Re: Wild M3/M5 eyepieces

The Wild/Heerbrugg steromicroscopes are outstanding and have
sufficient NA to support the higher magnifications. The princile
reason for the higher magnifications is to be able to manipilate
smaller specimen under magnification. Beginning at about 25X
compound microscopes over lap the higher magnifications of a stereo
microscope. The optics of the compound microscope provide better
resolution because the objectives are much closer to the specimen
which facilitates higher NA. The working distance under a stereo
microscope objective is much, much greater plus there is a 3D stereo
effect which is especially desirable for inspection and repairs of
small items or disection of smalll specimen. In additon to
considering an M3 or M5, look at the Leica MZ series. These are later
versions of the Heerbrugg lines and they currently come up on eBay for
very reasonable prices.

Aaron.


On 10 Nov 2005 23:16:07 -0800, "John Powell" <arudis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Hi.
>
>I'll start out by saying I'm not very knowledgable about microscopy. I
>do use stereomicroscopes for entomology work and have decided to take a
>big leap into becoming an owner of my very own scope. The "big" part
>being, at least for me, the purchase of a Wild M3 or M5.
>
>My question is the scopes I have come across in the recent past that I
>have seen for sale almost all have 10X eyepieces. If I was to buy one
>of them and then buy 15x or 20x eyepieces, will these provide the same
>great images at higher magnification as I would get at 50X with the 10X
>eyepieces in an M5 (or at 40X with a M3)? I do have some need getting
>the extra magnificaion I could with 15X eyepieces. 20X would be nice
>too.
>
>I had not found any good information about this, other than a few
>vaguely worded ideas that putting a higher X eyepiece in a scope
>designed for a lower range of magnifcation might not work that well.
>None of the was in reference to a Wild scope and in some ways I am
>almost sure even 20X eyepieces would work out just fine. Those mere
>hints of possible trouble I came across made me wonder, and I thought
>this might be a good place to find out what is correct.
>
>Thanks in advance to anyone that can help and is kind enough to take
>the time to answer a neophyte's questions.
>
>John
.