Eleshop SM-4TP stereo microscope, any experience?

[ftg]

Hello,

I did not find a suitable thread to necro about these, so let's make a new thread.

Anybody have any practical experience with the Eleshop.eu microscopes?
I'm looking at getting their SM-4TP for SMD soldering and rework.
I'm planing on working up to 0402 sized parts at most, but might have to work with 0201.

This is the one I'm contemplating -> https://eleshop.eu/szm7045xt-stl2.html

I'll also get their 0.5x Barlow lens with it, to get more working depth. As I plan on using a preheater with it.
https://eleshop.eu/catalog/product/view/id/1712/s/0-5x-barlow-lens-for-microscopes/category/208/

Eleshop also offers the "black edition" of this microscope as a set with the Barlow lens and their led ringlight.
https://eleshop.eu/sm-4tp-stereomicroscope-black-edition-set.html

The product numbering for these Eleshop microscopes seems to follow the Amscope one for the most part.
And they seem to be the same style construction.
But that does not really tell anything about the internal construction and quality of optical components used.

I would strongly prefer an EU (Finland or Germany best) based seller if you are going to suggest better alternatives to this.
I would like to buy new with warranty, instead of lurking eBay or local auction sites for deals.

Are there any significant problems with these types of microscopes, outside of the optics being what they are in their price bracket?

[Psi]

That Eleshop SM-4TP is almost definitely the same rebranded china microscope as everyone else sells.
eg Amscope,  or Luckyzoom on aliexpress.
I have yet to see any evidence that the internals are different between resellers

My one was from luckyzoom and looks identical to that one, stand and everything.

Nothing wrong with them, they are great value for the price.

[jfiresto]

They are good value, but you will likely get what you pay for. Low cost, "stencil" microscopes are not really built for heavy or long term service. The images you can get out of them, particular from the camera port and/or at high magnifications, also could be considerably brighter and sharper. The image that ends this review, I assume out of the camera port, shows what you might be missing. (The downloaded 1618x800pixel image really shows the difference.)

[thm_w]

That Eleshop SM-4TP is almost definitely the same rebranded china microscope as everyone else sells.
eg Amscope,  or Luckyzoom on aliexpress.
I have yet to see any evidence that the internals are different between resellers

Exactly, completely agreed.

They are good value, but you will likely get what you pay for. Low cost, "stencil" microscopes are not really built for heavy or long term service. The images you can get out of them, particular from the camera port and/or at high magnifications, also could be considerably brighter and sharper. The image that ends this review, I assume out of the camera port, shows what you might be missing. (The downloaded 1618x800pixel image really shows the difference.)

They are fine for long term service. Is there something specific that you think will break down?
There have been some cases where the linear rails were not proper hardened steel, thats the only one I can think of.

The image that you show what people "might be missing" is interesting but, for electronics use makes no practical difference whatsoever, both images are completely usable.

[Psi]

Yeah.

Might you get better optics and build quality with an Olympus or Zeiss.  Yes definitely but you will paying a lot for that extra 10% (ok, since I know someone will argue, maybe 35% better but no more than that).

Does it matter for electronic use, no.

Does it make you feel fancy using a Olympus or Zeiss etc with crystal clear optics and build finish.  Yes.

Does that make it worth getting, up to you. It's not going to make your soldering any better. 

One thing I will say about those china microscopes, don't get the simulfocal version unless you actually need it. They work fine, but it adds extra optics to redirect some light to the camera port. So you do lose a little optical quality on the simulfocal version vs the non-simulfocal version.  But if you need it its fine, simulfocal isnt bad you're just better off without it unless you need it.  (Camera port and both eyepieces working all at the same time)

[jfiresto]

It is a testament to the quality of the low cost Chinese microscope scopes that they convince you guys the alternatives are not significantly better. But then on another thread, I posted a picture to compare to what one of you are seeing with a new microscope at 32X: a picture I took from a decades old, battle scarred microscope that, on paper, is only 8% better. The difference is extreme. You might consider, why is that?

[Electro Fan]

jfiresto your knowledge and experience with microscopes is valuable and appreciated.  I think it’s just a matter of you can lead horses to water but you can’t always get them to drink. 

No doubt Olympus, Zeiss, Nikon and some other microscopes outperform Amscope microscopes.  The superior optics of these other microscopes isn’t really in question.

But what also doesn’t seem to be in question is whether the Amscope 745 in various configurations is suitable for enthusiast soldering.  Users here over the years have consistently reported that the 745 and their derivatives and cousins enable the soldering of through hole and SMD components with sufficient clarity and ease of use that is well beyond what can be achieved by most users’ eyes and hands alone (ie, without a microscope).

In fact, there might also be some microscopes less expensive than the Amscope 745 made by other manufacturers (and maybe some other less expensive models made by Amscope) that can also suffice for through hole and SMD soldering but based on the feedback from users it’s reasonable to say the 745 is pretty close to the sweet spot in terms of price and performance for enthusiast soldering microscopes.

Another way of looking at it is that while it’s somewhat difficult for users to translate the effect of 8% or 35% better image quality into the enjoyment and results of soldering it’s pretty easy to envision the impact of 2-3x the price on a user’s budget. 

[tggzzz]

I picked up (auction £45 ) an old Jouvel binocular microscope similar to that Eleshop. I have *5, *10 and *15 lenses, all with a working distance of ~90mm. I normally use the *10. Worst point: the metal stand is very heavy!

I also picked up (school sale £10 a Beck binocular microscope with (I think) *10 and *20 and an ~80mm working distance. I prefer its optics, but it doesn't have the long-reach arm.

Either are perfectly usable, but 99% of the time I use a very cheap "Rolson 60390 LED Head Loupe Magnifier Visor" - widely available under many names, e.g. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Rolson-60390-Loupe-Magnifier-Visor/dp/B001MJ0JW2 Benefit: can use anywhere (e.g. upside down and looking into a cabinet), can use with prescription spectacles.

[bateau020]

Also got my microscope from eleshop. (the same). With led ring, barlow 0.5X, and camera.
It has been an enabler for me. I now even manage to hand solder SMD components with 0.2mm pad spacing. It is one of the most valuable tools on my desk.

my remarks:
* tighten everything, because otherwise it will be a bit wobbly.
* the 4K camera I got from them has the focus somewhat off: the focus plane is not horizontal, but tilted in an angle. When you focus on what you see to the right, the left is out of focus. But I don't use the camera too often, so I decided to live with that.

[thm_w]

It is a testament to the quality of the low cost Chinese microscope scopes that they convince you guys the alternatives are not significantly better. But then on another thread, I posted a picture to compare to what one of you are seeing with a new microscope at 32X: a picture I took from a decades old, battle scarred microscope that, on paper, is only 8% better. The difference is extreme. You might consider, why is that?

Let me clarify as there is obviously some confusion:
- Its a special 10:1 zoom ratio head, most people do not need that and can go with the standard ~6:1 as linked in this post.
- The seller was telling me the microscope was defective after I sent the photos and wanted to replace it. I don't care in this case, as it was mostly an experiment.

[jfiresto]

... No doubt Olympus, Zeiss, Nikon and some other microscopes outperform Amscope microscopes.  The superior optics of these other microscopes isn’t really in question.

But what also doesn’t seem to be in question is whether the Amscope 745 in various configurations is suitable for enthusiast soldering. Users here over the years have consistently reported that the 745 and their derivatives and cousins enable the soldering of through hole and SMD components with sufficient clarity and ease of use that is well beyond what can be achieved by most users’ eyes and hands alone (ie, without a microscope)....

Thank you for your thoughtful follow up. So, it appears I did understand your original post and I think I now have a better idea of how I might advise people looking for a first microscope. Thank you again.

[jfiresto]

... The 4K camera I got from them has the focus somewhat off: the focus plane is not horizontal, but tilted in an angle. When you focus on what you see to the right, the left is out of focus....

Perhaps a silly question, but have you squared the objective with respect to the (flattish?) object you are photographing? If you focus a Greenough microscope at the center of, say, a bare PCB at high magnification, the focus will change as you look toward the extreme left or right, because of the slanted paths from the left and right objectives. The Greenough Principle section on this page shows the problem.

The more- and less-distanced images are less noticeable when you look through the eyepieces, because your eyes refocus as you look to the side. (This can cause eye strain.) A camera, however, is stuck at one focus across its field of view, so the focus on one side ends up above the sensor and the other ends up below.

[bateau020]

It might be that the greenough principle at play, but after some tweaking and reseating the camera, I managed to get a slightly better image. I still have a clearly visible lack of focus in the corners, but there is enough detail for me in all of the image. It is not great, but hey, you get what you pay for.

The image attached is a maximum magnification, full screen picture of some 0603 resistor network pads. Sorry, had to downscale (50%) due to "image too big" issue.

[jfiresto]

That looks reasonable for a simple achromat objective which should be in sharp focus over roughly the inner 60% (by area) of the image.

[Psi]

Looks pretty good.

Do you have an optics between the trinocular port and the camera?
Normally there's none and the camera will see a very small center area of the image you see in the eyepiece.
But you can get camera adaptor tubes with some optics to shrink the image down so most of it actually hits the camera sensor.

[bateau020]

It has a C mount 0.5x adapter between the camera and the microscope. And indeed, the view from the eye pieces is much larger than through the camera.

[ftg]

Small update.

I got the scope and it is okay.
Not the best one I have used but perfectly fine for the work I do.
The 0.5x Barlow lens was an excellent addition.
The previous cheap stereo microscope I used did not have one and the shorter working distance was an annoyance.
As testament to that, it had tons of soldering iron marks on the side of the ring light. None so far with the SM-5TP + 0.5x Barlow.

Is there any good guide on properly dialing it in?
I want to get the best performance from it I can get.

[bateau020]

Is there any good guide on properly dialing it in?

No doubt there are some great guides to be found with the specialists, but what I did was:
* remove the remaining wobble by greasing + reasonably tightening wherever needed. The most finicky was the fixation of the microscope inside the ring at the end of the arm. Too wobbly for me. I added a screw.
* put the base on a shelf. There is a lot of weight, and I do not have much desk space, so I gained desk space and lowered the center of gravity by raising the base instead of raising the microscope on the mast. Double win.
* align the microscope with the desk surface now it is installed.
* add an extra light on an arm behind the microscope. Helps mitigate glare from the led ring and makes reading of component markings a lot easier.

[ftg]

That is more or less what I did.
Just no shelf for it currently.
Plan is to replace the whole soldering table with a deeper motorized one.

[thephil]

I have the same thing (Aliexpress). Mine is labeled "Eakins" and cost about the same but with VAT included. It came with a lot more accessories (camera, 2 barlow lenses 2 sets of eyepieces, 2 camera adapters). I use mine at low magnification as anyone will for electronics work. It's perfectly appropriate for that. No, its not a Zeiss but absolutely fine. The stand is pretty rigid but needs some clamping to the table so that the thing doesn't tip over in some positions. I would buy it again for that purpose.

[Psi]

One thing to keep in mind, both eye pieces have a focus adjust, and the microscope has the big focus adjust knob as well. 

So it's possible to focus it using the big knob with both the eyepieces hard one way or hard the other way (focus wise). 

If you zoom in, focus using big knob and then zoom out it should stay in focus as you zoom out. If it does not then you have the eyepiece focus set wrong.
Also it can 'feel' a bit odd looking through it when the eyepieces focus is not in the right place (even though the image is in focus)
Have a play and see what you can find.

[TD-er]

Just bought the same microscope myself and indeed the camera needs to be tilted for a full width focus.
I think it has to do with the camera looking through only one of the lenses and those are slightly at an angle for the stereo effect when looking at it with your eyes.

Also the camera with a 0.5x C-mount adapter has quite a short DoF, so maybe we can experiment with adding an aperture disc in between to increase DoF?
Now it is hard to keep the camera in focus when you use the "zoom" button, however the oculars seem to be kept in focus.
Maybe their DoF is longer?
Anyone already experimented with this idea?