Headache with microscope use

[dadler]

Hi all-

I just purchased an Amscope SM-4TPX ( http://www.amscope.com/3-5x-45x-simul-focal-stereo-zoom-microscope-on-dual-arm-boom-stand.html ). I have never really used a binocular microscope before.

I have noticed that after using the scope for several minutes, I have a dull headache. Almost as if my visual focusing system needs to readjust.

Does this happen to anyone else? Does it go away with time?

I do not wear eyeglasses, but I used to wear contacts and got Lasik a couple of years ago.

[Muxr]

I don't get a headache but it can get tiring for sure. You could get an eyepiece camera (microscope imager) and just blow it up on a monitor or TV if you're having issues with directly looking at it.

[han]

Agree with "Muxr" I have try microscope for soldering with camera+monitor and it quite comfortable

[tggzzz]

I just purchased an Amscope SM-4TPX ( http://www.amscope.com/3-5x-45x-simul-focal-stereo-zoom-microscope-on-dual-arm-boom-stand.html ). I have never really used a binocular microscope before.

I have noticed that after using the scope for several minutes, I have a dull headache. Almost as if my visual focusing system needs to readjust.

Does this happen to anyone else? Does it go away with time?

I do not wear eyeglasses, but I used to wear contacts and got Lasik a couple of years ago.

I personally don't like stereo microscopes, and prefer headmounted visors.

However, I've been taking and viewing stereo photos[1] for >30 years. One "trick" I found was to

• adjust the viewer
• stop viewing for >30 seconds, look around the room
• restart viewing
• if I don't quickly re-acquire the picture, it means that the viewer should be readjusted so my eyes aren't doing all the work

There can be other reasons for headaches, including "bad posture" - i.e. just avoid strain in any part of your body!

[1] commercial antiques at https://vintagestereoscopicglassslides.wordpress.com/

[Ian.M]

Go to an optician and get your current prescription checked, then set both eyepiece diopter adjustments to match your prescription and adjust the eyepiece interpupillary distance to match as well.  Its got a separate camera port, so adding a HD camera (HDMI out, not USB only - too laggy) feeding your bench monitor would be a good idea so you only have to use the eyepieces for tasks requiring good hand-eye coordination, to minimise the time you spend hunched over it.

[plazma]

I only get headache or vision problems with a Mantis. With stereo microscopes I have done 12 hour shifts without problems. Check the diopter adjustment as suggested above.

[KJDS]

Place a coin on the bench and adjust the zoom so it almost fills the view.

Close your right eye and move the coin so it is central in the view and adjust the dioptre for best focus. Now close your left eye and adjust the dioptre for best focus. Is the coin still central? How is the view with both eyes?

If the coin is in significantly different positions through each eyepiece then you may need a service.

If like me you have very different vision in each eye, then it's worth starting the procedure just using your best eye and looking through each eyepiece with that.

[Fred27]

It also helps to zoom right in before focusing, then zoom out too how you want it. I believe the smaller depth of field when zoomed in makes any error more obvious.

[MrSlack]

I got a cheap USB microscope and use an old 17" TFT on my bench. Either that or a visor that I got from RS in about ~1992 that hasn't fallen to bits yet.

[HAL-42b]

If the coin is in significantly different positions through each eyepiece then you may need a service.

Collimation error. Often ignored but very important.

A friend had binoculars that he had dropped once or twice in his boat and the prisms were knocked out of collimation. I couldn't for the life of me convince him that there was something wrong with the instrument. We took turns looking trough it and I could see obvious collimation shift and to him everything was normal and I obviously had a problem with my eyesight. 

The funny part is that even after I re-aligned the collimation he still couldn't see any difference.

[uncle_bob]

Hi

The only other thing I would add:

Evaluate your work position while using the microscope. Are you leaning way over it? Are you bending down a long way or stretching to reach it?

Yes this seems obvious talking about it. It is really easy to miss the "my chair is wrong" part while you are right in the middle of working on something very complex.

Bob

[tggzzz]

The funny part is that even after I re-aligned the collimation he still couldn't see any difference.

In my experience, about 15%-20% of people simply can't see stereo views. Such people often have difficulty with ball games (e.g. tennis); they swing at the ball and completely miss it.

[uncle_bob]

In my experience, about 15%-20% of people simply can't see stereo views. Such people often have difficulty with ball games (e.g. tennis); they swing at the ball and completely miss it.

Hi

The fancy name for it is monocular vision.

Bob (looking at this page only through my right eye ...)

[tggzzz]

In my experience, about 15%-20% of people simply can't see stereo views. Such people often have difficulty with ball games (e.g. tennis); they swing at the ball and completely miss it.

The fancy name for it is monocular vision.
Bob (looking at this page only through my right eye ...)

It isn't as simple as that for many people.

[uncle_bob]

In my experience, about 15%-20% of people simply can't see stereo views. Such people often have difficulty with ball games (e.g. tennis); they swing at the ball and completely miss it.

The fancy name for it is monocular vision.
Bob (looking at this page only through my right eye ...)

It isn't as simple as that for many people.

Hi

Quite true, I've been told I'm unusual in that respect by a number of eye doctors. It's actually kind of fun because they don't expect you to be able to do it....

Bob

[mmagin]

Besides all the eyestrain issues, don't forget that the posture you use the microscope in could result in cramping of neck muscles, which can also lead to headaches sometimes.

[dadler]

Thanks all. I plan to get a camera for the scope, but all of the cameras that Amscope stocks seem to be kinda junky. Still looking for a decent one.

Place a coin on the bench and adjust the zoom so it almost fills the view.

Close your right eye and move the coin so it is central in the view and adjust the dioptre for best focus. Now close your left eye and adjust the dioptre for best focus. Is the coin still central? How is the view with both eyes?

If the coin is in significantly different positions through each eyepiece then you may need a service.

If like me you have very different vision in each eye, then it's worth starting the procedure just using your best eye and looking through each eyepiece with that.

Thanks for the clever coin trick. I just tried it.

Everything seems to be in order. Between both eyes, the coin appears identically across the top and bottom edges. The very left and right of the coin seem offset very slightly, but I think this is just a perceptual artifact due to parallax. (I was concerned that there may be some sort of alignment issue.)

I readjusted the interpupillary distance and the diopter and it seems to have helped some.

Hi

The only other thing I would add:

Evaluate your work position while using the microscope. Are you leaning way over it? Are you bending down a long way or stretching to reach it?

Yes this seems obvious talking about it. It is really easy to miss the "my chair is wrong" part while you are right in the middle of working on something very complex.

Bob

Thanks for this tip. The scope is on a desk surface that is 76cm from the floor, and the eyepieces are about 42cm on center from the top of the bench (this leaves 15cm working distance under the light ring). I have to sit with almost perfectly vertical posture to use the microscope due to the configuration. I have now noticed that I am slightly stretching my neck up to look down into the eyepieces. It is possible(likely?) that some of the headache/discomfort is from muscle/neck strain.

After spending some more time with the scope, I suspect that the better part of the headache is from the bright light.

I have blue eyes, and am pretty sensitive to light. I wear sunglasses outside most of the time--when the sun is bright. Along with the microscope, I bought the 144 LED light ring ( http://www.amscope.com/144-led-lighting-direction-adjustable-microscope-ring-light-with-adapter.html ). I have been using it with the brightness maxed out, because I seem to be able to see more clearly with this much light. I have tried turning the brightness down a few "clicks" (the cheap yellow arrows), and this does seem to help out the headache, at least in the short term. I haven't yet tried using the microscope for an extended period with the brightness reduced.

An aside-- I (think I?) understand the general mathematics/geometry related to the optics in the microscope, but the interpupillary distance sure seems touchy. Even the tiniest bit off to the side, and you lose the image entirely.

[HAL-42b]

Sitting desk height depends on your chair and your height but the most common height is 73cm. Slightly lower if you are using tall equipment.

Standing desk height is around 85 - 90 cm depending on the task. Watchmakers use standing desks in the sitting position because they work with their hands very close to their eyes.

The slight difference in horizontal alignment is interesting. Might be by design but might be not. I would be tempted to draw some crosshairs on a piece of paper and try to quantify it more precisely. I would expect the crosshairs to coincide exactly be at the center of the view field for both eyepieces at the working distance. Does it change when you adjust the interpupilary distance?

The focus distance may not coincide exactly. In fact Leica makes the focal depths slightly different on purpose to give the illusion of greater depth of field. It works and they say it is not detrimental to the ergonomics. I haven't used such scopes but I'm inclined to believe them.

[dadler]

Sitting desk height depends on your chair and your height but the most common height is 73cm. Slightly lower if you are using tall equipment.

Standing desk height is around 85 - 90 cm depending on the task. Watchmakers use standing desks in the sitting position because they work with their hands very close to their eyes.

The slight difference in horizontal alignment is interesting. Might be by design but might be not. I would be tempted to draw some crosshairs on a piece of paper and try to quantify it more precisely. I would expect the crosshairs to coincide exactly be at the center of the view field for both eyepieces at the working distance. Does it change when you adjust the interpupilary distance?

The focus distance may not coincide exactly. In fact Leica makes the focal depths slightly different on purpose to give the illusion of greater depth of field. It works and they say it is not detrimental to the ergonomics. I haven't used such scopes but I'm inclined to believe them.

I checked it again, it is certainly off a little on the left and right sides. For example, if I center a US nickel in the left eyepiece (leaving a very thin gap around the edge, the gap is about 1/30th the radius of the nickel), and look through the right eyepiece (using the same eye), the image is offset horizontally so that the gap is fully taken up along the right edge. The result is the same if I center the nickel in the right eyepiece and look through the left eyepiece.

Horrible pictures (taken with cell phone, had trouble aligning the phone and not losing the image):

left:



right:



The interpupillary distance does not seem to affect the alignment at all. The offset is exactly horizontal.

I thought that his offset was due to parallax, but now you have me wondering whether it should be there? If the microscope is out of alignment/bad I would certainly like to get Amscope to swap it out.

Thanks.

[KJDS]

That's not enough of an offset to cause most people any issues

[KL27x]

FWIW, my Amscope has a tiny bit of horizontal offset, which is much smaller than what you pictures show. A tiny fraction. Barely perceptible. And the offset would be reversed from what yours has. So I don't think parallax should be making this big a difference between images.*

I have used the microscope for hours at a time and I have never gotten a headache.

That's not enough of an offset to cause most people any issues

I'm not sure I'd agree. Look at the "IN" in "IN GOD WE TRUST."

*The way I'm determining this offset is looking at the edges of the FOV. When messing with the interpupillary distance, the part of each FOV which I can see from the same point in space changes. (And no matter how I set the interpupillary distance, I can see just fine in the middle). But the centering of the object remains the same in each FOV when the entire perimeter of each FOV is viewed. The right eyepiece view would show slightly more of Madison's sideburn than the left.

[dadler]

FWIW, my Amscope has a tiny bit of horizontal offset, which is much smaller than what you pictures show. A tiny fraction. Barely perceptible. And the offset would be reversed from what yours has. So I don't think parallax should be making this big a difference between images.*

I have used the microscope for hours at a time and I have never gotten a headache.

That's not enough of an offset to cause most people any issues

I'm not sure I'd agree. Look at the "IN" in "IN GOD WE TRUST."

*The way I'm determining this offset is looking at the edges of the FOV. When messing with the interpupillary distance, the part of each FOV which I can see from the same point in space changes.

The images were not taken from the same spot on each side. I just could not hold the camera steady enough. I took about 10 images on each side and these were (believe it or not) the best that showed the edge.  Hence the black occlusion. The other images did not have the occlusion, but did not clearly show the offset. I didn't want to let my phone touch the lenses. I also manually cropped the images, because they weren't even in the same point of the pixel grid.

The top and bottom are not offset at all, only the sides. It's hard to take a meaningful picture of the configuration. A picture through the top camera port won't help 

I can't say whether the offset is acceptable or not. If you guys think it's defective, I will contact Amscope.

[KL27x]

Well if going by your words and not your pics, it doesn't sound like there's necessarily a problem. You have the final say whether it works or not for you.

[dadler]

Well if going by your words and not your pics, it doesn't sound like there's necessarily a problem. You have the final say whether it works or not for you.

Thanks for the replies! The alignment (the very edge, distance between black circle and edge of nickel) is consistent. The black occlusion at the left can be ignored. That is all I am saying.

If your Amscope is not similarly misaligned then it certainly concerns me. I thought that perhaps the offset was literally intended/by design. If it's not, then I think I want to see if Amscope will exchange the head.

The bright light does affect me, but it also sort of feels like I am crossing my eyes a bit looking through the scope. It can't be much. Maybe I am just not used to using magnification for extended periods of time and will get used to it.

After a bit more time with the scope, I can say this: After using the scope for a while (10-20 minutes) and then looking away, I notice a headache in my temples. I don't notice much of a headache while I am using the scope, but primarily afterwards. It is like my focusing system is readjusting in some fashion. Everything seems a bit surreal for a while after using the scope, and this parallels the headache.

Thanks to everyone for the responses and advice.

[KL27x]

*Edit: oh, neermind. Mine has the just about exactly the same offset as yours on the right edge of the FOV. I was looking at the wrong part of the picture.

it also sort of feels like I am crossing my eyes a bit looking through the scope.

FWIW, if I zoom in on a small dot thru just the right eye and then switch to the left from the same head position, I find I have to "look over to the left" to see the dot thru my left eye. Like my brain thinks the picture is close to my face, but the pictures are aligned so that I don't have to cross my eyes like I would if the picture were as close as my brain feels it is. Like you have to use a "100 yd stare" even when the image looks like it's inches away. It's actually the opposite of what you say you are feeling. Try this and see if you are really crossing your eyes to see.

I routinely adjust to different glasses, so this is no big thing for me. But I find I actively arrange my work so that I switch back and forth between real world and microscope as little as possible. There's definitely an adjustment going on which is a little straining.