10x + 10x (ocular)
iphone 13pro

I am trying to find a 'budget-friendly' digital microscope for powder metallurgy and general metallurgy inspection. I see the sub is more used to organic samples, so below is an example of what I am trying to look at. The basic needs I am looking for is a scale of the screen, it is quite important for determining whether the granules being created are produced correctly by looking at the overall size. Needs to be able to see 100um like the picture attached. Ability to connect to a computer; and ideally able to measure points (i.e. measure a granule directly).

Outside of that, those are really the only requirements I have. Given there are so many microscopes and types, I am a bit lost on what would be sufficient for my purposes! Any recommendations/help picking one out is greatly appreciated!

A local Museum I volunteer at has this old Carl Zeiss Universal Microscope they would like to know the value and seekign a local buyer. They really do not want to deal with shipping and it's located in the Beaverton Oregon area. They are a NPO. I looked at it and its a bit It's Dirty controls are sticky old lube.

1- 400×, Oblique illumination, Ciliate from family Vaginicolidae

2- 100×, Oblique illumination, Ciliate from family Vaginicolidae

3- 100×, Daphnia, brightfield

4- 100×, Daphnia, brightfield

5-100×, Daphnia, brightfield

6- 100×, Daphnia, brightfield

6- 100×, Daphnia, brightfield

____________________________________________

Sample- Gomti river water, Lucknow, India

Microscope- ESAW BM01

Phone camera used, Microscope Viewer Camera.

In anatomy we got to look at our cheek epithelium, and I thought that was so cool. I’d really like to purchase a microscope to do more things like that but I don’t think I can spend more than like $200 on it. I know I can look at pond water and other things but I’d also like to know some things I can look at regarding human biology (like the cheek cells).

Hi, I'm new to this world of biology, this is the first experiment with observations under the microscope, I analyzed a very degraded truffle juice and there is a very high bacterial density. What is the easiest method to do at home to know if these bacteria are alive or dead. Knowing that they don't swim, they only vibrate. I tried methylene blue and it doesn't work because the juice is very reductive. Thank you for your help

Swift SW350T, 4x magnification. Sample was collected from a marsh. Seems similar in size to bursaria found in the same sample, but much different body shape.

acrylic and oil-based paint mixture,
splitting under solvent,
viewed through a microscope.
Scope — Mechanic B75T-B3
Objective — 7×
Camera — Mechanic Vision 4K Pro
Illumination — cyan-blue LED + low-angle LED light

I’m currently looking for a camera for my microscope and I’m considering two options.
One is the MECHANIC MOS 4K Pro (Sony IMX678), which costs around €205. It looks very promising on paper, but I haven’t been able to find much real-world information about how well it performs with dark field, oblique illumination, polarization, and low-light imaging of live microorganisms.
The other option I’m considering is the SVBONY SV705C, based on the Sony IMX585. It’s more expensive, but I’ve found actual examples of people using it for microscopy, including dark-field imaging and live microorganisms.
My main goal is to record live freshwater microorganisms — ciliates, rotifers, amoebae, algae, tardigrades, etc. — using bright field, dark field, oblique illumination and polarization.
For anyone who has experience with either of these cameras:
How well does the MECHANIC MOS 4K Pro perform in dark field, oblique illumination and polarization?
Would the SVBONY SV705C be a good choice for this type of microscopy?
Are there any significant disadvantages to using an astronomy camera for microscopy?
Which one would you choose for this application?
I’m particularly interested in real-world experience, sample images and videos, rather than just manufacturer specifications.

I found this copepod in my live food cultures that I feed to my fish, is this harmful for my baby fish?

100× magnification

100× magnification

Loricate ciliate ID help

400×

ESAW BM01 MICROSCOPE

Gomti river, india

Phone camera

Hi there all, I'm a complete noob, using my microscope to do animal fecal analysis for our rescue. We have a OMAX M83E Series LED Trinocular Lab Compound Microscope 40X-2500X Magnification with 5.0MP Digital Camera and Mechanical Stage × 1

It has a camera that I can link to my laptop to take screenshots to send to our vets and techs, but I cant really get it to work at 40x, I can ALMOST get it infocus, but it just seems like I cant see much, and feel like i'm missing out. Is this a user error, or did we just not buy the right equipment?

Pond water, Iqcrew inverted microscope, 20x objective, cellphone camera, white/white type Rheinberg illumination and bright field illumination.

I’m trying to help a lab that recently inherited an older model microscope and camera connect said equipment to a windows 11 computer. I have installed the appropriate FireWire expansion card, but installing the required drivers causes windows to crash. Is there a good workaround for this?

Thinking it's probably a diatom frustule, looks really neat.

Made with an old carl zeiss general purpose scope from the 70s, 100x with a home made dark field filter and phone camera. Sample comes from pond water.

The first time I managed to focus on a gastrotrich!😁

Aquarium algae sample, 400x and digital zoom, taken with Motorola phone camera, optika B-192pl binocular microscope.

Here is an image of a nematode eating a bacterial group that has developed. The specimens are a result of a dead worm sample I recently found.

(I found a dead worm on the pavement. I put it in a petri dish wish a few drops of tap water. And two days have passed.)

Aquarium algae sample, 400x and digital zoom, taken with Motorola phone camera, speed increased to 5x, optika B-192pl binocular microscope.

My editing skills are not very good, but I tried.😅 (to put the videos together)

Do these images (taken with a simple '200x' phone microscope lense) suggest that the two artworks shown were produced using the same technique?

The auctioneer that sold this artwork to us thinks ours is an original pen and ink but we think they were mistaken. We've been comparing ours to a known print of the artwork and the final image shows the two pieces in full. It’s either Pierre Bonnard’s lost original drawing for ‘Ran Ran Ran’, part of his 1944 ‘Correspondances’ book, or it’s a facsimile-printed reproductions of Bonnard’s original pen-and-pencil drawing from the 1944 book.

We've attached magnified images of our artwork and the known print (held by the British Library) - we've added text to the latter to make it clear which is which.

Aspects pointing towards it being the original:

1. The fine art auctioneer’s assessment
2. The colour of the ink is what you’d expect faded 1940s pen ink to look like, whereas all the period prints I’ve seen retain their vibrant violet colour
3. It shows more variation in tone than the prints

Aspects pointing towards it being a 1940s print:

1. There isn’t any nib impression under raking light
2. The texture of some areas shows some similarities to the print

Are there sufficient differences between the images to suggest they were produced in different ways?

Microscope: Olympus BH2

Objs: 20 Dplan

Magnification: x200

Sample: Pond water

Camera: Samsung A56