New trinocular microscope image not level through lens

[Psi]

I will check and get back and I do have Barlow lens for scope and scmc tv 1/2 but the problem is I can't get the camera and eye pieces to focus at the same time

Your microscope has 4 adjustments for focus.

- Rotating left eye piece focus ring
- Rotating right eye piece focus ring
- Rotating the main focus knob
- Rotating the SCMC TV 1/2 camera adapter focus ring.

Use this process to set up all the focus adjustments.

1. Zoom all the way in

2. Rotate the two eye pieces focus rings to be around 50% position i.e. find their min/max and set them to approximately center position.

3. Look into the microscope and adjust the main focus knob so the right eye comes into focus on something under the microscope.

4. Look into the microscope and check the left eye, if this is out of focus leave the main focus knob alone and adjust the focus ring on the left eye to fix it. Both eyes should now be in focus

5. Now look into the microscope and confirm you can zoom all the way out and all the way in and everything stays in focus.
If you cannot do this, try rotating left and right eye pieces focus rings together by an amount and then moving the main focus knob the other way to compensate.
There should be a spot where, if you focus while zoomed-in you can then zoom out and still be in focus.
(Note it doesn't always work the other way around. If zoomed out and then you zoom in it wont always be in-focus. The reason for this is simple but would take 2 paragraphs to fully explain) 

6. Now look at the image from the camera, rotate the focus adjustment ring on the 'SCMC TV 1/2' adapter so the camera image is in focus.
Note, you may have to unscrew the locking shaft and/or the locking screw on it a little so it will rotate.


Now you should be all good.
 
Of course, if you have an issue in the optics the above isn't going to work.

[Imran333]

Here's pictures of setup and inside microscope

[Imran333]

More pics

[Psi]

Did you find any loose optics?

[Mechatrommer]

i will suspect more on reflecting prism/lens, since i dont think objectives and eyepiece can give distorted image when looking straight down on perpendicular plane.. wiggling the prisms to see if some of them is loose. Or make re alignment yourself to get better image. those retaining screws seem not designed properly. But if you think its difficult you may put them back together again and send back for warranty refund or replacement.

edit: i think there are more reflectors you havent explored inside objective compartment.

[taydin]

I have almost the exact same microscope with the same camera adapter. And the image quality is not good, just like you observed. I have eliminted the camera to be the problem, because it works well with a nikon lens:

[taydin]

So that leaves only the camera adapter and the microscope itself. I think it's the microscope internal optics. Attached are two example images. As can be seen, the center is fine, but the further you go away from the center, the more the image becomes fuzzy (not blurry, just fuzzy).

I asked the Chinese company in aliexpress that sold me this, and they just said "this is normal"  So what are you going to do? Ship it back with huge expense, just to receive another one that has the same problem? I won't bother. Instead, I'm looking into making a stereo microscope using two rod microscope with two cameras. What I need to find are display glasses where each of the two displays has a separate HDMI input.

[Mechatrommer]

the OP problem is not fuzzy/poor/cheap lens which can be fixed with changing focus or replace with more quality lens, but distorted/tilted rectangle through eyepiece. I consider the out of focus camera as small problem can be fixed by changing distance of camera sensor from lenses. The distortion he tried to mimick on some pictures earlier is the peculiar one.

[jfiresto]

So that leaves only the camera adapter and the microscope itself. I think it's the microscope internal optics. Attached are two example images. As can be seen, the center is fine, but the further you go away from the center, the more the image becomes fuzzy (not blurry, just fuzzy).

I asked the Chinese company in aliexpress that sold me this, and they just said "this is normal"....

I am not sure I understand the use of fuzzy rather than blurry. The entire images are not sharp to me, considering the low magnification, and just get worse towards the edges. Strictly speaking, only the inner 60% of the field of view need be very flat and sharp, for a simple achromat objective. Even so, a quality "routine" microscope should be much sharper than that, and still be fairly sharp toward the edges.

[taydin]

I am not sure I understand the use of fuzzy rather than blurry. The entire images are not sharp to me, considering the low magnification, and just get worse towards the edges. Strictly speaking, only the inner 60% of the field of view need be very flat and sharp, for a simple achromat objective. Even so, a quality "routine" microscope should be much sharper than that, and still be fairly sharp toward the edges.

I'm talking about image out of focus when I say blurry. The image problems at the edges are not focus related. The image is just "smeared". Maybe the prisms, or mirrors, or whatever is in the microscope body, have a film of dust on them.

The image quality isn't as good as when you look at the card using the eyepieces, and I'm not sure that would be the expectation when you grab the image using the camera port. But in any case, to me, the center of both images are acceptable in quality. going to the edges the image gets progressively crappy.

[jfiresto]

... The image problems at the edges are not focus related. The image is just "smeared". Maybe the prisms, or mirrors, or whatever is in the microscope body, have a film of dust on them....

Usually dirty prisms largely reduce the brightness and contrast. I have a photo tube adapter (essential half the top half of the OP's microscope) with a dirty entry lens and prism, that a fellow with a Wild M8 used for many years, and never noticed anything wrong. I noticed some loss of contrast, the field of view was shifted about 10% with respect to the view in the eyepieces, and, curiously, the resolution was more than halved as you approached the edge of the FOV toward 2 or 8 o'clock. Well, someone had replaced the prism, many years ago – and left it slightly skewed and somewhat dusted with what may be old metal bits and epoxy.

My wild guess from a great distance is the OP's scope has an alignment issue.

EDIT: Attached a picture of the replaced prism.

[Psi]

So that leaves only the camera adapter and the microscope itself. I think it's the microscope internal optics. Attached are two example images. As can be seen, the center is fine, but the further you go away from the center, the more the image becomes fuzzy (not blurry, just fuzzy).

I've heard of others that have that issue.
It sounds like you got the newer version. I'm not entirely sure what exactly the difference is, but the newer versions seem to have issues where the center is sharp but edges are blured.

Louis Rossmann has been complaining about this issue for a while and sourced the old version to sell from his store.
See video below...

Some people say the issue is the adapter that goes between the microscope and camera. I'm not sure if that's the full story.
 

[Mechatrommer]

I'm talking about image out of focus when I say blurry. The image problems at the edges are not focus related. The image is just "smeared". Maybe the prisms, or mirrors, or whatever is in the microscope body, have a film of dust on them.

not dust, but it just physics, its called Petzval Curvature(1), Petzval Curvature (2). where in order to get sharp edge to edge image, you need to buy curved image sensor which i dont think exist in consumer market, except the given free two unit inside our eyeballs (retina). another workaround is to use larger lens elements so to increase the radius of this curvature to achieve near flat focus plan on the flat sensor, reducing the edge-blurry effect, this is the reason why larger more more expensive lenses sold out.

Louis Rossmann has been complaining about this issue for a while and sourced the old version to sell from his store.
See video below...

its another type of lens design/material defect known in cheap optics.. Astigmatism or Abberation

[taydin]

I've heard of others that have that issue.
It sounds like you got the newer version. I'm not entirely sure what exactly the difference is, but the newer versions seem to have issues where the center is sharp but edges are blured.

Louis Rossmann has been complaining about this issue for a while and sourced the old version to sell from his store.
See video below...

Some people say the issue is the adapter that goes between the microscope and camera. I'm not sure if that's the full story.

My camera adapter is actually similar to what Rossman is using. The quality of the other one is indeed very bad. Mine isn't THAT bad. So I guess maybe I have to change my expectation and this is what I will ever get out of this 

[taydin]

not dust, but it just physics, its called Petzval Curvature(1), Petzval Curvature (2). where in order to get sharp edge to edge image, you need to buy curved image sensor which i dont think exist in consumer market, except the given free two unit inside our eyeballs (retina). another workaround is to use larger lens elements so to increase the radius of this curvature to achieve near flat focus plan on the flat sensor, reducing the edge-blurry effect, this is the reason why larger more more expensive lenses sold out.

I was considering to dismantle the microscope body and clean the mirrors and what not, but not having a dust hood, I was putting it off. If it isn't a big deal to have a small amount of dust on the optics, maybe I should open the thing and clean it. I have very clean compressed air available, so I can really keep the dust quite low.

[taydin]

Have you guys ever seen display glasses with separate HDMI's for each eye? This is something that I'm searching for on the Internet, but no luck so far. One reason is the difficultly in coming up with effective search terms. All I get is normal opthalmology glasses, or dam VR things for gamers ...

[jfiresto]

I was considering to dismantle the microscope body and clean the mirrors and what not, but not having a dust hood, I was putting it off. If it isn't a big deal to have a small amount of dust on the optics....

You could do that (I am a fan of the Giottos Rocket Blaster), but I bet it won't make much of a difference. I have attached a picture showing the debris on the front of the front lens of the above photo adapter. There is more junk on the other side, and on the prism. As I wrote, the previous owner – with a high-end, plan objective stereo microscope – did not even notice.

[Howardlong]

I have the same problem.

These were taken with a Panasonic G9 Micro 4/3 camera body straight onto the camera port without any lenses. It's definitely in focus in the centre, I provide links to the 80Mpx jpeg for the pixel peepers.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/amscope-3-5x-45x-trinocular-zoom-microscope-with-double-arm-boom-stand/msg2298618/#msg2298618

As far as I am aware, that's just the way it is.

[jfiresto]

Yeah, I am starting to think that we should give up trying to solve issues with low cost Chinese microscopes, and just accept that they are what they are.

[TurboTom]

Several years ago I spent an amount not too much more than one of the mentioned microscopes would have cost, on a decent condition second hand Wild Heerbrugg M3. I never ever felt regretful for that spending and enjoy every single time I'm using it. I've worked with several different stereo microscopes but there's simply no comparison. No separate camera adapter of course, but an ocular camera in one of the sockets works just fine.

I know it's easily said but in some situations, it's just worth buying the "real thing" instead of spending a little less on an inadequate replacement.

P.S. I don't only relate this to the mentioned brand, any of the "big players" will probably provide as good quality.

[Nusa]

RE the original posters pictures, I notice the threaded mount on what I think is the right eyepiece appears to be broken. I don't know if that's the source of the problems he's seeing, but it's an indicator that the eyepiece may have taken a blow at some point.

0 degrees = board is lying flat.
90 degrees = you're literally viewing the board edge-on.
180 degrees = you're impossibly seeing the other side of the board, lying flat.
360 degrees = 0 degrees, since that's the number of degrees in a circle.

[AlfBaz]

I have a similar AM-Scope except to give access to the camera I have to pull a slide lever out which blocks one of the eye pieces.
It's worked flawlessly for several years unit I dropped it off the bench recently. Nothing is cracked or visually broken however I now see double when looking through the scope with both eyes.

All of the prisms, mirrors etc inside have grub screws to hold them in place and presumably for adjusting their position but they are all glued in place.
I rang an optics place in Sydney that repairs and calibrates scopes and they tell me without the manufacturers special rigs, realigning them is next to impossible.
It appears the only fix is to purchase a replacement head

The problem the OP is having is certainly a strange one in that it appears to be an optical distortion rather than an alignment issue as any misalignment should result in the two optical paths not converging on the same spot

[Imran333]

Did you find any loose optics?

nothing seemed loose

[Imran333]

RE the original posters pictures, I notice the threaded mount on what I think is the right eyepiece appears to be broken. I don't know if that's the source of the problems he's seeing, but it's an indicator that the eyepiece may have taken a blow at some point.

0 degrees = board is lying flat.
90 degrees = you're literally viewing the board edge-on.
180 degrees = you're impossibly seeing the other side of the board, lying flat.
360 degrees = 0 degrees, since that's the number of degrees in a circle.

on one side the eye piece thread is broken but there was no broken piece inside so I'm presuming it left the factory like that but I don't think that's causing the problem bcuz that's just the thread for the eye piece and it screws in perfectly still and if that was the problem then only one eye piece should be affected, I have contacted seller but seller on aliexpress is just messing me around but the broken thread is not causing the problem but it's something else maybe I need to take it apart a bit more and look deeper inside bcuz maybe I never took everything apart

[jfiresto]

Several years ago I spent an amount ... on a decent condition second hand Wild Heerbrugg M3. I never ever felt regretful for that spending and enjoy every single time I'm using it....

Some people don't like the original M3 because it has a bit of dome distortion, but I find it charming: it makes raised relief, a bit more so. (Could you correct that in Photoshop?) But, good grief, the image out of that microscope is bright, and it easy to see why. If you flip it to 16X (mid power), remove the head and peer down, you are staring directly at the objective. I am fixing up an M3 to give to a friend, and I don't think he will be unhappy with it. I think the best thing about the old Wilds is that they are extremely well made. Should you ever need to sell one, you can probably get back what you paid for it.

EDIT: I should add that if anyone is thinking of buying an old Wild stereo microscope: I would avoid the really old ones with yellowish housings, unless you are sure they have been well maintained.