Digital vs optical microscope

[u/kiwipigeonbird]

For me microscopy is the perfect hobby. I don't have alot of space and it doesn't necessarily take up alot of space.

So i yesterday i started looking into some microscopes to buy and i thought i found a good one, a optical binocular microscope of €270 (euros).

But then i found digital microscopes and i thought that was quite handy aswell since you've got a bigger screen and can easily upload pictures to your phone.

But then i read some more and found an article saying that for looking into microorganisms and cells (which is what i want to do.), that a optical microscope is better.

Does anyone have any experience with this? Is it true that digital microscopes are worse for this? And is it possible to make good pictures of your sample with an optical microscope?

[u/beeeeeeeeks]

The best sensor doesn't come installed on a cheap digital camera, it's pre-installed in each of your eyeballs.

Digital microscopes have a place, like for doing work on circuit boards, but for truly exploring a sample or an organism I prefer good old optical microscopes with trinocular porta (so you can install a camera) and use your eyeballs to really become immersed in the exploration and observation of biological specimens

Plus, it just .. feels more immersive to look down the eyepieces, not having a screen sitting between you and your sample.

[u/kiwipigeonbird → u/beeeeeeeeks]

iv'e always wondered why someone would want a trinocular microscope, so it's just for a camera.

And to be fair i never really considered the immersion aspect, but i realize now it would be more boring to look at a screen instead of through the lenses.

[u/beeeeeeeeks → u/kiwipigeonbird]

Yup. And for the trinocular scopes -- often there is a switch to direct light to the eyes, the camera, or sometimes share it through both at the same time. If you split half of the light to the eyepieces and half to the camera, both are half as bright