How to buy tools

[JohnR725]

36 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

but the microscope

yes the microscope the absolute must have because you must have one or else it allows you to do everything better than everything else in the universe except. Somewhere in the discussion group I just pointed out the flaw of using a microscope. Yes microscopes have their purpose but there's a reason watchmakers didn't adopt microscopes from the beginning of time and why they sit where they can look into their work rather than down on their work. then of course I like to joke that microscopes make things bigger they don't necessarily allow you to see things better especially if you do not grasp what it is you're looking for in the first place. Then you also have to have a microscope that has proper depth of field then you'll definitely have problems if you don't have a decent depth of field.

39 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

The telescope well thats just an old baby one

at least yours is out maybe it gets use? My telescopes are all hidden in their boxes sealed up even disassembled the main telescope mount as it was getting in the way so it's in a separate box in another room.

1 minute ago, LittleWatchShop said:

You can get 1.25x readers

as annoying as it is to wear glasses there are quite a few times in my life for having them was nice as things were flying where they shouldn't be flying. Knocking out a lens in a glasses frame is a lot nicer than knocking out a eyeball.

[LittleWatchShop]

4 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

microscopes

I sometimes think microscopes are a crutch--my dad never used one. But, in reality, they are extremely useful. Beyond magnetism, my ring light illuminates under the plates when I am setting the train wheels. So, I concede to the utility of my microscope.

[Tony13]

2 hours ago, Vizard said:

 

Okay, today's watch tinkering suggests that magnification has to be my next consideration.

I have 5x and 10x jewellers loupes, but trying to use them whilst fiddling takes a bit of effort. They steam up and fall out of my eye socket.

What do you guys have?

Many thanks.

A cheap metal headband will do, those where you can stick your loupe in.

https://www.cousinsuk.com/product/eyeglass-holders

It will do for now you can always buy a microscope if you really like the hobby.

Don't forget that us lads here are all tool nuts.

The only things you should never save cash on is tweezers buy Dumond dumoxel.

 

[Neverenoughwatches]

36 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

yes the microscope the absolute must have because you must have one or else it allows you to do everything better than everything else in the universe except. Somewhere in the discussion group I just pointed out the flaw of using a microscope. Yes microscopes have their purpose but there's a reason watchmakers didn't adopt microscopes from the beginning of time and why they sit where they can look into their work rather than down on their work. then of course I like to joke that microscopes make things bigger they don't necessarily allow you to see things better especially if you do not grasp what it is you're looking for in the first place. Then you also have to have a microscope that has proper depth of field then you'll definitely have problems if you don't have a decent depth of field.

I am curious as to when microscopes did start to be used for watchmaking, i remember watching chronoglide 2 years ago when i was just starting to get interested in watch repair. Kalle mentioned that he was one of the first in the Netherlands to use one, so that seems quite recent. I thought they would have been used a long time ago 50s 60s ?, it just seems a logical thing to do. The biggest thing for me is the working distance and the sitting position seems more comfortable than hunched over using a loop. Field of view is also important,  being able to see the whole of the movement and some, so you have an idea of where your hands are.

48 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

at least yours is out maybe it gets use? My telescopes are all hidden in their boxes sealed up even disassembled the main telescope mount as it was getting in the way so it's in a separate box in another room.

Haha it is out but no it doesn't get much use, i only dragged it into the watchroom to make a joke.  Its an old  80's 900mm refractor, 90mm mirror ,its theoretical magnification is obviously a joke , i think around 80x is about as clear as it gets, a reasonable view of the rings of Saturn are about its limit. For the last 5 years I've been promising myself a bigger Cassegrain 8 inch maybe. Had a fascination with space since i was 8, seen many things that make me wonder what is really out there. 

[nickelsilver]

3 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

I am curious as to when microscopes did start to be used for watchmaking, i remember watching chronoglide 2 years ago when i was just starting to get interested in watch repair. Kalle mentioned that he was one of the first in the Netherlands to use one, so that seems quite recent. I thought they would have been used a long time ago 50s 60s ?

I think stereo microscopes mid 20th century were pricey items. But average buying power was higher, so? When I was in school in the late 90s we had one average quality microscope. During my school I bought an excellent American Optical scope, and a lathe, and quickly a simple boom mounted scope for the lathe. I hate thinking of doing fine turning without a scope, and within a 1.5 meter radius of my bench I have an American Optical zoom on a bench and a Nikon on another and use both all the time. In the same radius is my small lathe with its scope (Olympus, selectable 10x or 20x) and a monocular toolmaker's scope. 4 microscopes and they all get used all the time!

 

I also imagine how such fine work was done back in the day before decent scopes were affordable. I think most (U.S.) watchmakers first scope, and likely only, was the monocular Bulova scope for checking Accutrons.

[LittleWatchShop]

28 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

I think most (U.S.) watchmakers first scope, and likely only, was the monocular Bulova scope for checking Accutrons.

That was my dad's first scope, but as best I recall, he seldom used it. I have it now and it is in pristine condition. I have it set up with my primary lathe (a Levin). Though monocular and 30x (I believe) it has great utility in that role. A stereo would be better, but since my lathe is situated on a conventional watch bench, the elevation would be an issue. So, the Bulova scope works for now.

My stereo scope and boom sits on a conventional office desk.

[HectorLooi]

5 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

I am curious as to when microscopes did start to be used for watchmaking

I think microscopes began getting popular maybe 10 to 15 years ago. I think 2 things happened that made microscopy commonplace:- 

1. The prices of stereo microscopes dropped below the $1000 mark.

2. The introduction of white LED ringlights.

Stereo microscopes have been around for a long time. Early brands like Zeiss and Leica were very expensive, making widespread adoption of microscopes in the industry impossible. When Japan started making microscopes in the 70's, brands like Nikon, Olympus and Pentax dropped the prices to around $2000. I'm sure everyone have seen photos of electronic assembly lines with microscopes at every workstation.

Then China came into the picture at the start of the milleniunm and prices really plummeted. At $1000 each, many small workshops like jewellers, dental laboratories, watch repair workshops could afford at least a couple of microscopes at their workplace.

The prices dropped below $500 around 10 years ago, and that's when microscope use really took off. Even small handphone repair shops used microscopes for soldering and inspection work.

And around that time, white LED's came into the limelight. If you tried using your microscope without your LED ringlight, your pretty much in the dark. ( pun intended )

I remember in the 80's, the surgical microscopes in the operating theaters had halogen or plasma arc lamps. These were huge units that ran hot and had noisy cooling fans. And the lifespan of the halogen and plasma arc bulbs were pretty short. The light units came with a mechanism to do a hot swap in case the lamp blew during an operation.

So we really have to thank China for making microscopes available to the masses and hobbyist like us.

Edited November 1, 2023 by HectorLooi

[Neverenoughwatches]

6 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

refractor, 90mm

105mm reflector

[JohnR725]

9 hours ago, LittleWatchShop said:

I sometimes think microscopes are a crutch--my dad never used one. But, in reality, they are extremely useful.

2 hours ago, HectorLooi said:

I think microscopes began getting popular maybe 10 to 15 years ago. I think 2 things happened that made microscopy commonplace:- 

1. The prices of stereo microscopes dropped below the $1000 mark.

Obviously cost is why we don't see microscopes we didn't see microscopes back then. Now they've gotten cheap and they do have their purposes.

4 hours ago, nickelsilver said:

American Optical scope, and a lathe,

In the case of a lathe a microscope is an excellent idea. Because when I'm using a lathe I do like to look straight down. It's one of the irritations with the lathe at work it's on a jewelers bench and you look into your work and that really doesn't work well for me at all. Looking down on a lathe is what I want to do. I've also known of other people that have microscopes with their lathe especially when you're turning a balance staff and that would be an excellent idea. Even from a safety point of view it would be nice to get your eyeball away from metal flaking off of and heading for your eyes even if you do have a loop line or glasses.

Opinions everybody gets an opinion for the most part. Do we really need a microscope for general watch repair? I thought I'd go for pictures what Pictures can we find of watchmaking and how everyone uses microscopes now and instead I find a video. Also a rather amusing video of happy students not working drinking coffee and tea but eventually we get to what we need to see.

So do they have microscopes yes looks like some of the benches all have microscopes. But it doesn't look like they're using microscopes as opposed to loops still looks like they using those old-fashioned things attached eyeballs. Can one person turning something on a lathe you look like it had a camera not a microscope? So school teaching watch repair that doesn't universally have everyone having a microscope?

 

 

 

8 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

I am curious as to when microscopes did start to be used for watchmaking,

If you watch the video it becomes a more interesting question as everyone isn't using a microscope. Which may be finding is hobbyists obsessed with their inability to see what they're doing have a perception that microscopes will somehow fix the problem of whatever their problem they perceive they have with seeing. Then the cost of microscopes has come down where there are affordable.

Then yes I know microscopes have their use but I still have concerns with people looking straight down on their work they don't have a good view of the watch itself in the case of another discussions somebody put a gear in upside down which could happen anyway but if you really can't see into your work I would perceive are having a problem and just because of the microscope means the problem does not go away. But still microscopes do other use from looking at things just not necessarily everywhere and watch repair at least that's my Opinion for what it's worth.

8 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

900mm refractor, 90mm mirror ,its theoretical magnification is obviously a joke

That's an interesting observation?

2 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

105mm reflector

That's a better description it matches what you have in the picture. Also the incredibly long focal length but also befitting for what you half. Then because I went looking for something YouTube immediately figured out that I need to get a telescope for astrophotography astrophotography imaging just because I've looked at one website.

Oh and your telescope would suck for astrophotography. My first what I would call a nice telescope complements of eBay were not supposed to buy telescopes is a etx90 telescope with I believe a focal length of 1250 mm. I found the images through this thing were supersharp really nice for just looking at the night sky am looking at things. Then for those curious minded people this particular telescope is called a Maksutov-Cassegrain As I doubt anybody really cares and not going to post an image basically the light comes through a lens in the front bounces off a mirror in the back ounces off I went to the front and then he goes out the back and ends up with that insanely long focal length. Long focal length is extremely bad if you would like to do astrophotography.

8 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

For the last 5 years I've been promising myself a bigger Cassegrain 8 inch maybe.

In general with telescopes bigger is better you gather more light with more lights you can have more magnification and still see things. Unfortunately bigger means physically heavier and way more money typically. Anything over about 9 inches you almost have to build the physical observatory because moving your telescope around becomes very inconvenient. Not that people don't do it I've seen their telescopes on wheels but not really something you grab and run out and look at something.

What I find interesting for astrophotography is going back to something smaller with a much shorter focal length is a better way to go.

[Neverenoughwatches]

39 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

3 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

105mm reflector

That's a better description it matches what you have in the picture. 

Haha that just shows how often i use it, i gave my sister my refracting telescope,  which is actually much better than this. 

47 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

Obviously cost is why we don't see microscopes we didn't see microscopes back then. Now they've gotten cheap and they do have their purposes.

In the case of a lathe a microscope is an excellent idea. Because when I'm using a lathe I do like to look straight down. It's one of the irritations with the lathe at work it's on a jewelers bench and you look into your work and that really doesn't work well for me at all. Looking down on a lathe is what I want to do. I've also known of other people that have microscopes with their lathe especially when you're turning a balance staff and that would be an excellent idea. Even from a safety point of view it would be nice to get your eyeball away from metal flaking off of and heading for your eyes even if you do have a loop line or glasses.

Opinions everybody gets an opinion for the most part. Do we really need a microscope for general watch repair? I thought I'd go for pictures what Pictures can we find of watchmaking and how everyone uses microscopes now and instead I find a video. Also a rather amusing video of happy students not working drinking coffee and tea but eventually we get to what we need to see.

So do they have microscopes yes looks like some of the benches all have microscopes. But it doesn't look like they're using microscopes as opposed to loops still looks like they using those old-fashioned things attached eyeballs. Can one person turning something on a lathe you look like it had a camera not a microscope? So school teaching watch repair that doesn't universally have everyone having a microscope?

 

 

 

If you watch the video it becomes a more interesting question as everyone isn't using a microscope. Which may be finding is hobbyists obsessed with their inability to see what they're doing have a perception that microscopes will somehow fix the problem of whatever their problem they perceive they have with seeing. Then the cost of microscopes has come down where there are affordable.

Then yes I know microscopes have their use but I still have concerns with people looking straight down on their work they don't have a good view of the watch itself in the case of another discussions somebody put a gear in upside down which could happen anyway but if you really can't see into your work I would perceive are having a problem and just because of the microscope means the problem does not go away. But still microscopes do other use from looking at things just not necessarily everywhere and watch repair at least that's my Opinion for what it's worth.

That's an interesting observation?

That's a better description it matches what you have in the picture. Also the incredibly long focal length but also befitting for what you half. Then because I went looking for something YouTube immediately figured out that I need to get a telescope for astrophotography astrophotography imaging just because I've looked at one website.

Oh and your telescope would suck for astrophotography. My first what I would call a nice telescope complements of eBay were not supposed to buy telescopes is a etx90 telescope with I believe a focal length of 1250 mm. I found the images through this thing were supersharp really nice for just looking at the night sky am looking at things. Then for those curious minded people this particular telescope is called a Maksutov-Cassegrain As I doubt anybody really cares and not going to post an image basically the light comes through a lens in the front bounces off a mirror in the back ounces off I went to the front and then he goes out the back and ends up with that insanely long focal length. Long focal length is extremely bad if you would like to do astrophotography.

In general with telescopes bigger is better you gather more light with more lights you can have more magnification and still see things. Unfortunately bigger means physically heavier and way more money typically. Anything over about 9 inches you almost have to build the physical observatory because moving your telescope around becomes very inconvenient. Not that people don't do it I've seen their telescopes on wheels but not really something you grab and run out and look at something.

What I find interesting for astrophotography is going back to something smaller with a much shorter focal length is a better way to go.

Nexstar do both Maksutov and Schmidt Cassegrain scopes, Schmidt being the big one but still a fairly portable scope. When i finish spending on watch things i might have some money left to treat myself. Another great hobby but cold winter late night skys are not the most enjoyable of environments. 

[VWatchie]

@Vizard You might find the following post (pdf) helpful.

(If you do decide to get yourself a Weishi I'd strongly recommend the 1900 model over the 1000 model)

[Neverenoughwatches]

20 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Another great hobby but cold winter late night skys are not the most enjoyable of environments. 

My poor children they cant figure out if I'm some mad scientist nerd or a weightlifting tattooed thug.  I tell them " i fed , clothed and taught you right from wrong for 20 years so what does it matter 

[Vizard]

23 hours ago, VWatchie said:

@Vizard You might find the following post (pdf) helpful.

(If you do decide to get yourself a Weishi I'd strongly recommend the 1900 model over the 1000 model)

Thanks I will look at this.

[gpraceman]

For general magnification, I use a visor.  I find it easier to use than eye loupes and have a better chance of seeing what direction a part went pinging off to.

https://www.esslinger.com/headband-magnifier-with-4-lenses-clearance/