Which microscope or what do I get from upgrading my current one

[JDubU]

HobGoblyn;

While you decide on/wait for your new microscope, you can work around your original problem by putting your current microscope on an elevated platform.

The platform can be something like this:
https://www.amazon.com/Construction-Fashionable-Adjustable-Non-Skid-Computer/dp/B075BRNDTR?ref_=ast_bbp_dp
or this:
https://www.amazon.com/Large-Monitor-Stand-Computer-Screens/dp/B07H8NHR8N
or you can make one yourself out of wood.

Since your Swift S41 has a very large working distance and can also lower its head over most of that same distance, you can raise the base above the work and lower the head to get it into focus range.

[HobGoblyn]

Just had a look at the wild, it's £850 (£708.33 + vat) and doesn't take a camera

The Wild M3(x)/M7(x)/M8/M10 microscopes all have infinity optics that let you insert a photo tube and many other fun options, between the zoom unit and the binocular head. With a little patience, you can get the tube and thread adapters for a micro four thirds camera for perhaps another £300.  That may sound like a lot, but then the microscope and accessories are very well built and with a little care will outlast you. And should you should grow tired of them, you can likely sell the lot for what you paid for it. In the meantime, it is no exaggeration that the Wild's workmanship and imaging will blow the doors off the Amscope.

Thanks.

Not saying it's a bad deal, just that it's a bit out of my current  budget (well there's a few other things I need to get from my current budget, don't want to spend more than £700 in total on microscope, light ring etc)

[jfiresto]

They have very high quality microscopes, their own branded ones, and some secondhand examples of both.

http://www.brunelmicroscopessecure.co.uk/acatalog/Stereo-microscopes.html

It would be nice to know what "contemporary" microscope is on that massive Wild boom stand. I am not entirely sure it is an M3Z. I do not think I have seen one in a ring mount.

[jfiresto]

... Not saying it's a bad deal, just that it's a bit out of my current  budget (well there's a few other things I need to get from my current budget, don't want to spend more than £700 in total on microscope, light ring etc)

That is understandable. It would be a bit like buying a classic Mercedes. I think you are going to be more than happy enough with the Amscope: with its more versatile optics, accommodating stand and convenient lighting. Also, if you need a microscope camera port, you can generally get a better deal on a microscope that has one, rather than buying and adding one later.

[HobGoblyn]

Whether I need a camera port is an interesting question.

I don't intend to do youtube clips etc, but just having the ability to take a screen shot from the PC when I need help is going to be very useful.

Likewise having pic on one screen while researching board on the other  would probably be useful.

I don't intend to ask my darling wife if she minds me spending another x amount on another microscope in the next few years (and if this lasts, ever) hence the ability to add one made sense.

[jfiresto]

With less expensive microscopes, you almost always have to buy a model with a photo tube and can not add one later.

The Wild microscopes and their "common main objective" peers were designed to be used for decades, for tasks that were not always known at the time of purchase. They had to be flexible.

Amscope sells a line of CMO microscopes that are many times more expensive than the SM-3NTP and SM-4NTP. Perhaps that is why no one seems to write about them. 

[HobGoblyn]

I prefer dual arm boom stands as they let you quickly slide the head toward and away from the stand. With a single arm, you have to unclamp the head, move it, make it vertical again, and then re-clamp it. Past Amscope's dual arm stands came with soft shafts, however, that became grooved and ornery over time. People used to fix that by substituting properly hardened shaft stock. Did Amscope ever address that?

I am not crazy about Amscope's published microscope images. This one is only in good focus over the inner third (by area) of the field of view:

(Attachment Link)

A competent effort with an achromat objective should manage twice that, ca. 60%. Perhaps, you get a better view through the eyepieces.

ADDENDUM: What may have happened, here, is that Amscope did not tilt the specimen to make it perpendicular to the lens that provided the picture. This is an issue with Greenough designs at higher magnifications: on, say, the left side, the focus sits too high; on the right, it sits too low. If this at a low magnification, however, the optics are not quite right.

ADDENDUM x 2: No, strike that idea: I suspect mediocre optics. It looks just as bad toward the top and bottom as left and right.

According to all the youtube vids I've watched, the camera quality they show is nowhere near the quality of looking through the lenses, a few have stressed that the image on their screens simply doesn't do it justice. 

[artag]

It would be nice to know what "contemporary" microscope is on that massive Wild boom stand. I am not entirely sure it is an M3Z. I do not think I have seen one in a ring mount.

I suspect it's one of their own - if it were anything recognisable I'm sure they'd say so. That said, it does appear to have the Wild style swinging eyetubes for interpupillary adjustment rather than the swivelling eyepieces of their own stereo heads.
 

[HobGoblyn]

Ordered last Wednesday, microscope in USA, arrives at my house this morning in the UK.  Very impressed.

[HobGoblyn]

And it's assembled. Very very very very pleased with it, and that's looking through it without a light ring (due wednesday)

Going to have to rethink slightly where everything is, but very happy.

Also going to have to get a much smaller dust cover that just covers the head

Many thanks for all your help

[KD0CAC John]

(Attachment Link)

Plus your choice of light ring and camera from elsewhere, don't buy from Amscope, overpriced for quality/performance.

I remember Dave talking about the camera attachment , and an earlier type had issues and another type was recommended - but do not remember which mount was recommended , kinda guessing the one in you list may not be , no sure ?

Thanks 

[KD0CAC John]

Another question I had , is there a protective lens for the Barlow .5 lens , against smoke & solder splatter ?

[jfiresto]

Yes, it screws into the 48mm female threads at the bottom of the 0.5X lens.

[HobGoblyn]

Yes, it screws into the 48mm female threads at the bottom of the 0.5X lens.

Is that an additional purchase?

[jfiresto]

Of course although they need not be expensive. I can not find any from Amazon that mention or appear to be coated, so imagine most are not. Uncoated should not be worse than looking through a clean, single-pane window.

ADDENDUM: If it were my microscope, I would probably try a 48-52 step up thread adapter and then go to town with 52 mm camera filters: protective, UV, polarizing, ....

[HobGoblyn]

Thanks

Unless I buy from China, they cost more than I can buy a new 0.5 for lol

Edit, just read your edit, will take a look

[jfiresto]

A sheet of uncoated glass transmits ca. 90% of the light passing through it. The issue is the remaining 10% is mostly reflected and may produce ghosts of bright spots and bright areas. You can get some not super expensive camera filters that suffer much less of that, that are tested in the link I added to my previous amended post.

A thread adapter also allows you to test a much greater variety of filters, if you happen to suffer, as some of us do, from perpetual, possibly pathological, tool refinement syndrome.

But perhaps I am being too pessimistic and everyone coats their 1X, protective "barlow lenses".

[HobGoblyn]

That's better.  Adaptor £6.08,  Amazon basic 52mm 1x   £6.49.  Both will be here Tuesday if I order today

All the 52mm I can see including Amazon one, have UV protection.  Does that matter?


Edit: I've just read through your link, seems there's a vast difference between various filters whether UV or not. 

I'll get  This one   instead for £7.99, will be here in 9 days.

[jfiresto]

Now you are talking. I like this point in the item's description:

Hard Coated' HMC Multicoating process suppresses ghosting, flare and reflections, and increases light transmission

[HobGoblyn]

Or do I spend an additional £17 and get the lowest reflection on the link you posted Nikon 52Mm Filter Nc Neutral Colour

[jfiresto]

That is a good question. Are there any camera stores you could visit that would let you look at typical, filtered, shiny or bright objects: to compare a filter that reflects 3% to one that reflects 0.3%? That is outside my experience and I do not know what to tell you.

I expect the filter will become a wear item if you will be wafting solder flux smoke into it. Cheaper but good enough may become the right motto.

The Royal Mail delivery tracker reports your lens passed through Norwich at 11:23 this morning.