USB microscopes for very small SMT

[[email protected]]

I just started to need reading glasses this year (weak ones, about +0.75
dioptre).  For close work, I decided to go the whole hog and get some
bifocals--reading glasses above and +2.5 dioptre for close work below.

They coat about $35 from Zenni Optical, with nice frames, good coatings,
and the correct interpupillary distance.  The nice thing about that is
that for that price I can order a few pairs to leave lying around the
lab, and can even experiment with reducing the interpupillary distance
to take account of converging on nearby objects.  That really helps
reduce the eye strain.

For higher mag, I use a Zeiss surgical microscope, but that doesn't fit
in anybody's kit bag.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs

Costco. Three pair for maybe $17 US. One by the bed, one by the PC,
and one for the car. Getting old is a bitch.

Does the Zeiss fit on your head, or is it a table top microscope?

 

[[email protected]]

Well, you know how software is usually written these days ...

640K is all you will ever need. Just ask IBM.

 

[Joerg]

Magnification doesn't really make sense in this application unless the
screen size is known. Have you considered just wearing magnifiers. On
the low end, you just get reading glasses. There are magnifiers you
can wear.

A huge magnifier lens in front of me keeps getting in the way. Magnifier
glasses is what I am using, a mild pair for reading and 2-3x for SMT.
But 0204 and SC75 packages are borderline and I want to be prepared for
the time when my eyes say "no" to that despite magnifier glasses.

The other issue is the switch between soldering and looking at the
scope. Phil's bifocals would probably work but I really prefer a
monitor. It had worked great for me when checking on things in catheter
manufacturing.

The brain (OK, my brain) wants the motion of the iron to make sense
from my perspective. Now why a manipulator probe is not a problem is
another story. It may be that the soldering iron can move in any
direction. When you probe, you move one direction at a time.

Probably IFR flying will train the brain but at today's gas prices that
might not be so cool. I got used to this via ham radio. The big power
amps needed fine adjustment of two huge capacitors in a Pi filter and
the power meter and plate current indicators move in opposite
directions, plus things can reverse. Same in ultrasound, did that >20
years now, the image often moves opposite and there are zero optical
cues. You get used to that quickly.

 

[Joerg]

Costco. Three pair for maybe $17 US. One by the bed, one by the PC,
and one for the car. Getting old is a bitch.

Bifocals? Now that would be cool. Got to go to Costco anyhow soon.
Running low on beer

 

[Joerg]

640K is all you will ever need. Just ask IBM.

It could be, for most things, but we have become wasteful. Yesterday a
couple of TLA files from a Tek analyzer were sent here for analysis.
Grand total of 6MB, more than the available space on the whole hard disk
of my first PC.

 

[[email protected]]

I have one and it does nice macro. Usually in the briefcase when I do
EMI jobs. But it won't live-stream via its USB cable. It can only
download pics and brief movies.

Back east I've used a Mantis because that's all they had. Almost became
sea-sick from its slow wobble and I usually never get sea-sick.

My ancient Canon Powershot A70 comes with software that shows a live
viewfinder on the PC screen. It takes way better live video than the
cheap webcams that I have tried. I think it is because it has a
proper lens and a CCD with a large physical area so that it can
capture enough light. It doesn't have as many pixels as a newer
digital camera, however that is irrelevant because it has many more
than the PC screen can display. (NTSC video cameras and many webcams
will not have enough pixels to fill a laptop screen without
interpolating, so I think these would not be so worthwhile if your
time is costly.) By the way, there is a known fault with the Canon
Powershot A70 and many others, whereby the CCD fails. You can get the
CCD assembly replaced free when it fails, so no problem.

Chris

 

[Joerg]

The parts keep getting smaller, and the days of white silkscreen are
gone. Laser-marked epoxy has a contrast ratio of 1.3 or something, if
the angle is just right. Brownish-black on blackish-brown.

A quick swipe with an IPA-soaked q-tip will sometimes reveal the
secret top-mark, for a second or so.

Cheer up: *nobody* can read this stuff.

That's one of the reasons I'd like such a simple microscope. You can
zoom in and let some histogram equalizer SW work on it. When trying this
with a digital camera I was sometimes able to read the code on SMT parts
and tell the client "Hey, found the problem, you guys stuffed the wrong
transistor for Q37". But it's cumbersome, no USB streaming.

No answer from Veho (not a good sign, they don't have Thanksgiving in
the UK) but a German engineer told me that the previous model worked at
10-15cm distance. That's >5", should be enough. So I think I'll try it
(and then let you guys know).

 

[Charlie E.]

Bifocals? Now that would be cool. Got to go to Costco anyhow soon.
Running low on beer

Got some bifocals a few years ago, since I have a huge prescription
(9.5 diopters) but found that they drove me nuts! If I had the cash,
I think I would just get some reading glasses with the other
prescription. Since the reading prescription was in the bottom, I was
always having to look up to use the computer...

Charlie

 

[Charlie E.]

Real pain isn't it. I was up to tri-focals and even tried Vari-Lux,
but finally resorting to R-K ~1990.

Later had a lens replacement on the right eye, because R-K "creeps".

So I only need readers now.

...Jim Thompson

Well, since the wife is blind, she doesn't want me to even THINK about
eye surgery, especially since with my prescription, LASIK is almost
considered experimental surgery...

Charlie

 

[John Devereux]

Well, since the wife is blind, she doesn't want me to even THINK about
eye surgery, especially since with my prescription, LASIK is almost
considered experimental surgery...

I meant to ask if anyone here has had laser eye correction, what
effect that has on close-up work. I am short-sighted ATM.

 

[K Ludger]

I meant to ask if anyone here has had laser eye correction, what
effect that has on close-up work. I am short-sighted ATM.

I've worked in the area, almost ALL the MDs wore spectacles. There are pros
& cons, they obviously felt the risks were > the benefits.

 

[Charlie E.]

I take it you're VERY near-sighted?

You're not quite of retirement age, I don't think?

When you reach that age, have cataract lens replacement, on the gov's
dime... although you should check, your insurance might cover it.

...Jim Thompson

Ah, there's the rub...

You see, Pam DID have a cataract surgery, from a 'reputable' doctor.
It was just before she lost about 40% of her remaining sight... :-(

Charlie

 

[JosephKK]

"Reputable" doctors give me a plain, literally.

I'm allergic to acetaminophen (Tylenol, and noted in BOLD on my
chart), so the hospital staff gave me Percocet after my hip
replacement :-(

Now a "reputable" doctor says I have an inflamed prostate... I say I
have a hernia, but am being ignored. I'm going to take my business
elsewhere... it's really fun to tell them to their face that you think
they're incompetent ;-)

...Jim Thompson

I'll bet that it weird out doctors to be treated like replaceable
parts. Then a doctor that won't listen to patients is a fool, ones
that listen too carelessly will get replaced as well.

 

[Joerg]

I'll bet that it weird out doctors to be treated like replaceable
parts. Then a doctor that won't listen to patients is a fool, ones
that listen too carelessly will get replaced as well.

Nope, a doctor who regularly spends more than x minutes per patient will
get replaced :-(

 

[James Arthur]

I meant to ask if anyone here has had laser eye correction, what
effect that has on close-up work. I am short-sighted ATM.

Laser eye correction? It adjusts your focal length. Permanently.

If you're young and still accommodate (can vary your focal
length by contracting your eye's ciliary muscle, warping its
crystalline lens), you'll still have a range of distances
that will be in focus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciliary_body

Once you get a bit older everyone loses that variable-focus
ability, and your eyes' focus will be set to one distance.
That fixed-focus is called 'presbyopia.' Starts setting in
about 40 years, and is usually solidly fixed by 55 or so.

So, if you're presbyopic and you get laser'd for 'distance'
vision--e.g. focused at infinity--near objects will be
blurry. You'll need reading glasses / magnifiers.

If you're young and can still accommodate 4 or 5 or 10
diopters, you'll have some years before ... you'll need
reading glasses to see up close.

Or you can get laser'd and ask to stay nearsighted.

Or wait for the almost inevitable cataract surgery, and
ask for a replacement lens that makes you ... whatever you
want.

I think the ideal focal distance = reading distance, say 40-50cm
or so. That's -2.5 to -2.0 diopters. That way you can read
and see most things even without glasses.

My two eyes are naturally both nearsighted, but one more than the
other. That's called 'monovision'. I can choose the best for
the task, which I find handy. It's also an option of surgery, to
get one eye set to 'far,' and the other to 'near,' but many people
hate it and simply, biologically, cannot ever adapt. YMMV.

HTH,
James Arthur

 

[John Devereux]

John Devereux wrote:
[...]

I meant to ask if anyone here has had laser eye correction, what
effect that has on close-up work. I am short-sighted ATM.

Laser eye correction? It adjusts your focal length. Permanently.

If you're young and still accommodate (can vary your focal
length by contracting your eye's ciliary muscle, warping its
crystalline lens), you'll still have a range of distances
that will be in focus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciliary_body

Once you get a bit older everyone loses that variable-focus
ability, and your eyes' focus will be set to one distance.
That fixed-focus is called 'presbyopia.' Starts setting in
about 40 years, and is usually solidly fixed by 55 or so.

I'm 44, but have been nearsighted since 10 or so ("3.5"?). Also quite
astigmatic. So when I am working with small parts I often look over
the tops of my glasses so I can use my natural very short focus.

So, if you're presbyopic and you get laser'd for 'distance'
vision--e.g. focused at infinity--near objects will be
blurry. You'll need reading glasses / magnifiers.

I guess I could also get prescription glasses optimised for very short
focus too - but then they might be useless for anything further away
than the end of my arm!

If you're young and can still accommodate 4 or 5 or 10
diopters, you'll have some years before ... you'll need
reading glasses to see up close.

Or you can get laser'd and ask to stay nearsighted.

Or wait for the almost inevitable cataract surgery, and
ask for a replacement lens that makes you ... whatever you
want.

I think the ideal focal distance = reading distance, say 40-50cm
or so. That's -2.5 to -2.0 diopters. That way you can read
and see most things even without glasses.

My two eyes are naturally both nearsighted, but one more than the
other. That's called 'monovision'. I can choose the best for
the task, which I find handy. It's also an option of surgery, to
get one eye set to 'far,' and the other to 'near,' but many people
hate it and simply, biologically, cannot ever adapt. YMMV.

Now that sounds like a good engineering solution! Should be similar to
me leaving a contact lens out, so could I try it for a while

HTH,

Yes, thanks.

 

[JW]

Has anyone used this for really fine pitch soldering?

http://www.geekalerts.com/usb-microscope-with-2gb-online-storage/

I am looking for something small that I can throw into the bag in a
pinch and that can live with my laptop (or pretty soon netbook) as a
monitor, when going to a client. Do these work?

IMO for doing surface mount work, anything over 5x magnification is
overkill. So my question would be what the *minimum* magnification would
be. Additionally, at lower magnifications how much of the work area would
be displayed?

 

[TTman]

Has anyone used this for really fine pitch soldering?

http://www.geekalerts.com/usb-microscope-with-2gb-online-storage/

I am looking for something small that I can throw into the bag in a pinch
and that can live with my laptop (or pretty soon netbook) as a monitor,
when going to a client. Do these work?

Just got mine... quite good, but the further away the target is, the harder
is is to focus. Quite a bit of backlash on the focus ring too. Tricky at
150mm, easy at 50 mm . 5 out of 10.....

 

[James Arthur]

John Devereux wrote:
[...]

I meant to ask if anyone here has had laser eye correction, what
effect that has on close-up work. I am short-sighted ATM.

Laser eye correction? It adjusts your focal length. Permanently.

If you're young and still accommodate (can vary your focal
length by contracting your eye's ciliary muscle, warping its
crystalline lens), you'll still have a range of distances
that will be in focus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciliary_body

Once you get a bit older everyone loses that variable-focus
ability, and your eyes' focus will be set to one distance.
That fixed-focus is called 'presbyopia.' Starts setting in
about 40 years, and is usually solidly fixed by 55 or so.

I'm 44, but have been nearsighted since 10 or so ("3.5"?). Also quite
astigmatic. So when I am working with small parts I often look over
the tops of my glasses so I can use my natural very short focus.

Getting laser'd for 'far' vision would be exactly like
not ever being able to look over your glasses.

If that "3.5" means -3.5 diopters, you'd be able to focus
clearly up to about 30cm. That's not very short-sighted,
that's considered mild. -10 diopters (10cm) is considered
'high' myopia.

I guess I could also get prescription glasses optimised for very short
focus too - but then they might be useless for anything further away
than the end of my arm!

Exactly true. 'Reading' glasses, though, are cheap, and
an assortment of them is the usual solution to this problem.

Far-sighted people are focusd beyond infinity. In old age
they can't see anything clearly--not even in the same room--
without some sort of glasses. And, the closer they bring
something, the blurrier it gets.

I prefer nearsightedness. At least that way I'll always
be able to clearly see the things that are right in front
of me. And walk up to something to see it better, if
need be. And I can read.

But, if I hunted for a living I might choose differently.


Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[John Devereux]

[...]

I'm 44, but have been nearsighted since 10 or so ("3.5"?). Also quite
astigmatic. So when I am working with small parts I often look over
the tops of my glasses so I can use my natural very short focus.

Getting laser'd for 'far' vision would be exactly like
not ever being able to look over your glasses.

If that "3.5" means -3.5 diopters, you'd be able to focus
clearly up to about 30cm. That's not very short-sighted,
that's considered mild. -10 diopters (10cm) is considered
'high' myopia.

I guess I could also get prescription glasses optimised for very short
focus too - but then they might be useless for anything further away
than the end of my arm!

Exactly true. 'Reading' glasses, though, are cheap, and
an assortment of them is the usual solution to this problem.

Far-sighted people are focusd beyond infinity. In old age
they can't see anything clearly--not even in the same room--
without some sort of glasses. And, the closer they bring
something, the blurrier it gets.

I was sort of hoping that as I aged I would tend to get more
"farsighted", so there would be some point when my vision was perfect!
Even if only for a few months

But it would seem I will just lose the ability to change focus, so
will be permanently focussed on a point somewhere not far from the end
of my nose. Oh Well..., better that, than focussed at a point past
infinity as you say below.

I prefer nearsightedness. At least that way I'll always
be able to clearly see the things that are right in front
of me. And walk up to something to see it better, if
need be. And I can read.

But, if I hunted for a living I might choose differently.

Thanks for the explanation.