Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Supereyes USB microscopes?

I

Ivan Shmakov

Jan 1, 1970
0
[Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
still.]

Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
USB microscopes' specifications? I've seen claims of something
like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
(quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)

First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
software.

My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
task. Is there some other brand I should consider?

TIA.

PS. Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
software to operate.
 
G

Greegor

Jan 1, 1970
0
        [Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
        still.]

        Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
        USB microscopes' specifications?  I've seen claims of something
        like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
        (quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)

        First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
        Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
        640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
        software.

        My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
        and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
        task.  Is there some other brand I should consider?

        TIA.

PS.  Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
        software to operate.

How does that compare to the Veho VMS-004D with 2MP CMOS sensor which
sells for $56 online?

Which Supereyes model and sensor are you talking about?
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Ivan said:
[Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
still.]

Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
USB microscopes' specifications? I've seen claims of something
like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
(quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)

I recently bought the 200x kind.

First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
software.

My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
task. Is there some other brand I should consider?

From a quality and resolution POV it looks more like 1MPixel. But that
could also be due to the lens. Obviously there can't be a $1k lens in
there :)

TIA.

PS. Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
software to operate.

It works out of the box into Windows Explorer. But for using the various
resolution modes (which affects frame rate) you need their software. The
one on the CD didn't work and they have a free download. It took a while
to figure out that only the non-w version works.

LED: This is not SW-controllable and the LEDs will stay lit even with
the PC off, depending on PC-configuration and whether you use a powered
hub (I do). Until USB power gets cut.

Another thing you should now: The USB cable does not have any rotational
strain relief so don't use this in a rough environment where it gets
moved a lot.
 
B

brent

Jan 1, 1970
0
        [Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
        still.]

        Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
        USB microscopes' specifications?  I've seen claims of something
        like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
        (quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)

        First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
        Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
        640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
        software.

        My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
        and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
        task.  Is there some other brand I should consider?

        TIA.

PS.  Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
        software to operate.

I cannot speak to the specifics of what you are looking at....

I have been looking at cracked solder joints through a traditional
microscope, but am not able to get very good pictures. A guy in the
office has one of those usb microscopes and they are very
good....but.... the focal point is so close to the device that I
could only get good images looking straight down on the chip.
Unfortunately, the cracked leads were only visible when viewing
through a traditional microscope and tilting the board a lot.

So, while I think these devices are great, they may not get some angle
you need.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
brent said:
[Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
still.]

Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
USB microscopes' specifications? I've seen claims of something
like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
(quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)

First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
software.

My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
task. Is there some other brand I should consider?

TIA.

PS. Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
software to operate.

I cannot speak to the specifics of what you are looking at....

I have been looking at cracked solder joints through a traditional
microscope, but am not able to get very good pictures. A guy in the
office has one of those usb microscopes and they are very
good....but.... the focal point is so close to the device that I
could only get good images looking straight down on the chip.
Unfortunately, the cracked leads were only visible when viewing
through a traditional microscope and tilting the board a lot.

So, while I think these devices are great, they may not get some angle
you need.


There is an adjustment wheel for focus though. Also, there are two
protrusions to prevent hitting the lens on the object, probably can be
sawed off.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
John said:
[Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
still.]

Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
USB microscopes' specifications? I've seen claims of something
like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
(quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)

First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
software.

My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
task. Is there some other brand I should consider?

TIA.

PS. Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
software to operate.
I cannot speak to the specifics of what you are looking at....

I have been looking at cracked solder joints through a traditional
microscope, but am not able to get very good pictures. A guy in the
office has one of those usb microscopes and they are very
good....but.... the focal point is so close to the device that I
could only get good images looking straight down on the chip.
Unfortunately, the cracked leads were only visible when viewing
through a traditional microscope and tilting the board a lot.

So, while I think these devices are great, they may not get some angle
you need.

Get a Mantis!

.... and buy a fortune cookie factory and clean it out, to get the space
for a Mantis :)

Seriously, that and the fact that it easily fits into my briefcase is
why I bought the Supereyes microscope.
 
B

brent

Jan 1, 1970
0
brent said:
        [Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
        still.]
        Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
        USB microscopes' specifications?  I've seen claims of something
        like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
        (quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USDa piece.)
        First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
        Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
        640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
        software.
        My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
        and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better),for my
        task.  Is there some other brand I should consider?
        TIA.
PS.  Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
        software to operate.
I cannot speak to the specifics of what you are looking at....
I have been looking at cracked solder joints through a traditional
microscope, but am not able to get very good pictures.  A guy in the
office has one of those usb microscopes and they are very
good....but....  the focal point is so close to the device that I
could only get good images looking straight down on the chip.
Unfortunately, the cracked leads were only visible when viewing
through a traditional microscope and tilting the board a lot.
So, while I think these devices are great, they may not get some angle
you need.

There is an adjustment wheel for focus though. Also, there are two
protrusions to prevent hitting the lens on the object, probably can be
sawed off.

Can you get a focal point 3 inches away?

How much did it cost?
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
brent said:
brent said:
[Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
still.]
Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
USB microscopes' specifications? I've seen claims of something
like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
(quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)
First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
software.
My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
task. Is there some other brand I should consider?
TIA.
PS. Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
software to operate.
--
FSF associate member #7257
I cannot speak to the specifics of what you are looking at....
I have been looking at cracked solder joints through a traditional
microscope, but am not able to get very good pictures. A guy in the
office has one of those usb microscopes and they are very
good....but.... the focal point is so close to the device that I
could only get good images looking straight down on the chip.
Unfortunately, the cracked leads were only visible when viewing
through a traditional microscope and tilting the board a lot.
So, while I think these devices are great, they may not get some angle
you need.
There is an adjustment wheel for focus though. Also, there are two
protrusions to prevent hitting the lens on the object, probably can be
sawed off.

Can you get a focal point 3 inches away?

No, about 1/2" from the protrusions or almost 3/4 from the LEDs.

For soldering very fine stuff I use a Veho VMS-001, that can do several
inches and it also has a cap against the solder fumes.

How much did it cost?


I think I paid around $120 for it, including a somewhat flimsy stand.
Could have gotten a better deal but needed it for a job, and fast. I
found the image quality quite remarkable for that price so to me it's
definitely worth it.
 
R

Robert Baer

Jan 1, 1970
0
brent said:
[Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
still.]

Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
USB microscopes' specifications? I've seen claims of something
like 5 Mpx& 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
(quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)

First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
software.

My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
task. Is there some other brand I should consider?

TIA.

PS. Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
software to operate.

I cannot speak to the specifics of what you are looking at....

I have been looking at cracked solder joints through a traditional
microscope, but am not able to get very good pictures. A guy in the
office has one of those usb microscopes and they are very
good....but.... the focal point is so close to the device that I
could only get good images looking straight down on the chip.
Unfortunately, the cracked leads were only visible when viewing
through a traditional microscope and tilting the board a lot.

So, while I think these devices are great, they may not get some angle
you need.
Phase contrast anyone?
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
John said:
[Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
still.]

Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
USB microscopes' specifications? I've seen claims of something
like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
(quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)

First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
software.

My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
task. Is there some other brand I should consider?

TIA.

PS. Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
software to operate.

I have a Veho VMS-004, $69 from Amazon with a stand. It's 640x480, adjsutable
focus, but strangely stops just short of infinity. The problem with all these
Dyno clones is that the LEDs are close-in, and there's a lot of reflection
glare.

This one works without loading any software in XP, but Win7 doesn't seem to have
a built-in video cam viwer. Strange.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/53724080/Optos/Veho.jpg

I use my Veho mostly with its LEDs turned off. On the Supereyes there is
a potmeter (a literal one) to adjust brightness from zero to full, much
better.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
John said:
John said:
[Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
still.]

Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
USB microscopes' specifications? I've seen claims of something
like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
(quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)

First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
software.

My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
task. Is there some other brand I should consider?

TIA.

PS. Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
software to operate.
I have a Veho VMS-004, $69 from Amazon with a stand. It's 640x480, adjsutable
focus, but strangely stops just short of infinity. The problem with all these
Dyno clones is that the LEDs are close-in, and there's a lot of reflection
glare.

This one works without loading any software in XP, but Win7 doesn't seem to have
a built-in video cam viwer. Strange.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/53724080/Optos/Veho.jpg
I use my Veho mostly with its LEDs turned off. On the Supereyes there is
a potmeter (a literal one) to adjust brightness from zero to full, much
better.

There are webcams with adjustable white-illuminated LEDs for as little as $1.
Forget the video, that's a pretty good USB utility light.

Why don't cars have USB connectors?

They do. Last time I was in a Ford Fusion it had several. IIRC the
Mustang we rented had that as well, plus blue pedal lighting for
whatever reason. You drive a European car and some of those features
take a while to make it over there. Just like cup holders did :)
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff said:
There are also various microscope ring illuminators, most of which are
adjustable:


A cigarette lighter to USB adapter is usually sufficient.
<http://store.griffintechnology.com/powerjolt-dual-universal-micro>
You can choose between igniting a cancer stick, or charging a
smartphone. The decision should be obvious. The difficult part is
finding one that will supply 2A for powering an iPad.

It might also have something to do with padded dashboard collision
safety, where a USB connector projecting from the dashboard would be
considered a hazard.

Almost everything has USB these days:

http://www.geekalerts.com/cake-usb-hub/
http://www.greensmoke.com/catalog/Batteries/usb-cigarette/prod_33.html
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
John said:
John said:
John Larkin wrote:

[Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
still.]

Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
USB microscopes' specifications? I've seen claims of something
like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
(quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)

First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
software.

My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
task. Is there some other brand I should consider?

TIA.

PS. Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
software to operate.
I have a Veho VMS-004, $69 from Amazon with a stand. It's 640x480, adjsutable
focus, but strangely stops just short of infinity. The problem with all these
Dyno clones is that the LEDs are close-in, and there's a lot of reflection
glare.

This one works without loading any software in XP, but Win7 doesn't seem to have
a built-in video cam viwer. Strange.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/53724080/Optos/Veho.jpg

I use my Veho mostly with its LEDs turned off. On the Supereyes there is
a potmeter (a literal one) to adjust brightness from zero to full, much
better.
There are webcams with adjustable white-illuminated LEDs for as little as $1.
Forget the video, that's a pretty good USB utility light.

Why don't cars have USB connectors?
They do. Last time I was in a Ford Fusion it had several. IIRC the
Mustang we rented had that as well, plus blue pedal lighting for
whatever reason. You drive a European car and some of those features
take a while to make it over there. Just like cup holders did :)

I wish I could plug a laptop into my Audi and reprogram most of its
Im-Smarter-Than-You behavior. The windshield wipers are amazing.

When I rented a VW in Germany last year I was mighty disappointed that
it had an automatic transmission. Maybe it was the edition for
Amerikanskis. Anyhow, I could push the lever to the right and then had a
whopping seven gears for hand-shifting. No clutch pedal though. To my
real surprise it had a mph display in addittion to the km/h.
 
A

amdx

Jan 1, 1970
0
You're apparently fighting a depth of field problem. Your unspecified
model PCB inspection microscope probably has a limited depth of field,
as controlled primarily by the objective lens. More magnification
means a smaller depth of field.
<http://www.microscopyu.com/articles/formulas/formulasfielddepth.html>
Nikon DoF calculator (Java required):
<http://www.microscopyu.com/tutorials/java/depthoffield/index.html>
By tilting the PCB, you're making things more difficult as getting a
decent photo of a tilted PCB requires an even larger depth of field.
It's the same DoF problem with both microscopes.

I suspect that you can put the camera perpendicular to the PCB, and
move the light source around until the cracks become visible. You can
also cheat a little. Smear some fluorescent dye on the solder joint
crack. Let it penetrate into the crack. Wipe, and illuminate with a
UV flashlight. You can buy the dye at any auto parts store:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dye_penetrant_inspection>
(Note: I haven't tried this yet).

Some interesting reading on USB cameras for PCB inspection:
<http://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/dino-lite-411t413t/msg55114/#msg55114>
Mine looks exactly like this:
<http://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/usb-microscopes-for-pcb-inspection/msg56282/#msg56282>
It's flimsy, cheaply built, poor construction, and takes great photos
mostly because of the close in LED lighting.
With film cameras dwindling away, would it be worth working up a mount
for a decent 35mm zoom lens to a camera, so you could get some distance
between the subject and camera lens?

Opinions here --->

I ran across this camera which is in a different housing then most.
Says 5MP!
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Professiona...011?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item27d08533c3

YOUTUBE video here.

Thoughts?

Mikek
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
amdx said:
With film cameras dwindling away, would it be worth working up a mount
for a decent 35mm zoom lens to a camera, so you could get some distance
between the subject and camera lens?

Opinions here --->

It already exists. I bought an Olympus E-PL1 plus a Fotodiox adapter
that connects the existing collection of Minolta Rokkor lenses to this
camera. Works nicely.

I don't have this one but if I needed to do some extreme macros I'd
probably add this to the stack:

http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Exte...=1363111634&sr=8-11&keywords=Fotodiox+Olympus

But you can't really us these cameras for soldering and things like
that. Most don't have realtime output into a computer, have a voracious
power appetite but no power supply connectors, and you don't really want
to mess up such expensive lenses with solder fumes.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
John said:
John said:
John Larkin wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

[Probably not the most appropriate newsgroup, but nevertheless
still.]

Could someone please shed some light on the Supereyes-brand
USB microscopes' specifications? I've seen claims of something
like 5 Mpx & 200x optical zoom, but I'm suspect that these are
(quite) a bit overstated, given the price (like 25 USD a piece.)

First and foremost, do they really employ a 5 Mpx sensor?
Somehow, I've got the impression that they may be using a
640 x 480 (0.3 Mpx) one, and then "enhance" the image in
software.

My guess is that I'd need something with a (1 .. 2) Mpx sensor,
and more or less decent optics (Supereyes' or better), for my
task. Is there some other brand I should consider?

TIA.

PS. Naturally, the device shouldn't require any "custom" drivers or
software to operate.
I have a Veho VMS-004, $69 from Amazon with a stand. It's 640x480, adjsutable
focus, but strangely stops just short of infinity. The problem with all these
Dyno clones is that the LEDs are close-in, and there's a lot of reflection
glare.

This one works without loading any software in XP, but Win7 doesn't seem to have
a built-in video cam viwer. Strange.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/53724080/Optos/Veho.jpg

I use my Veho mostly with its LEDs turned off. On the Supereyes there is
a potmeter (a literal one) to adjust brightness from zero to full, much
better.
There are webcams with adjustable white-illuminated LEDs for as little as $1.
Forget the video, that's a pretty good USB utility light.

Why don't cars have USB connectors?

They do. Last time I was in a Ford Fusion it had several. IIRC the
Mustang we rented had that as well, plus blue pedal lighting for
whatever reason. You drive a European car and some of those features
take a while to make it over there. Just like cup holders did :)
I wish I could plug a laptop into my Audi and reprogram most of its
Im-Smarter-Than-You behavior. The windshield wipers are amazing.
When I rented a VW in Germany last year I was mighty disappointed that
it had an automatic transmission. Maybe it was the edition for
Amerikanskis. Anyhow, I could push the lever to the right and then had a
whopping seven gears for hand-shifting. No clutch pedal though. To my
real surprise it had a mph display in addittion to the km/h.

The Audi has a 6-speed dual-clutch automatic with no torque converter.
It alternates odd and even gear trains and shifts in 60 milliseconds.
It's my first automatic, but it's a lot easier to drive on the hills
here than a manual, and Mo and The Brat can drive it, too.

Those cars are very sporty, but it also means a lot of stuff is under
high mechanical stress and gets busted easily.

The mechatronics package was replaced twice, and the transmission
once, before the warranty ran out. I sure hope they got it right.

That is not a good sign. I like to keep things simple, as in manual
transmission. My big 1987 Audi station wagon is still traveling between
Sweden and Germany, spoke to the new owners again a couple weeks ago (we
are good friends). No serious repair bills, ever. Well, except when a
delivery truck backed into it but that was paid for by their insurance.

I am also a strong believer that there should be the least amount of
electronics in cars. Because electronics in cars break a lot, are
usually grossly overpriced and designed non-repairable.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff said:
Nope.

I are not an optics expert, which entitles me to make a few expensive
mistakes before I experienced what could have been better learned with
some RTFM.

Mistake #1. I tried to adapter a 1/3" CMOS imager to various
originally lenses designed for 35 mm cameras. These lens caused the
image to overshoot the usable area of the CMOS imager. The result was
substantial magnification of the center part of the image, but with a
loss of about 80% of the light. The same lesson was repeater by
purchasing a microscope tube CMOS camera, without the necessary 0.5x
optics. I obtained some center magnification, but at the expense of
brightness.

1/3" is really puny. But try this with four-thirds or micro four-thirds
cameras. I did, and the new Olympus E-PL1 with the 35mm Minolta Rokkor
lenses from the 80's makes stunning photos. I didn't even buy any
Olympus lenses with it.

Mistake #2. More pixels in the same image area are not necessarily
better. You'll get better resolution, but because the pixels are
smaller on the imager, they will be less bright. The CMOS imager
responds to insufficient lighting by adding "noise" to the image,
which is often worse than not having enough resolution.

True, but compared to ye olde grainy 400-ASA slide film even some
middle-class cameras are better.

[...]
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff said:
It was all I had handy, borrowed out of a Logitech USB camera.

Well, a USB camera is indeed the lower end of photography :)

Yep. 4/3" sensor at 18.5mm x 18.0mm are getting close to the original
24mm x 36mm film image size.
<http://www.anandtech.com/show/2507/2>
This drastically reduces the loss of light and center magnification
problem caused by small imagers. It should work nicely with 35mm type
lenses. However, trying that with my Canon S5IS camera, which as a
1/2.5" sensor (5.7mm x 4.3mm), is not going to work so well.

With my Olympus it leads to roughly 2x more focal length. So a 250mm
tele lens is now like 500mm. Which is great but at the other end it's a
bit of an issue because the lowest focal length I have is 28mm which now
equates to 56mm. Meaning I've no longer got a wide angle lens which
might be the reason I'll have to buy an Olympus lens (or another older
Rokkor) some day.

It was amazing. When I put on that tele lens after unpacking the camera
I held it out in the distance, focused and took my first shot. A tiny
whitish splotch that I could barely see with my eyes was quite visible
now. Zoomed up ... and could see read the text including a telephone
number on there. Scary.

Ugh. That brings back nightmares of evenings in the darkroom. Yeah,
Tri-X was really grainy. I still have boxes of prints and film rolls
from those days. Polaroid 107 prints were much better and easier, but
the cameras were a PITA to adapt to a microscope.
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/120906899299>

I ruined several shirts with this instant film stuff back in the 80's.
 
There are also various microscope ring illuminators, most of which are
adjustable:


A cigarette lighter to USB adapter is usually sufficient.
<http://store.griffintechnology.com/powerjolt-dual-universal-micro>
You can choose between igniting a cancer stick, or charging a
smartphone. The decision should be obvious. The difficult part is
finding one that will supply 2A for powering an iPad.

My truck has two "Cigarette lighters" (one is an unswitched AUX port).
My wife got an "octopus" for her lighter (that didn't come with one)
because of all of the devices she uses.
It might also have something to do with padded dashboard collision
safety, where a USB connector projecting from the dashboard would be
considered a hazard.

USB connectors are, or at least shortly will be, ubiquitous in car
audio systems. Some are remote, in the console but some are in the
"radio" itself. 2A capability for iPads, even. The iGods have
spoken.
 
J

josephkk

Jan 1, 1970
0
Looks like future PCs will have USB and Thunderbolt connectors.

Maybe, a bit too oddball and not enough better than USB 3.

?-)
 
Top