What's new

What to look for in magnification

That may be the case, but they wouldn't have been used with a 40x objective. Check and see if you can find an original manual, I think you'll find that they weren't suggested for use with higher magnification levels. The reason is illustrated in the link above.
 
I'm looking forward to some pics as most that are posted (even if they are of high mag.) are not as clear as what I see through my own at 100x.
It would be nice to be able to show what I see but it is cost prohibitive at the moment.
 
I'm looking forward to some pics as most that are posted (even if they are of high mag.) are not as clear as what I see through my own at 100x.
It would be nice to be able to show what I see but it is cost prohibitive at the moment.

I would like to see a few of your images. You can always do as I did and take a shot through the eyepiece with a phone or little camera. Pretty sure that is what Ian is doing with his.

I am waiting on a fiber optic light and still deciding on either an adapter for my SLR or a better c-mount camera to really get cracking. The currently mounted camera on my scope is only 480P resolution, so not great for decent imaging, only good for a general live view.
 
That may be the case, but they wouldn't have been used with a 40x objective. Check and see if you can find an original manual, I think you'll find that they weren't suggested for use with higher magnification levels. The reason is illustrated in the link above.
Original objectives as far as I can tell, but good call, I'll dig around and see if they are in fact. 6x, 10x, (missing), 40x.
 
Good call Ekretz,

Found the model. MJ Metallurgical scope...

Came with 15x eyepieces... Previous owner must have replaced them with 20x at some point.

Objective lenses are original though, so should probably just pick up some 15x eyepieces.

That'd bump me up to 600x mag worth using hopefully (I never bother with 800x atm b/c it's such a nightmare to focus).
 
I would like to see a few of your images. You can always do as I did and take a shot through the eyepiece with a phone or little camera. Pretty sure that is what Ian is doing with his.

I am waiting on a fiber optic light and still deciding on either an adapter for my SLR or a better c-mount camera to really get cracking. The currently mounted camera on my scope is only 480P resolution, so not great for decent imaging, only good for a general live view.

I have tried with the phone and a loupe. Its an old phone and images are not magnified much.
I'm really not much of a tech guy. I don't even have data for my phone.
I think its an I Phone 3, I don't even know.
My brother is an I.T. guy for the county so I get all the hand me downs - phones, computers etc.. No charge.
Its all beyond me.
I've looked at microscopes with cameras many times but it would just be to post here so hard to convince myself.
I get very good images right at the source so that will have to suffice.
I will live vicariously through you guys:)
 
And just for the fun of it for those who may enjoy it, some shots of an experiment today. All at 400x optical again. Ignore the bevel for the most part as it's not all in the DOF. Scratch depth is enough for those to be out of focus at one end of the range or another. I tried to focus on the edge as well as possible for these. The silhouette with the built in light actually works pretty well for viewing the edge with some little tweaks, although I do like a black background better for external lighting. These are all pre-strop.

20210430_120705.jpg

20210430_120826.jpg

20210430_125639.jpg

20210430_132100.jpg
 
And got the idea to try a few slides with stropping compounds. These would be better with a little more magnification. (And a camera that wasn't handheld to the eyepiece, heh).

20210430_151118.jpg

20210430_151146.jpg

20210430_152205.jpg
 
Not too bad there Eric!
Clarity at the very edge is pretty good on the Chosera and 20K. Slight out of focus on the others but pretty damn good.
Love the photos.
 
Nice pictures! I have the same issue with a camera. I picked up an Omano omm200 with a Celestron camera. I can’t get a good image with the Celestron, but this camera does work for Alex Gilmore. My phone works better unfortunately.
 
Ekretz, that's about 420mu FOV?

If so very interesting. I've looked at a LOT of slurries like that (under 400x), but never abrasive pastes.


Assuming our FOV's are the same or really close...

0.5 mu is ballpark where a natural stone slurry size starts to be "a finisher". Any bigger than that and it's a pretty meh shave in my experience. Average coticules look like this.

.25 mu looks pretty typical size for a natural finisher slurry

.1mu looks like the finest slurries.



Here's some natural finisher slurry at 400x (optical), maybe 400mu edge to edge (~1250x on my 27" Monitor).

IMG_20210501_093401376.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ian, yep about 450u or so FOV, but taking the picture with the phone and cropping it means there is a little less there. Nice shots!
 
Last edited:
Oops, I did it again! Now this just fell into my lap yesterday. It seems to be raining microscopes by me. At least they're good ones! I'll be selling the one from page 2 of this thread, and it looks like I should be able to get enough for it that I'll actually be getting paid to upgrade to this one! :biggrin:

20210728_023609.jpg
 
Hart steel 7/8 edge view after one shave.
Veho 400 microscope connected to smart phone
Honing progression:
Naniwa 4 k (gouken)
Tsushima JNAT with Nakayama asagi slurry to water only
Nakayama asagi with tomo finish

Observations.
The shave was really smooth, but lacked some sharpness.
The striations from the 4k is still visible, but they seem to go all the way to the apex.
The edge seems to be a little convex at the apex, maybe because of stropping or it might be caused by the slurry.
The Tsushima seems to be cutting slow. More work is/might be needed at this stage for a keener edge. Maybe the Tsushima is to soft and or coarse.

My goal here was to test the results after jumping of a 4k to a mid range slow jnat would give.
Maybe i could have gotten better results if i added one nagura before the tomo at the end.
It also showed me that the striation at the bevel did not have much of an impact as long as the apex is straight.
4K to 8K to JNAT have been shown to be more efficient, but less smooth.

Just an example of how i use my scope to test different progressions.

1627573927310.jpeg
 
Last edited:
I would change to a different lighting setup if you are using the ring light. I find that ring lights are generally useless for razor work if you want to see anything informative. Use an oblique lighting technique or try the backlit method if you have a bio microscope.

And I forgot to update about that above razor smoothed by a few strokes on a CBN strop earlier. Shaved great, keen and smooth. Got about 4 or 5 shaves on it now with no signs of degradation. I will do an updated image after it gets some wear on it.

We should perhaps start a microscope nerd thread.
 
First image out of the Vanox scope. This is about 400x optical, slightly cropped, in brightfield with EPI illumination. Shot through the eyepiece with my phone, so not perfect. Still need to get a camera set up on this one. Optics are in need of a major cleaning as well.

20210731_131938.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPO
Top Bottom