Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Well, I have just experimentally used this graf-apsco. 

I put the main plate from a vostok parts movement in a movement holder and disassembled and removed the lower balance jewel setting. 

With the space available under the optics i could easily manipulate things with tweezers, but getting a screwdriver in was very awkward. 

Additionally, the area i can see is no bigger than about 16mm across with the lower magnification lenses. 

So, with the presumption that i probably can't easily change the optics to get more depth and width, I think this is best regarded as a beautiful example of space-age industrial design that is perhaps useful for hairspring manipulation and maybe careful cleaning? 

 

20220218_183030.jpg

Posted
22 minutes ago, spectre6000 said:

I posted a page or two back about the part number decoding, as well as a minor breakdown of the AmScope sale strategy/amount/timing.

@spectre6000That's what I was thanking you and everyone else for. I must of read your posts half a dozen times 🙂 Will be getting the 20x eyepieces for my kids as well, great idea.

27 minutes ago, TimpanogosSlim said:

So, with the presumption that i probably can't easily change the optics to get more depth and width, I think this is best regarded as a beautiful example of space-age industrial design that is perhaps useful for hairspring manipulation and maybe careful cleaning? 

Now that is an object of beauty. It's a shame it can't be used for what you wanted in the main but if that were mine it would be taking the place of some of the wife's figurines on the mantelpiece 🙂

C.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Skyfiller said:

@spectre6000That's what I was thanking you and everyone else for. I must of read your posts half a dozen times 🙂 Will be getting the 20x eyepieces for my kids as well, great idea.

Sorry about that/you're welcome. I started out answering the part about the 10% sale, but accidentally linked to the part number breakdown post, then saw the thing about the part number quagmire, and things devolved. We started potty training our 2 year old this weekend, and it's been a long day. 15% comes up from time to time, check out the Wayback Machine on obvious time periods, and you'll be able to figure when to wait for.

Re: 20x eyepieces, they came in handy this past week in a non-child way. I listen to a lot of vinyl, and we had a record that was skipping. I recalled reading a few years back that it might be possible to repair a skipping record. Tons of caveats; You have to know what you're doing, be super careful, guess right, etc. I figured I could probably eliminate a lot of the guesswork if I could see it. I saw what was likely my skipping scratch, and got up on it with the microscope, but nothing... I turned the album around on the offending track a while, and then I found the problem... A dust mote wasn't actually a dust mote, but some hard bit of ash or something that melted into a groove, and was really stuck in there! I grabbed my 0.5mm watchmaking screwdriver, dropped it in the groove like a needle, and popped that hard little thing out! No more skip! Excellent tool! 

Edited by spectre6000
  • Like 3
Posted
6 hours ago, spectre6000 said:

I posted a page or two back about the part number decoding, as well as a minor breakdown of the AmScope sale strategy/amount/timing.

Looks like 15% off is as far as they will mark down open box, too. So right now, in the president's day sale, you can get a new or open box SM-4TP for $486.19, and coupon codes don't apply to open box. 

Or there's this: 

https://www.amazon.com/Parco-Scientific-PA-5FZ-Trinocular-Magnification/dp/B078PSZJCB/

i don't think i am at a point where spending four or five bills on a microscope makes sense though. 

Posted

I have something similar, with an integrated lighting ring, but without the swan-necks. Mine cost about a quarter of that. I bought  stand-alone swan-necks and I add Illumination from below in some circumstances. Getting the lighting right is tricky. It's good for inspection and saving the pictures to the pc, but of limited use for working under.

Posted
11 hours ago, TimpanogosSlim said:

Exact same thing without the AmScope sticker (which peeled off on mine on its own the other day), and for a better price. That's most of what I ended up putting together at a pretty stellar price. Just add the light, 20X eyepieces, and Canon mount, and I think that's it for what I went with with my bonus bits. The only other thing necessary for watchmaking though, is the light. Looking through their Amazon store, that seems to be the cheapest option with the double boom stand, so I guess they don't have an even cheaper one without the 2x Barlow. That's likely the best deal I've seen yet on a proper watchmaking setup.

Actually, I just went to the link I posted previously, and it's dead. Searching organically, and they've bumped the price up $20. So... The current best value option for a watchmaking microscope setup is:

Scope+ ($450 shipped):

https://www.amazon.com/Parco-Scientific-PA-5FZ-Trinocular-Magnification/dp/B078PSZJCB/

and

Light ($22.99 shipped):

https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B07VR2LJJL/ref=ppx_od_dt_b_asin_title_s00

If you want to be able to take photos to be able to get help here, you have your choice of cameras or camera mounts, which vary wildly. Still, If $473 was all it took to get where I'm at without all the spreadsheets, and decoding, and research, and figuring out sales schedules, I'd have pulled the trigger much sooner.

Posted
4 hours ago, spectre6000 said:

Exact same thing without the AmScope sticker (which peeled off on mine on its own the other day), and for a better price.

 

It looks like there are some ebay vendors at around the $400 price point as well. 

Something to think about i guess. I grew up in a big family on an english professor's salary so some level of frugality and DIY ethic is baked into my psyche but it seems like the chances of this sort of scope coming up for sale used at a hefty discount are slim. 

Posted

A 0.5x Barlow lens will halve your magnification but double your working distance.

Most modern microscopes have screw threads on the lens shroud where accessory lenses can be attached. Yours has a lens shroud. Maybe you can remove it and 3D print something where you can fix a Barlow lens and maybe a ring light even.

Posted
1 hour ago, HectorLooi said:

A 0.5x Barlow lens will halve your magnification but double your working distance.

Most modern microscopes have screw threads on the lens shroud where accessory lenses can be attached. Yours has a lens shroud. Maybe you can remove it and 3D print something where you can fix a Barlow lens and maybe a ring light even.

That shroud covers a turret that has two pair of objectives and spins freely with two stops. One set has twice the magnification of the other. Either of them have more magnification than i need for most watchmaking tasks.

If i physically attach a ring light i will have to make sure there is enough wire slack so that i can switch back and forth between the two sets of objectives. I've ordered a cheap 12v LED ring (for automotive headlight "halo" effect) that i was thinking i would mount so that it rests around that turret. 

I don't remember the measurements of the small end of the shroud but in the neighborhood of 50mm sounds about right to me. 

silicone or hot glue to the shroud might be a pipe dream, it's not a big deal to 3d print something, even with threads to mount a lens -- I've already printed adapters to mount photographic filters to USB cameras.

I wear glasses and having a circular polarizing filter on the webcam to cut back on the glare makes video conferences slightly less awkward. Though i have to say - I have been working from home since september 2017 and i can count on one hand the number of times that anyone at my current employer, who predominantly employs people who work from home, has even suggested a video conference. 

One time, it was an all-hands meeting to introduce a newly hired C-level executive. The owner said he "wanted to see some faces out there". And 5 minutes later, disappointed with the number of faces he could see, said he would pay a $100 bonus to anyone who turned on their camera. But it was hot in my house and i wasn't wearing a shirt!

I already ordered the "wide field" 5x eyepieces from an aliexpress vendor in hopes they provide a somewhat wider field of view than the ones i got from amazon. Look exactly like what would cost $40+ship from amscope but with a total out of pocket at about $14. I also tinker on small electronics from time to time and the Graf-Apsco should be handy for minute board-level repairs as it is now. 

There's an ebay vendor that will sell me an 0.5x barlow with 42, 48, or 50mm mount for $19ish. If that doubles the working range, that's worth it. 

Posted (edited)

For some perspective by picture:

That's a 7x-45x Stereo Amscope with a 0.5x Barlow lens and 10x eyepieces. It shows a working height of 200mm and that Bergeon movement holder just fills the complete sight picture in the microscope on the lowest magnification. I tried taking pics through the eyepieces but my phone camera doesn't want to play along

IMG_8724.thumb.jpg.abc9c5c4a272cf9636af2ae9f6e569f9.jpg

I got it years ago for working on automotive engine control units as my day job (lots of really small parts on those; smaller than watch parts to be honest) and I use it pretty much all day every day. Soldering, hot air rework, that kinda thing. When I got into the watchmaking hobby I simply carried on using that microscope as I'm comfortable with it. I've tried watchmakers eyeglasses but it's no where near as convenient as working with the microscope (to me at least) so I don't bother with eyeglasses at all anymore. It's great because I can work on a standard height bench and I sit upright to look through the microscope, not hunched over as I would wearing eyeglasses.

Edited by gbyleveldt
  • Thanks 1
Posted
3 hours ago, gbyleveldt said:

It's great because I can work on a standard height bench and I sit upright to look through the microscope, not hunched over as I would wearing eyeglasses.

This is arguably almost as much a benefit as the improved visibility. Watchmaking benches are rare and expensive; much more expensive than a microscope. You can rig up a tall work surface to save your neck, but then your arms/shoulders are the next in line of contortion. I went the opposite direction initially, and bought a cheap wooden stool from IKEA, then chopped the legs off to make it short. Cheaper than raising or a raised work surface. Still had the arms/shoulder issue, but then add that I either needed to really be able to stretch out my legs, or my knees were on the list of contortion. With the 'scope, I'm at a perfectly serviceable work height all around. There are three things that keep me from watchmaking: one is the physical discomfort (solved), two is the eye strain/inability to really see what I'm doing (solved), and the third is just finding time (constant struggle).

  • Like 2
Posted
19 minutes ago, spectre6000 said:

Watchmaking benches are rare and expensive

Yes, pretty rare.  I picked one up recently for $300.  Vintage, very early 1900s.  But, your point is well taken!

My microscope sits on my electronic work bench.

Posted

Hi Joe   I have somthing similar for close inspection work, I does the job. not tried to work under it as its a bit close to thhands and looking at the screen and working  a bit disorientating.  Not got the required surgical technique.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted

Hi Joe  I think its what you want it for . If its to work under for balance work etc Its not good enough you need a different scope like the one attached which is a binocular scope with a decent working distance.    Cheers

boom scope.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
20 hours ago, TimpanogosSlim said:

That shroud covers a turret that has two pair of objectives and spins freely with two stops. One set has twice the magnification of the other. Either of them have more magnification than i need for most watchmaking tasks.

I was thinking about this statement and I think you don't have a true stereo microscope.

A true stereo microscope has two separate optical pathways, with two separate objective lenses side by side, to give stereoscopic vision. From your description, if it shares a single objective lens, it would be impossible to give stereoscopic vision.

  • Thanks 1
Posted

Hi Weasol,   Thanks for your response,

I need one with a monitor( neck problem ), not many types are available to buy here. will keep looking for one.

Regards

 

Posted
3 hours ago, HectorLooi said:

I was thinking about this statement and I think you don't have a true stereo microscope.

A true stereo microscope has two separate optical pathways, with two separate objective lenses side by side, to give stereoscopic vision. From your description, if it shares a single objective lens, it would be impossible to give stereoscopic vision.

Nope, it's a true stereo microscope. Like i keep saying, the turret has two pair of objectives. If you search google images for "graf apsco stereo-graf" there are many versions of it, but i haven't come across another with a turret like this one. 

I haven't taken a good picture of the objectives yet. Maybe tomorrow. Here's a fuzzy crop of one of my existing pictures. 

20220218_130013.jpg.76a9f660c9756307fd0d9c6110834d6b.jpg

I think i will order the 0.5x barlow and between now and when it gets here from china i have some time to acquaint myself with the threads library for OpenSCAD - replace the shroud with a lens adapter. 

 

Posted
14 hours ago, TimpanogosSlim said:

We have a new winner! 

Current Champ-een:

What I'm calling the ideal scope + a 2X Barlow for $399.28 (free shipping):

https://www.ebay.com/itm/383948619796

Light ($22.99 shipped):

https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B07VR2LJJL/ref=ppx_od_dt_b_asin_title_s00

Given this trend, I'm sure the light (and whatever other peripherals) can be found for less as well. The cost of proper watchmaking microscopy has been dramatically reduced through this crowd sourced sourcing here... When I started looking, I was having a hard time justifying a $600-700 purchase. I don't think I'd have paused nearly as long at $420.

Posted
13 hours ago, TimpanogosSlim said:

Nope, it's a true stereo microscope. Like i keep saying, the turret has two pair of objectives. If you search google images for "graf apsco stereo-graf" there are many versions of it, but i haven't come across another with a turret like this one. 

I haven't taken a good picture of the objectives yet. Maybe tomorrow. Here's a fuzzy crop of one of my existing pictures. 

20220218_130013.jpg.76a9f660c9756307fd0d9c6110834d6b.jpg

I think i will order the 0.5x barlow and between now and when it gets here from china i have some time to acquaint myself with the threads library for OpenSCAD - replace the shroud with a lens adapter. 

 

Here we go. 

20220222_115035.jpg

  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Do you have the service manual for 3135 as it would explain the procedure then in the absence of that the current procedure for modern mainsprings would be breaking grease on the outer wall as it's an automatic watch. The mainsprings are considered prelubricated no lubrication is required. Then the arbor is lubricated with a suitable lubrication. Typically the only time you see well I haven't ever seen anything quite like that Rolex but Seiko watches often the barrel is filled with some sort of I believe graphite-based lubricant. Or if too much breaking grease was applied in it leaks out but that would be a heck of a lot of breaking grease. I wonder if the black would be molybdenum disulfide? There is a variation of 8200 Quite remember the number were a little bit of molybdenum disulfide Which is a really nice high-pressure powder is mixed in with the eighth 200 and maybe they applied a heaping quantity of that?
    • The watch is from 1990 and was serviced just once around 20 years ago. No idea if the mainspring barrel was ever opened or changed before now.
    • Interesting but I think we have a problem here? We probably need to split hairs on a definition problem. For instance take a real Rolex movement put it in a real Rolex case but not the one it came in take a real dial real hands and make up a watch that is 100% real and what exactly is this? If you send your Rolex in for servicing and anything's been changed at all from what it was when it left the factory Rolex will be unhappy and remove all offending components. This does become a problem of people changing things because they think it's their watch and they want to have a different dial Lord diamonds the bezel or whatever words Rolex sees all of this as evil and bad as far as a Intel Rolex only things the watch is legit if everything is exactly what it was when it left the factory and nothing's been changed including the stem everything asked me Rolex original or their very unhappy about its existence. Then you think about a fake watch what is its real purpose? Well its real purpose is to make money for somebody and fool the customer. So all the watch has to do is look pleasant on the outside and inside can be anything. Typically nobody's going to see inside. So typically anything that's not legit counterfeit movement etc. why would someone spend so much time and effort making it look just like a real Rolex when there's no need to? Unless of course you have one or two movements to impress somebody with this is what's inside your watch but even that is problematic Now we don't end up with I've interesting problem that troubles me where I work. The owner will offend a cage your watch by looking at it carefully with a microscope the timing machine etc. and he will point out all the things that he feels are not appropriate correct or whatever for your watch. But in my example above of mixing and matching legitimate Rolex parts he wouldn't necessarily be able to tell. The problem I have with this is it often times things like his claim to telling a counterfeit is look at the second hand the quality of the secondhand is not as nice as a legitimate one. But maybe somebody replaced a second hand on a real Rolex. Or the other day at work I don't know what it was in before but there was a really pretty movement transparent back and they decided it was fake because of? Now I didn't think it was fake I took one look was beautifully manufactured but they had a reason What bothers me with counterfeit Rolex is or anything counterfeit watch related it is reminding me of a witchhunt. The early days of witch hunting how can we tell a which Manon which? That makes me wonder how many super fakes are really fake at all it's basically somebody deciding it's a fake based upon inappropriate assumptions. Like the secondhand is been changed or the watch was worked on the screws are perfect or other things. Other minor problems with super fakes for instance I have a long story the not going to tell the short version is I found the website once where they claim to be counterfeiting Rolex watches. They even had a picture to prove their counterfeit watch the problem with pictures online how do we know it's really a counterfeit watch and not a real Rolex watch that you're telling us is counterfeit. Oh and they had testimonials from all kinds of people who bought their watches and were very happy with the service of course the problem with the watch is you don't know what's inside it unless you take the back off and just because somebody shows a picture online and says this is their super fake maybe it really isn't a super fake they be there just trying to say that. We end up with a interesting problem of manufacturing a watch. Does Rolex actually make every single part found in their watch? Then the year 2004's basically irrelevant. This is because initially Rolex buys stock in the company and they manufacture Rolex watches. I'm assuming over time Rolex will acquire more stock and only in 2004 do they get the whole company. But the company itself hasn't really changed other than the name on the front of the building. The real question is did they really make every single component found in the Rolex watch from the beginning of time until end of the time? A lot of the components found in a watch would be extremely specialized did they make their own jewels or their own mainsprings for instance? But that is looking at the article they employ a heck of a lot of people now I would guess now that Rolex probably does make everything in-house. Especially when they have nifty CNC equipment like for making screws were he could make a huge batch of one type it instantly switch to another type where before he needed specialized machines for one machine for one screw now manufacturing all kinds of stuff in-house becomes very simple. But still is possible that in the early days they might have outsourced something may be perhaps. But conceivably we do have minor changes in thing is due to how things have been made over time which can lead to confusions over whether this is legit or not when it may be as a change of manufacturing methods oh and regarding the screws found in your Rolex watch? In about mid-80s I went to a school reunion in Switzerland. One of things we could do was visit a factory and I picked Rolex because I wanted to see the mass production making of Rolex watches. Which is very disappointed I did not get the sea at all because didn't see them making Rolex watches in their Geneva headquarters even though the building is really fake? So what did we get to see well after sales service because after all were watchmakers we should see that. Did learn something interesting about Rolex screws if your watch was sent to Rolex the screws that come back are not the ones that went there. As they are using powered screwdrivers they don't want to risk breaking heads off and they will replace the screws of every single watch. The other one of interest was suppose there's a scratch and you can see the brass? No problem they have a solution that basically electoral plates without electricity so the scratch goes away. The research Department was quite boring and didn't look like anyone was ever there. Then it was too long ago to remember all the details other than I was disappointed I want to see manufacturing.   Yes the joys of artificial intelligence that is more like a trained monkey that's there to please you.
    • Hey everybody! I just registered to WRT. I found this forum searching for informations about ELMA watch cleaning machines (will get one ELMA tomorrow ✌️). I'm new in watch repair, collecting watch repair tools to fill up my work space 😎.   Greetings from Vienna Michael
×
×
  • Create New...