Re: Making a microscope

From: Michael A. Terrell (mike.terrell_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 03/10/05 

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 14:12:47 GMT

Don Taylor wrote:
>
> I never really considered real-time frame rate as a criteria for a
> microscope. But I agree that the plastic lenses could be lots better.
> There was a web page a few years ago that discussed the possibility
> of replacing the lenses. Each power is provided by a separate lens
> assembly that is housed inside the scope. Unlike many products, the
> scope is fairly easy to open. But building a new lens assembly
> might be a challenge. I studied the web page for a while but never
> did go further. And I suppose automating the focus wouldn't be
> out of the question. Somewhat surprisingly, the scope seems to
> comply with the Twain protocols, I think, it has been a while since
> I was actively playing with this. People found you could "open"
> the scope with any Twain compliant application and even inspect
> the properties. You weren't locked inside some incompatible SW.
> So, a little stepper could drive the focus knob and just search
> for maximum contrast.
>
> I'm certainly not defending the toy. But it was surprising how
> much they could deliver for the price.

   The frame rate was so slow you had to adjust the focus and wait for
the next frame. I considered replacing the camera card with a standard
NTSC camera but I haven't found one to fit the available space. Its too
bad Mattel-Intel didn't make one you could hook to your TV's video
input. It would have been a better microscope if they had. Even
better, a version with both outputs.

   I have several security cameras that take a "C" mount lens but I
can't find a good closeup/macro lens. 

-- 
?
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida