks in advance, and 73--







Re: OT: microscope source?

magnustoelle
 

Good day,
I appreciate all the good advice based on 1st hand experience.
Harvey, if you are looking into microscopes for inspection, not active work when microscoping, then I‘d recommend some quality Stereo Microscopes from brands such as Leica, Olympus or Zeiss. Their adjustable magnification power is a feature I surely do not want to miss. ‚Zooming’ in and out the area of interest is what I do most before and after equipment repair work and board assembly. 
After weeks of consideration I have bought a used Zeiss type Stemi DV4 in good condition last year; with a magnification of 8x to 32x. Its optics are stunning.The 2nd aspect I want to mention is good lighting. You cannot expect good visuals under poor lighting conditions. Good light systems can be expensive!  I have converted two inexpensive work lights with goose necks into adjustable and dimmable lights for the above microscope and in combination with the Stereo Microscope they produce excellent results; at a hobby budget friendly price level (total 400€).There are many threads on this topic on the eevblog forum.
Cheers,
Magnus


Harvey,

The first microscope you mention is a stereo microscope, but the second microscope, I believe, is a reflected light high power microscope for wafer inspection is not a stereo microscope.
It is binocular, but not stereo. There is one light path that is split into two eyepieces, so it cannot be stereo.

--Victor

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 12:07 PM, Harvey White wrote:


If you're going to get a stereo microscope, bear in mind that there are
two industry uses at least.  One is parts inspection, assembly and
such.  These have a suitable working distance, say 4 to 6 inches based
on what I have.

The other type is a wafer inspection scope.  It has a very short working
distance and is not suitable (IMHO) for assembly work. You can often
tell the difference by looking at the stage.  The wafer scope should
have positioning adjustments on the stage.

I have an american optical /spencer on a boom.  Useful for assembly, but
not useful for peering inside a plugin.

Harvey


Re: 7854 printed manuals and their revisions

Albert Otten
 

There are newer versions. Artek Manuals (Dave) lists their pdf is for S/N B010100-B14xxxx .
Albert


Re: OT: microscope source?

victor.silva
 

Harvey,

The first microscope you mention is a stereo microscope, but the second microscope, I believe, is a reflected light high power microscope for wafer inspection is not a stereo microscope.
It is binocular, but not stereo. There is one light path that is split into two eyepieces, so it cannot be stereo.

--Victor

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 12:07 PM, Harvey White wrote:


If you're going to get a stereo microscope, bear in mind that there are
two industry uses at least.  One is parts inspection, assembly and
such.  These have a suitable working distance, say 4 to 6 inches based
on what I have.

The other type is a wafer inspection scope.  It has a very short working
distance and is not suitable (IMHO) for assembly work. You can often
tell the difference by looking at the stage.  The wafer scope should
have positioning adjustments on the stage.

I have an american optical /spencer on a boom.  Useful for assembly, but
not useful for peering inside a plugin.

Harvey


Re: Hardest part to get to? (2230 AC-Gnd-DC Lever Arm)

alastair.knights@...
 

Sounds like I'm better off with my 2230 and I'm glad to hear that I'm not venturing into unchartered territory.

That said, I still think I'm looking at a full day to label and dismantle the scope, replace the part, re-assemble and get it working again. Hopefully I'll get it right first time and not have to repeat the process!

Alastair


Re: 7854 printed manuals and their revisions

Dan G
 

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 10:46 AM, Martin Hodge wrote:

If you have the time, could you look to see if there is an
indication of revision date on your manual?
The lower right corner of the first page is marked:

First Printing APR 1980
Revised OCT 1985

The last change it covers is on the A20 High Voltage board, which changed
at serial number B073999.

My manual also contains a set of Manual Change Information sections,
which cover schematic, calibration and theory of operation changes
extending to serial number B095219 (dated 6-11-86).

dan


Re: OT: microscope source?

Roy Thistle
 

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 01:53 AM, cheater cheater wrote:


Louis Rossmann
I wouldn't buy anything from Louis; but, that's just my personal preference.

--
Roy Thistle


Re: OT: microscope source?

Roy Thistle
 

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 08:05 PM, Jeff Dutky wrote:


Amscope, but looking over their products on Amazon the prices are very
reasonable, and the quality looks good
They've perfected the art of making something look very close to quality microscopes... do we know a country's industry that's really good at that? The AM may stand more for amateur-ish than American.
I can't say the optics are not adequate... since that technology is long ago quite mature... and scale factors into it a lot. (Do you pay 100.00 USD for glasses that cost 1.00 USD to make? One does... or one has a dollar store magnifying glass.)
Other than the glass in their products... the rest is plastic and cast... so in my opinion junk.

--
Roy Thistle


Re: OT: microscope source?

Daniel Koller
 

A friend of mine put it fairly concisely I think.  At least it's a good working model for how to approach Chinese optics.  What he said is many Chinese products are from the same OEM factory as the name brand ones, but without the quality control. So, when you buy a "Chinese" product, you pay less, but take on the responsibility for a bad item, or two, or three...  So the trick is to be able to return it for free until you get a good one.  Therein lies the value of Amazon Prime, as much as I hate to support another huge company.
   I want to revise my earlier "purist" point of view.  I didn't dismiss the Amscopes.  I just don't know anything about them.   But in light of Walter's endorsement of them, it's possible they are quite good. 
  Let me veer a little off topic here.  In the Amateur astronomy world, a company known as Televue made a name for themselves selling VERY high quality eyepieces.   These things are heavy - lots of glass in them, with wide fields of view, and expensive.  A Plossl eyepiece goes for ~~$250.   But lately, I have purchased a couple of SvBony branded eyepieces from e-bay and Amazon.   They both cost about $25, so 10x LESS than a Televue.    And I am STUNNED at how good these eyepieces are.  I was able to compare a 10mm eyepiece to my 10.5 mm Televue Plossl directly and there is no perceivable quality difference, at least not to me.  The view is sharp to the edges.   So far I have purchased two of these things, and they are awesome.  So, I think there is absolutely a possibility that the Amscope microscopes can be very competitive to the best brands, optically.
  Dan

On Thursday, April 15, 2021, 11:59:26 AM EDT, victor.silva via groups.io <daejon1=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Lot's of quality variation in Chinese equipment.
I would need a lot of stellar reviews of Amscope before buying a Chinese product.

I'm not saying all Chinese products are bad, I have some Chinese manufactured equipment that is world class.

The stuff sold on ebay is mostly low quality junk. So be careful.

--Victor


Re: OT: microscope source?

Harvey White
 

If you're going to get a stereo microscope, bear in mind that there are two industry uses at least.  One is parts inspection, assembly and such.  These have a suitable working distance, say 4 to 6 inches based on what I have.

The other type is a wafer inspection scope.  It has a very short working distance and is not suitable (IMHO) for assembly work. You can often tell the difference by looking at the stage.  The wafer scope should have positioning adjustments on the stage.

I have an american optical /spencer on a boom.  Useful for assembly, but not useful for peering inside a plugin.

Harvey

On 4/14/2021 9:36 PM, Brad Thompson wrote:
Hello--

Given shrinking component markings and deteriorating vision, I'm
interested in purchasing a stereo microscope with long working distance.
I stumbled across a company (Amscope) that offers a range of scopes that
look promising.

Has anyone in the group purchased from that company? Please reply
 privately.

On  a broader level, what's the group's experience and recommendations
for peering, say, into a plug-in's innards?

Thanks in advance, and 73--

Brad  AA1IP







Re: OT: microscope source?

victor.silva
 

Lot's of quality variation in Chinese equipment.
I would need a lot of stellar reviews of Amscope before buying a Chinese product.

I'm not saying all Chinese products are bad, I have some Chinese manufactured equipment that is world class.

The stuff sold on ebay is mostly low quality junk. So be careful.

--Victor


Re: OT: microscope source?

Greg Muir
 

Aside from my Amscope SE400-Z boom microscope with 10X wide field eyepieces for “flat’ (on-the-bench) work I also use a Donegan Optivisor (trade name) when having to stick my head inside of a piece of equipment to deal with inspection and component replacement. Both gives these old eyes excellent viewing capability for everything down to 0402 SMT packages.

For quick solder joint final inspection after deflux I picked up a jewelers/gemologists/geologists folding loupe. Some contain tiny LED illumination that often comes in handy.

The amount of money one wants to spend is obviously based upon the actual usage of the optical equipment. There is no need to spend $500-$600 or more for a microscope if you are only going to use it only a couple times a year. My usage is far more than that but I also realized that if a lower price piece of equipment serves the purpose the extra money can certainly be put into better places.

Greg


Re: OT: microscope source?

Chris Wilkson
 

I can't remember the [exact] model numbers off the top of my head, but I have used several Amscopes for assembly and inspection. They are a good value, IMHO.

At my old job we had a small boom stand scope. From memory and looking at pictures online, I believe it was a SE400-Z. ~$200 new. It was great for inspection and very good for assembly/rework. One thing I didn't like was the short arm. It was designed for working on top of the base. If you rotated the arm away from the base, the scope could tip over. I also recall that the focus was a little off when changing zoom (or vice-versa). Easy to adjust, but it was a 2-knob adjustment I think. The gooseneck mounted lamp was very nice but the point source light created pretty bad shadows.

For home use, I bought a nice simul-focus scope. I think that one is a SM-4NTP. ~ $600 with my setup. Double arm, trinocular, with the optional LED-ring light source. The base is heavy enough that I can rotate the scope in and out of the work space without tipping. The light source is super bright and adjustable and shadow effects are minimal. Adjustments are easy all around and the focus is stable. I didn't get a camera with it, but I will get one in the future. In theory, the simul-focus feature will keep the camera in focus if the eyepiece view is in focus. But I obviously haven't verified that yet.

The boom-arm scopes are heavy -> cast iron bases. They're too heavy to drag around, and too big to fit inside that thing you're sticking your head into to while repairing it, so I also have a head mounted magnifier. They also work great for bench work. Cheap $20 Pros Kit brand I think. They work well, and have a switched LED lamp and a few discrete magnification levels via flip-in lenses. But they are not very comfortable for long term use. I need a better pair.

If I need to take pictures of something small, I use a $20 USB scope from Adafruit. Model 1061. It is serviceable but I don't like to work under it. It's really very hard for me to coordinate hands/eyes when looking at a monitor. And the monocular view makes it even harder to work in 3-space.

Camera phone takes REALLY good pictures, but is the last resort because the focal length is way too long for many of the interesting shots that I need.


Re: OT: microscope source?

Renée
 

I have a couple of the cheap ones focal length 17 inch and 14 inch..bad thing is depth of field...gee go figure more mag shallower depth, and one of the biggest for me is attaching them to the glasses with regard to the weight. i have not spent time to convert them to a headband style holder that can be pushed out of the way.....quality of lenses is not great but sufficient to do some very fine work...takes time to get it all adjusted...and it does not always hold said adjustment......most of the time the B&L 3x headband works for the larger parts....
hope this helps
Renée

On 4/15/21 6:16 AM, SCMenasian wrote:
I have a Baush&Lomb Stereozoom, which works well for me, except when it's (relatively) fixed position prevents me from looking into equipment. I got used to it when I ran a semiconductor quality assurance/materials analysis lab.

On a recent trip to my dentist, I observed that he had magnifying loupes which attached to his glasses. A search on Amazon revealed that some (Chinese?) were quite inexpensive (around $50, if I recollect correctly). On my next trip to the dentist, I asked which brand he used and what the cost was. It was in the $3000 range. So, I guess that there is a large range for these and it might be a bit of "you get what you pay for". I did find some others (on Amazon or elsewhere?) in the $200-$300 range and that might be the sweet spot.




7854 printed manuals and their revisions

Martin Hodge
 

On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 10:51 PM, Dan G wrote:


On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 10:19 PM, Martin Hodge wrote:

Where did you find that schematic?
On my bookshelf :)

The image I uploaded is a scan of my (original) paper manual.
Thank you for taking the time to scan that. I was just about to buy a printed manual for my 7854 when you made it apparent that there may be other versions available. If you have the time, could you look to see if there is an indication of revision date on your manual? The PDF on tekwiki, which I have been referring to, appears to be Sep '81 and the copy I was going to buy matches that. But you appear to have a later revision.

So, I'm in the market for one if anyone has an extra.


Re: OT: microscope source?

Daniel Koller
 

Hey Brad,   
   I use a microscope every day, both at home and at work.   I actually haven't used it too much to repair scopes, per se, because I have not had to repair them too often, but I use a microscope for electronics work often enough.  My recommendation, if you are planning to be using a microscope a lot, is to get a GOOD one.
  I know nothing about Mantis or Amscope optics, but the traditional leaders in the business are Olympus, Nikon and Leica.   At work, no one farts around with anything else - the assemblers need GOOD microscopes.   I personally prefer my Nikon SMZ-2, an older model, over most of the Olympus microscopes at work.  I purchased it for about $250 on e-bay  and it was said to be new.   It came in a sealed plastic bag, and sure looked new, so whether or not the seller's claim was true is irrelevant.   The boom was an additionally $100 or so, purchased separately.   You pay for good optics and solid mounts.  
   My Nikon has a 0.9-4x variable zoom head, and I typically use x10 eyepieces (9-40x net magnification).   However, this is TOO MUCH for most work under the scope, so I bought a 0.5x objective lens for it (4.5-20x net).   I also have 20x  eyepieces with a graticule in them if I want to measure something really small.    Often however, I wish I had *lower* magnification and more working space.
   The Leica microscope I have at work is something like 3-60x net zoom and it is optically superior in every way to any other microscope I have ever used.  It is a NICE microscope.  It lacks the boom, but at work I don't need it as much.  Used, it still cost about $1000.  Many people at work have used it, and now I see Leicas popping up on other work benches, so others seem to like it too.  Ideally, this is the zoom range you should use for electronics repair and assembly, especially the low end of 3x.
   For working on electronics, I would say a good heavy boom is useful.  You can swing the scope to the side, or bring it to the edge of the bench to work there, and raise and lower it a good deal more than a microscope with a fixed base.   You can for example, use it on an instrument in situ, then swing the boom out of the way as necessary.  My microscope is centered on my shop bench, indicating how important it is.
  For soldering under the microscope, DEFINITELY get some sort of objective lens or neutral filter to screw over the lenses.   You can etch away the objectives with acrid solder smoke.   Having  a fan on also helps draw smoke away from the lenses.   
  Don't be distracted by cheap electronics and microscopes with built in cameras.  As was mentioned, a typical cell phone has a better camera than anything you typically find in a microscope and if someone comes out with a great microscope with built in camera, well, next year's next generation of cell phones will blow that camera's resolution out of the water.   Instead, I built  an adapter that slides over one of the eyepieces and snaps on to my ancient Canon A720 camera, which has manual controls for exposure, aperture and focus.  I used a lathe to make part of the adapter, but I bet you can also 3D print one.  There are some available commercially I am sure.  The setup takes great photos and my optics are not compromised by extra elements needed to pull light out for a camera port.
Hope this helps.  Dan

Heh heh.... just reading Walter's reply before I send.   Yes, I an a "high end purist!!"   But I got them by low-end scrounging on e-bay.  I'm not afraid to dumpster dive for what I want.
Illumination:   My setup is the original Nikon lamp, single axis, mounted off to the side of the objective.  It has a hallogen bulb that gets hot.  This is not Ideal and I often find myself adding another spotlight source to the side.  A ring light would be better.  Good lighting is also expensive.  I have not tried some of the cheap LED ring light assemblies sold on e-bay.   My guess is they are a bit "blue" and will drive me nuts ("Purist!!").  At work I have a ring light fed by a quartz lamp in a shoebox sized illuminator connected by fiber optic about 18" away.   A fan cools the lamp.    It is a nice setup, but they are a bit expensive.   I've maybe seen some for under $200 on e-bay, but have not looked recently.   Ring lighting is useful for photography, and you can often enhance the view by shadowing part of the ring and moving the light around that way, with a card.
Another poster made the point about lighting, and north facing windows.  I think this is also a very good point, with regard to eyesight in general.   As we get older, we need more light!!  I have not got much light coming in through my shop windows (a single south facing French door on the end) but when my wife insisted I take out the hideous vanity lamps in the bathrooms, I mounted them on the ceiling of my shop.  I screwed in an assortment of old CFL and LED lamps.  It's where my old CFLs go to die and I test various new LED lamps.  So there is a variety of color temperature bulbs, and a LOT of them (~12x >60W equivalent spread out over ~~400 square feet).  But with a lot of light and a good pair of glasses, you just might not need the microscope for one particular task, yet.

On Thursday, April 15, 2021, 09:39:53 AM EDT, Paul Amaranth <paul@auroragrp.com> wrote:

I have a couple pair of the Chinese loupes that were in the 35-70 range.
I use one pair at 3.5X quite a bit.  They have a long working distance and the magnification is good for small work.

I also have a 10x pair but that's too high a power for head mounted gear.  They bounce with every heartbeat.

I also have a headband magnifier along with the Mantis.  They all have their place.  Some work better for some applications than others.

The Mantis is the coolest though.

To say which is best is like saying you only need one scope :-)

  Paul

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 06:16:25AM -0700, SCMenasian wrote:
I have a Baush&Lomb Stereozoom, which works well for me, except when it's (relatively) fixed position prevents me from looking into equipment. I got used to it when I ran a semiconductor quality assurance/materials analysis lab.

On a recent trip to my dentist, I observed that he had magnifying loupes which attached to his glasses. A search on Amazon revealed that some (Chinese?) were quite inexpensive (around $50, if I recollect correctly). On my next trip to the dentist, I asked which brand he used and what the cost was. It was in the $3000 range. So, I guess that there is a large range for these and it might be a bit of "you get what you pay for". I did find some others (on Amazon or elsewhere?) in the $200-$300 range and that might be the sweet spot.







!DSPAM:60783cb46304409463872!
--
Paul Amaranth, GCIH            | Manchester MI, USA             
Aurora Group of Michigan, LLC  |  Security, Systems & Software
paul@AuroraGrp.Com              |  Unix/Linux - We don't do windows


Re: OT: microscope source?

 

Regarding Amscope, their microscope units are pretty good, not Zeiss or Olympus optics level,
but completely adequate for SMD work. the hardest issue is getting mag factors in the best range,
4-20x, with roughly 10x being optimal. This is not easy, because most eyepieces are already 10X
(or greater), and a 1X or lower objective is large and costly. Variable objectives at low factors are
often the perfect solution for this task. High end purists sometimes scoff at vendors like Amscope, but
not everyone can afford $5K optics, so it really comes down to what you find satisfactory.

I prefer the Olympus models as they are so flexible and re-configurable, and often reasonably priced.
I have a nice collection of them now, in every style. Through-the-lens illumination is a HUGE help
for any kind of metallurgical observation (the industry term for top surface, not through viewing).

I have camera based units as well, but to be candid, they are not ideal for re-work or assembly,
but are great for inspection. Most people find it very hard to co-ordinate eye-hand work to a monitor,
and the stereo microscope often works better because it feels more like your natural vision, just better.

anyway, just my $0.02 worth on this topic, happy to discuss further off-list.
all the best,
walter  (walter2 -at- sphere.bc.ca)

--
Walter Shawlee 2
Sphere Research Corp. 3394 Sunnyside Rd.
West Kelowna, BC, V1Z 2V4 CANADA
Phone: +1 (250-769-1834 -:- http://www.sphere.bc.ca
+We're all in one boat, no matter how it looks to you. (WS2)
+All you need is love. (John Lennon)
+But, that doesn't mean other things don't come in handy. (WS2)
+Nature is trying very hard to make us succeed, but nature does not depend on us.
We are not the only experiment. (R. Buckminster Fuller)


Re: OT: microscope source?

Paul Amaranth
 

I have a couple pair of the Chinese loupes that were in the 35-70 range.
I use one pair at 3.5X quite a bit. They have a long working distance and the magnification is good for small work.

I also have a 10x pair but that's too high a power for head mounted gear. They bounce with every heartbeat.

I also have a headband magnifier along with the Mantis. They all have their place. Some work better for some applications than others.

The Mantis is the coolest though.

To say which is best is like saying you only need one scope :-)

Paul

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 06:16:25AM -0700, SCMenasian wrote:
I have a Baush&Lomb Stereozoom, which works well for me, except when it's (relatively) fixed position prevents me from looking into equipment. I got used to it when I ran a semiconductor quality assurance/materials analysis lab.

On a recent trip to my dentist, I observed that he had magnifying loupes which attached to his glasses. A search on Amazon revealed that some (Chinese?) were quite inexpensive (around $50, if I recollect correctly). On my next trip to the dentist, I asked which brand he used and what the cost was. It was in the $3000 range. So, I guess that there is a large range for these and it might be a bit of "you get what you pay for". I did find some others (on Amazon or elsewhere?) in the $200-$300 range and that might be the sweet spot.







!DSPAM:60783cb46304409463872!
--
Paul Amaranth, GCIH | Manchester MI, USA
Aurora Group of Michigan, LLC | Security, Systems & Software
paul@AuroraGrp.Com | Unix/Linux - We don't do windows


Re: OT: microscope source?

Mark Goldberg
 

I have an Amscope SE400-Z. That has a nice long working distance, so plenty
of room for tools. I use the 10X for assembly and the 20X for inspection.
The stereo is a huge help with visualization compared to a monocular
camera. The eye relief and exit pupil are such that I don't need my
glasses. The illuminator is good. A Mantis is better, but usually very
expensive.

My qrz.com page has links to my setup.

Regards,

Mark
W7MLG

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 6:37 PM Brad Thompson <brad.thompsonaa1ip@gmail.com>
wrote:

Hello--

Given shrinking component markings and deteriorating vision, I'm
interested in purchasing a stereo microscope with long working distance.
I stumbled across a company (Amscope) that offers a range of scopes that
look promising.

Has anyone in the group purchased from that company? Please reply
privately.

On a broader level, what's the group's experience and recommendations
for peering, say, into a plug-in's innards?

Thanks in advance, and 73--

Brad AA1IP








Re: OT: microscope source?

Oz-in-DFW
 

I have a couple of StereoZooms with 0.5X Barlow lenses on them to extend the working height to something more comfortable for electronics. It halves the magnification, but it turns out the resulting range is a bit better for working on SMD parts.

--
Oz (in DFW) N1OZ

6641 - 6660 of 188004