Glare problem with 144 LED right light for microscope

[Electro Fan]

btw: the main issue with working distance for me is not the elevation of the PCB but rather how much vertical space I have to maneuver tools e.g. hot air gun that ideally wants to be vertical to direct air downwards onto the chip.

Man, you are in and all around this rabbit hole - your documentation is a good map for future rabbits
🐇 

[Electro Fan]

Saw this:

Probably doesn't completely translate due to different technologies including different materials, dimensions, and construction techniques but maybe it has some tiny applicability:

https://expertphotography.com/photography-umbrella-lighting/#:~:text=This%20type%20is%20best%20for,umbrella%20is%20a%20reflective%20umbrella.

"White umbrellas don’t control the light as well as black umbrellas. Because they spread the light over a larger surface area, they reduce the glower of that light more than other types of modifiers."

So maybe by a tiny margin the white ring housing might diffuse the light rather than focus it, and therefore maybe provide slightly less light but maybe help avoid some reflections (grasping at theoretical nits in the rabbit hole, I think).

https://www.amscope.com/white-adjustable-144-led-ring-light-illuminator-for-stereo-microscope-camera.html

https://www.amscope.com/144-led-adjustable-compact-microscope-ring-light-adapter-with-black-finish.html

As of the moment it's 77 reviews for white vs 49 for black (but both average 4.9).  Review/purchase numbers likely reflect (haha) aesthetic preferences rather than any measurable difference in performance.

---

- or maybe I got it backwards? 

[lukego]

One thing I'd mention (surely covered somewhere above) is that the color of the surroundings seems to matter when you are working with leaded solder, because it is reflective like a mirror and will pick up its surroundings, while lead-free solder tends to be less sensitive because it reflects diffuse light and has a consistent cloudy appearance.

I had trouble seeing bridges with leaded solder because their reflective appearance looked similar to wet flux residue. I was planning to make some kind of white screen around the working area, e.g. a 3D printed enclosure, to give the solder something more definite to reflect back (and holding up a piece of white paper made me think this would work.) However, I switched to lead-free solder for separate reasons instead and then I didn't have the problem.

[Electro Fan]

One thing I'd mention (surely covered somewhere above) is that the color of the surroundings seems to matter when you are working with leaded solder, because it is reflective like a mirror and will pick up its surroundings, while lead-free solder tends to be less sensitive because it reflects diffuse light and has a consistent cloudy appearance.

I had trouble seeing bridges with leaded solder because their reflective appearance looked similar to wet flux residue. I was planning to make some kind of white screen around the working area, e.g. a 3D printed enclosure, to give the solder something more definite to reflect back (and holding up a piece of white paper made me think this would work.) However, I switched to lead-free solder for separate reasons instead and then I didn't have the problem.

Good point about the color of surroundings and reflections. 

Also, if color temp has been discussed in these threads I don't think I've seen it.

What color temps have you tried and what have you settled on?

IMO without a doubt color temp impacts what you see.  As LEDs have become more available for home lighting I've paid more attention to color temp.  At first LED's for conventional lighting didn't seem to offer much choice with respect to color temp.  Now it's possible to find LED bulbs with ~3000-3200 K color temp.  Generally anything higher seems too white/bright/sterile, ie too "cold" - both for indoor and outdoor lighting.  There might be some exceptions but that seems to be the general trend.

The Amscope and other LED ring lights seem to only be available in 6000 K or higher.  If anyone has a line on warmer LED ring lights, please post a link.

[jfiresto]

Leica Microsystems used to favor 4500K, a neutral white. They have since shifted toward 5600~6000K (vertical daylight) as demonstrated here. The LED3000/LED5000 illuminator brochure can be downloaded as a PDF if the link is still broken.

[jonovid]

in my opinion a high quality microscope needs more then just a central point ring light but also ability add one or two directional lights if needed.
to add 45 degree side illumination .  ring light is ok, however sometimes you need side illumination to pop some text or code.

all three light source's should be independently dimmable, with any side illumination independently adjustable angle, from the other light source's set around the radius of a central point of the microscope.   

[Electro Fan]

in my opinion a high quality microscope needs more then just a central point ring light but also ability add one or two directional lights if needed.
to add 45 degree side illumination .  ring light is ok, however sometimes you need side illumination to pop some text or code.

all three light source's should be independently dimmable, with any side illumination independently adjustable angle, from the other light source's set around the radius of a central point of the microscope.

Agreed.  So far my plan is for a dimmable double goose neck plus a dimmable ring light.  Unfortunately the gooseneck only has one dimming setting for both goose lights; ideally there would be separate dimmers for each gooseneck.

Edit:  ok, as a result of this discussion I found this:
https://www.amscope.com/powerful-led-dual-goose-neck-microscope-illuminator-light.html
- another $62 plus tax for dual dimmers
- both single and dual dimmer versions are 6500 K

- the educational process around here sometimes saves $ and sometimes it costs $; hopefully it all evens out with good results

[ErikTheNorwegian]

My microscope light was hard to work with, glear , hard light and not very easy on the eyes..
I opened a defective LCD monitor, removed the fresnel layer under the LCD panel. Cut a ring out of the thin plastic fresnel that I placed under the led light and turned it until I got a more even and glear free light. The 3D dept and feeling was greatly improved. Some tape and it's been there since.
Worked for me, free to try for you.

[Electro Fan]

My microscope light was hard to work with, glear , hard light and not very easy on the eyes..
I opened a defective LCD monitor, removed the fresnel layer under the LCD panel. Cut a ring out of the thin plastic fresnel that I placed under the led light and turned it until I got a more even and glear free light. The 3D dept and feeling was greatly improved. Some tape and it's been there since.
Worked for me, free to try for you.

Yep, maybe Amscope hasn't put quite as much R&D into their lighting products as they have margin.

A search on "gooseneck LED light" on Amazon shows various alternatives, some at pretty low prices relative to the $107 Amscope wants for a double gooseneck with a single dimmer.  Not sure how convenient these are but looks to be some possiblities.

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=gooseneck+led+light&ref=nb_sb_noss

[jfiresto]

I and others have used IKEA Jansjö work lamps. Unfortunately IKEA discontinued the brighter versions a couple years ago.

If there is an IKEA nearby, you might check out its successor, the Nävlinge. The desk lamp is probably not all that useful as only the top bit flexes. But the clamp on spotlight, if it is just as bright, could prove quite serviceable.

EDIT: The clamp-on and desk lamps are both 220 lumens.

2ND EDIT: I checked out the Nävlinge and found it too dim. I see however, that IKEA Germany is selling the Jansjö table lamp in chrome.

[lukego]

Agreed.  So far my plan is for a dimmable double goose neck plus a dimmable ring light.  Unfortunately the gooseneck only has one dimming setting for both goose lights; ideally there would be separate dimmers for each gooseneck.

I have a light like this from Aliexpress: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4000041917646.html

This works well with my RPi camera. Gives me high quality images without needing max brightness or extremely careful/near positioning. Definitely an important part of my setup.

The device is simple. Each illuminator is just one LED and a lens to focus the light into a smaller area. The base seems to just provide 5V to the LED and use PWM for dimming. Mine seems to deliver 20% PWM duty cycle at maximum brightness. The "3W" claim seems to just be a marketing number, if the LED would operate at 100% duty cycle, which is 5x what the maximum setting actually delivers. I tired putting in 100% duty cycle from my bench supply for a second or so, and WOW was that bright, but I'm not sure if the LED can survive long in that mode or whether the enclosure is able to dissipate enough heat.

This light wasn't sufficient for my Eakins IMX290 camera. If I wanted a good image I needed both lights cranked up to max and placed within about an inch of the board, which is too close for comfort. That's why I opened it up and started to look into "turbo charging" the light. But the fault there is with the camera, just doesn't have the right sensor for use on a trinocular scope.

[dreamcat4]

This light wasn't sufficient for my Eakins IMX290 camera. If I wanted a good image I needed both lights cranked up to max and placed within about an inch of the board, which is too close for comfort. That's why I opened it up and started to look into "turbo charging" the light. But the fault there is with the camera, just doesn't have the right sensor for use on a trinocular scope.

Yeah the thing I don't really understand properly is because the IMX290 is supposed to be a very well performing low light sensor... probably even better (for low light) than the one in the Rpi HQ camera.

So it's like... well whats the problem then? Is it the firmware running on the eakins blue camera? Or that the camera is somehow engaged in a "mode" that is not performing to the full capabilities of the sensor? For example if that mode is not exposed to the user, or it's a technical restriction of the way the MCU in the camera communicates with the sensor module, etc.

It does not really make sense to me why the IMX290 (the sensor alone). Would be inadequate and be underperforming. Don't get what I am missing here.

I mean - it's great that the rpi camera can do such a good job at lower cost. But that doesnt then explain why the eakins itself is doing such an inferior job, when it has a (slightly better?) sensor in it.

Or maybe there is some post processing steps going on in the rpi?

Ah wait! now I remember! The rpi camera only can use 2 of those mipi dsi lanes. Half the bandwidth. SO this then limits the fps to 1080p30. Wheras the eakins is doing twice the refresh rate @ 1080p60. So maybe since each frame is being exposed for double the time (on rpi), that then makes it about twice the brightness?

So what would happen if you could limit the eakins IMX290 sensor to do a "true" 30fps? Rather than have it's MCU just be throwing away half of the frames (and still capturing at 60fps regardless).

The reason I bring this up is because some dude out there has also been working on an FPGA adaptor, for the RPI HQ camera. Which uses all 4 dsi lanes. And that implementation (very much a prototype rather than a finished product). Well he can set any resolution or framerate he likes, up to 1000fps.

And basically to increase the FPS is always makes the image significantly DIMMER. As of course you would expect out of any camera.

Hope this helps! Let us know if you can do any further tests to confirm (or deny) with your own cameras. Good day!

And of course this speaks to the differential between the brightness thru the eye pieces compared to the camera image. Perhaps other people just artificially boost the brightness on the captured image? At a loss of quality? But of course it does not work like that. Due to the metal reflections, making it hard to see the solder joints, etc.

Please let us know if you can elaborate any better! Since my own opinions expressed here are mostly guesswork and therefore speculative. It would be nice to know better.

[lukego]

So it's like... well whats the problem then? Is it the firmware running on the eakins blue camera? Or that the camera is somehow engaged in a "mode" that is not performing to the full capabilities of the sensor? For example if that mode is not exposed to the user, or it's a technical restriction of the way the MCU in the camera communicates with the sensor module, etc.

Good question. The RPi camera does expose more tuning parameters (via raspivid command) than the Eakins (via primitive GUI) and I am tuning the RPi to the max. Some notes:

RPi HQ has a physically larger sensor. I am running that in 2x2 binned mode i.e. each pixel in my image is made up of light captured from four (2x2) cells on the sensor.  This may mean that the sensor's per-pixel light sensitivity is higher than the spec would suggest (if it considers full resolution mode on the sensor.) The max resolution I'm able to make this work with is 1296x972 for that's close enough to my goal 1080p for my purposes.

Eakins doesn't let me test slo shutter speeds. Those should allow more light onto the sensor for each frame at the expense of some blurring if the shutter speed is too close to the frame rate. Eakins setting for maximum shutter time / longest exposure seems to be too short while RPi software seems to allow more choice of values i.e. gives me some rope to hang myself with. On RPi HQ I'm able to boost exposure by extending shutter time with perfectly acceptable smoothness. It's possible that this is a big part of the problem if Eakins firmware artificially limits exposure length while RPi HQ lets me make the right trade-off.

These days I always disable all digital enhancement in the camera. I record the image as it is delivered by the sensor and then I correct the exposure myself in post-processing (specifically I use the "RGB Curves" modifier in Blender VSE to boost the mid range.) So I am not dependent on the digital "gain" features of the Eakins verses the RPi HQ.

The RPi HQ does offer some exposure correction features that occur in the analog domain, like analog gain and dynamic range control (e.g. capture more of the darker range to brighten later in post), and I do apply these. Could be that the IMX290 also supports this but that Eakins firmware doesn't expose it, not sure.

EDIT: Also, another factor is that I'm using different reducer lenses for the cameras, because the larger sensor on the RPi HQ works well with 1/2 while the smaller sensor in the Eakins IMX290 needs 1/3. These are both cheapo reducer lenses from Eakins so I don't think they make a big difference but worth mentioning.

[Electro Fan]

Thanks for the discussion on the cameras - hope we can keep that going.

On the lighting....

Attached is an image of the AliExpress pricing for a double gooseneck with individual brightness controls.  It looks a lot like the Amscope product; additionally for $92.65 it includes a ring light that seems to be about $40 from Amscope.  Just the double gooseneck with the individual controls from Amscope is $169.99.

Beyond wondering about the pricing is another item/question.  In the third image you can see that the AliExpress light stand has markings that indicate that maybe the color temp is configurable.  Any possibility color temp is really user configurable?  Anyone know if the same labeling is on the back of either the single or individually controllable Amscope double gooseneck?

I think the ability to have an individual brightness control is pretty desirable as it would effectively give the ability to control 3 lighting sources (2 goosenecks plus the ring) from 3 directions.

Thoughts?  Thx 

[lukego]

Beyond wondering about the pricing is another item/question.  In the third image you can see that the AliExpress light stand has markings that indicate that maybe the color temp is configurable.  Any possibility color temp is really user configurable?  Anyone know if the same labeling is on the back of either the single or individually controllable Amscope double gooseneck?

I have some LED photographic lights with "adjustable color temp." On mine the way it works is there are both cold and warm LEDs and you control the brightness of them separately to get the mix you want. (If you want max brightness you are stuck with 50/50 mix because they are all turned on to full.)

I think the ability to have an individual brightness control is pretty desirable as it would effectively give the ability to control 3 lighting sources (2 goosenecks plus the ring) from 3 directions.

I see only two control dials so it seems unlikely that both color temp and brightness are individually controlled. But you can also adjust brightness by moving one light further away from the board, these goosenecks are pretty good for that because they are long and firm.

That's probably the lighting kit that I'd start with if I were starting over. I think that you can get a good image using those lights, even with a suboptimal camera if you take care with the positioning. The only difference in my setup is the polarized ring light but that was expensive and not necessarily worth the money.

[jaaa1976]

I probably did not need the lightly used E-PL7 I bought yesterday, but it was cheap compared to the cost of a good microscope camera with a 4/3-inch sensor.

Hello..did you fix E-PL7 on microscope? if yes .. which adaptor c mount ? I want try some dslr camera on my microscope.thx

Olympus PEN Lite E-PL7 I see on ebay is good price used so i may try this camera ? or is there some better options for dsrl camera on ebay ?

[jfiresto]

... Hello..did you fix E-PL7 on microscope? if yes .. which adaptor c mount ? I want try some dslr camera on my microscope.thx

Olympus PEN Lite E-PL7 I see on ebay is good price used so i may try this camera ? or is there some better options for dsrl camera on ebay ?

My ca. 40 year old photo tube has a c-mount that was originally for a one-inch video tube. All I needed was an inexpensive c-mount to micro four thirds thread adapter to directly project the image onto the camera sensor. Do note that the c-mount should be no more than 34~35mm in diameter for a few millimeters below the flange, since the adapter has to stick the mount a couple millimeters into the camera to get the correct Flange Focal Distance.

The Olympus micro four thirds cameras from roughly  the OMD EM-5 onward are nice for stills and basic video. I would get a later Panasonic micro four thirds camera for more advanced video or if you need live HDMI out. A Nikon 1 should be better sized if you are a Nikon fan. Otherwise, it is probably cheaper to go 4/3rds and waste some pixels. You can probably use a mirrorless APS-C camera body (check the FFD!), but without a relay lens, the vignetting would waste more of the sensor.

Because of its mirror, a DSLR needs an intermediate relay lens to project the camera port image all the way to the sensor. The cost and complication of that prompted me to look at mirrorless system cameras with 1" and 4/3" inch sensors.

[jaaa1976]

Because of its mirror, a DSLR needs an intermediate relay lens to project the camera port image all the way to the sensor. The cost and complication of that prompted me to look at mirrorless system cameras with 1" and 4/3" inch sensors.

mirrorless system cameras with 1" and 4/3" inch sensors will be better buy? if yes ..which model you can suggest me?  Im new with cameras ..was using camera when was young..its all new to me now.

[jfiresto]

Will you be shooting video?

High definition video?

Do you need live monitoring so that you can use the camera as a video camera without recording anything?

[jaaa1976]

Will you be shooting video?

High definition video?

Do you need live monitoring so that you can use the camera as a video camera without recording anything?

Is good to have this options but for me now is enough just look on monitor to check boards when i repair phones etc.. so i can clearly see smallest parts capaitors etc. and replace them.. sometimes i just look on monitor and same time soldering..so not always look in microscope.
I dont need at the moment make videos.
I need live monitoring so that I can use the camera as a video camera without recording anything.

[jfiresto]

...
I need live monitoring so that I can use the camera as a video camera without recording anything.

Look at the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX80. It is supposed to have live HDMI monitoring, both 4K and 1080, with 4K pleasantly decimated to 1080 if the monitor only supports that. I bought one to decimate and will mount it on a microscope with a one-inch image, c-mount camera port. Unfortunately, I am presently blocked from fetching the camera and it would be rather expensive to post.

[jaaa1976]

Look at the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX80. It is supposed to have live HDMI monitoring, both 4K and 1080, with 4K pleasantly decimated to 1080 if the monitor only supports that. I bought one to decimate and will mount it on a microscope with a one-inch image, c-mount camera port. Unfortunately, I am presently blocked from fetching the camera and it would be rather expensive to post.

thank you for suggestion.. its not expensive camera i look on ebay.. if i buy..which adapter i need to buy? can you send me link?
If i buy this camera  .. it means i dont need buy this expensive microscope C mount adapter for amscope in link below?
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32858009996.html

and what you think about Sony A6000 Mirrorless Camera ?

[jfiresto]

and what you think about Sony A6000 Mirrorless Camera ?

I have since favorable snippets about Sony's cameras but no very little about them. The A6000 has an E-mount with an even slightly shorter distance than micro four thirds. It looks like you can get inexpensive c-mount to Sony e-mount thread adapters, though, again, you may have consider the diameter of the microscope's c-mount just below the flange. Having an APS-C sensor, you may get vignetting or more blurring toward the corners than with a micro four thirds camera.

What microscope do you have? You want a 1X, 1-inch microscope c-mount adapter. On older and on higher end microscopes, they are often much cheaper and simpler because the adapter needs no optics.

[jaaa1976]

and what you think about Sony A6000 Mirrorless Camera ?

I have since favorable snippets about Sony's cameras but no very little about them. The A6000 has an E-mount with an even slightly shorter distance than micro four thirds. It looks like you can get inexpensive c-mount to Sony e-mount thread adapters, though, again, you may have consider the diameter of the microscope's c-mount just below the flange. Having an APS-C sensor, you may get vignetting or more blurring toward the corners than with a micro four thirds camera.

What microscope do you have? You want a 1X, 1-inch microscope c-mount adapter. On older and on higher end microscopes, they are often much cheaper and simpler because the adapter needs no optics.

I have AmScope SM745NTP-B 7X-45X Black Simul-Focal Trinocular Zoom Stereo Microscope
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32995863371.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.43b34c4dA

[jfiresto]

I do not know Amscope, but I think you want the 1X version of the above, perhaps the 1X version of one of these. It is the cheapest which may mean it contains no optic, that is, no cheap optics to degrade the image, assuming it is designed correctly.