Which should i choose?

[Mike576]

Im contemplating buying a new microscope. I currently have the amscope 7-45 with a .5 barlow. It works but isnt super clear towards the higher zooms and i have to adjist the focus as o zoom in which is annoying.

I have found 2 microscopes on ebay. 2 vastly diferent prices, one is a deal one is still a deal but a lot more.

First is a leica s6 with a .75 and .5 barlow lens. Seller offered to drop the price to 675 shipped.

Next is a zeiss OPMI 1 with a 175mm lens and 12.5x for 1800$.

Both are in great condition and within my budget (the zeiss being the max)

Will i see a large difference jumping up to the zeiss. Steve lindsay says the zeiss is his go to on his website.

Im the type who likes to buy once cry once and want the best, but if its only 2% better for 1100$ more ill spend that on practice plates lol

Thanks for any info!

 

[sam]

Consider the Leica A60 which is pretty much becoming the new industry standard. Or get a new or used used Meiji EMZ-5 which is an excellent scope.

I have two Zeiss Stemi 2000 scopes and the Leica A60 is brighter, sharper, and clearer than the Zeiss.

I can't look through your amscope so I can't predict how much better a scope upgrade will be. The ones I've tested were certainly nowhere near the quality of Zeiss or Leica, as one would expect.

 

[Leland Davis]

I have not had a chance to try the Leica A60 but I went from a amscope to a Meiji EMZ-5 you will be amazed at the difference.

 

[Mike576]

Thanks for the help! With the a60 is the fancy arcobat stand with the head rest worth the extra money or is the standard flex arm stand good?

 

[Aventuraal]

I use a Zeiss OPMI 1 and have for about 10 years; when I bought it, it was after some research and thought, I've never regretted it. I like German optics, from years as a wet film photographer, using Leica M3's, and a Rollei with Zeiss glass, as well as a whole slew of Japanese cameras and lenses; you could look at the negatives side by side on a light box against excellent Canon lenses and see a contrast difference between the two. I also like the various final objectives for the Zeiss ( I have 4 different ones) that allow you to choose the working distance and not use a Barlow lens. I personally have never liked zoom lenses, so I don't mind in the least that the Zeiss is not a zoom system. That said, I've never used any of the other scopes on the market, so I have no comparison to offer, just my thoughts.

 

[jerrywh]

I would look for a Meiji EMZ5 with a .5 or a .3 objective lenz.
I have a Meiji EMZ5 and a Leica both and can't tell much difference except the price. a .75 lenz isn't too good either. I would go for a .3 or a .5 objective with10 power eye pieces.

 

[sam]

I use a Zeiss OPMI 1 and have for about 10 years; when I bought it, it was after some research and thought, I've never regretted it. I like German optics, from years as a wet film photographer, using Leica M3's, and a Rollei with Zeiss glass, as well as a whole slew of Japanese cameras and lenses; you could look at the negatives side by side on a light box against excellent Canon lenses and see a contrast difference between the two. I also like the various final objectives for the Zeiss ( I have 4 different ones) that allow you to choose the working distance and not use a Barlow lens. I personally have never liked zoom lenses, so I don't mind in the least that the Zeiss is not a zoom system. That said, I've never used any of the other scopes on the market, so I have no comparison to offer, just my thoughts.

I have not engraved with a non-zoom microscope, but what I know in years of photography is how much faster and sharper prime lenses are over zooms. Not sure I'd be willing to sacrifice the speed and flexibility of a zoom scope, but I wouldn't mine experimenting with the Zeiss scopes with turret lens arrangement.

Leica shooter here as well. I shoot M10p now, but I grew up on film. My dad trained me on his Leica IIIg. This is a selfie from 1970 with dad's Leica.

 

[Mike576]

I would look for a Meiji EMZ5 with a .5 or a .3 objective lenz.
I have a Meiji EMZ5 and a Leica both and can't tell much difference except the price. a .75 lenz isn't too good either. I would go for a .3 or a .5 objective with10 power eye pieces.

Do you notice a big difference in the depth of field between the 2? I hear the a60 has a larger focus depth of field than the competition.

 

[Chujybear]

I use an American optical scope, which is fine, i also use a Leica mz6, and a Leica m3z. Both are Anaupgrade from the AO, but mostly because of the add ones.. there is a bit more distortion with the AO, but it does not impede the work.

 

[pblack]

I'm primarily a jewelry and am just getting into engraving. That said, I use a Leica A60 (no addon objective lens) at work and my coworker has a Meiji EMZ5. The Leica has sharper optics than the Meiji. The zoom and magnification of the Leica are also better if you are looking into the flexibility that zoom provides for other tasks besides engraving. Laser inscribed serial numbers on diamond girdles are so much easier to read at 30x.

 

[Aventuraal]

Re: Sam's reply about the Zeiss, I would clarify that it is not a turret, but a single final objective at a time; you change final objectives to change the working distance. There was made an accessory turret that fitted onto the objective lens mount, and allowed the use of a second objective lens by flipping back and forth between the two, which would also change the working distance; I have one, and have very seldom used or needed it. The Zeiss does have a 5 times stepping magnification change built in; so, depending on the eyepieces and the eyepiece tubes mounted, you can get magnifications up to around 102x, way past what you would ever use. My current setup is a 200 mm final objective, 160mm eyepiece tubes, and 10X eyepieces, which tops out at about 32x, according to the factory data. The final objective is the determining factor in the working distance, the 200mm equates to about 8 inches; I also have 125mm, 175 mm and a 300 mm; using those in the current setup would yield working distances of about 5 inches, 7 inches, and 12 inches. Using the current setup, the magnifications yielded are 4.8x; 8x, 12.8x (twice, because of the optics of the rotary stepping mechanism) 20x and 32x.