Jump to content

Loupe / eyeglass / eyepiece


Recommended Posts

Hi guys 

i am about to start on replacing balance staffs and jewels over the next couple of months. I noticed in marks video on replacing staffs he use a eyeglass to check the rivet is ok. 

I have just tried my old eyeglass its a x7 and a x10 and they seem the same to me, To get any kind of vision through the x7 you need to be near enough to be touching what you want to view with the eyeglass and then the view is not big enough. so i used the x10 and its bigger from the same position than the x7 (nearness) but blurred as to be know use. so if i move back to get a clear view its just the same magnification as the x7 just further away.

So what am i missing and is there a solution.  more magnification x20 x40?

cheers

gary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, gary17 said:

Hi guys 

i am about to start on replacing balance staffs and jewels over the next couple of months. I noticed in marks video on replacing staffs he use a eyeglass to check the rivet is ok. 

I have just tried my old eyeglass its a x7 and a x10 and they seem the same to me, To get any kind of vision through the x7 you need to be near enough to be touching what you want to view with the eyeglass and then the view is not big enough. so i used the x10 and its bigger from the same position than the x7 (nearness) but blurred as to be know use. so if i move back to get a clear view its just the same magnification as the x7 just further away.

So what am i missing and is there a solution.  more magnification x20 x40?

cheers

gary

I have used these for years, x10 to start and x25 to finish teh pivots. Cheap and effective. I also remove one side for work where i am no afraid of scards of metal from the lathe.  Check out my lathe videos.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a lot of difference between one manufacturer's x10 and another's. Same goes for any other magnification. In my experience, the whole thing is a bit of a minefield. You buy a handful of different magnifications, and discard the ones which are no use for one reason  or another, then guard the good ones with your life, whatever x-factor is written on the box.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My favorite hi power loupes are Asco aplanetic (the achromats are awesome too). They aren't cheap but they're goood. I use them mostly for checking positioning of staffs on the jacot tool, or a quick check of things at the bench that don't warrant shifting to the microscope.  10x most of the time, 12x sometimes. There are loupes to 20x or more but I think they are a vestige of a time when binocular scopes in the 7-30x range were rare and expensive. I think somewhere I have a 30x loupe but I just got it as a curiosity.

 

I wouldn't work with one though, just for inspection. I've had a microscope over my lathe since I was in school last century, literally couldn't work without it. Ain't no loupe gonna help cutting a Piaget 9P staff at 1.60mm total length haha.

http://www.schurch-asco.com/e-shop/catalog/index.php?cPath=114_115_226&osCsid=604fcd0e090a4d4fefae3feb8ce1c5b6

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jdrichard said:

These ones...forgot the picture

10A94C20-5ACC-423A-9611-0A9531BE16C0.jpeg

so you close one eye or the other back and forth? do your eyes get tired from this?

 

49 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

My favorite hi power loupes are Asco aplanetic

are they really that much clearer, or less distortion that a non aplantic loupe? curious about that..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MechanicMike said:

are they really that much clearer, or less distortion that a non aplantic loupe? curious about that..

I really notice a difference, they just have a nicer undistorted image. In the Schurch catalog they have their H2 loupes that look like regular loupes but are double lens and 10 or 14x; though they have larger lenses I find the distorted field around the central view pretty distracting and uncomfortable for the eye.

 

I have two every day loupes for general work that I go back and forth with, both were made by Wild Heerbrug who unfortanately don't make loupes like this anymore. One is a 3x simple double convex lens, the other a 5x with a pair of plano-convex lenses. Not many makers bothered to use a pair of lenses for 5x; I don't know if it's a true aplanatic but the image is great. Most of the time I just stick with the 3x.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • jdm changed the title to Loupe / eyeglass / eyepiece
  • jdm pinned this topic

I use a microscope for jewels also.  Outside of that, I kinda built up my supplies on a shoestring budget.  I have some strong reading glasses for when I just need to see what I'm doing close-up. I also have a headset magnifier that Sarah got for me. I have a couple triplet loupes in my tool chest. But, this'll sound weird, the magnifier I seem to grab the most is a little lens array that I salvaged from an old video recorder. It's even more powerful than any loupe I have. I can even make out cracks in jewels (but I still use the microscope for a better look). It's ideal for initial inspections.  But generally, with my astigmatism and other eye issues, I like to keep a variety of things around and grab whichever one I need to, so as to get the view I desire.  I need lots of options.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, nickelsilver said:

I really notice a difference, they just have a nicer undistorted image. In the Schurch catalog they have their H2 loupes that look like regular loupes but are double lens and 10 or 14x; though they have larger lenses I find the distorted field around the central view pretty distracting and uncomfortable for the eye.

 

I have two every day loupes for general work that I go back and forth with, both were made by Wild Heerbrug who unfortanately don't make loupes like this anymore. One is a 3x simple double convex lens, the other a 5x with a pair of plano-convex lenses. Not many makers bothered to use a pair of lenses for 5x; I don't know if it's a true aplanatic but the image is great. Most of the time I just stick with the 3x.

I may have to give a serious look. As I mentioned elsewhere, I always seem to be on a perpetual hunt for the perfect loupe, because my eyes have well... kept up with my age. True they are expensive but if it's the last one I would own, to me it's worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, rodabod said:

I find they are a bit like tweezers - you have to try several. Nowadays I mainly use an AF branded loupe for coarse work.

Peak microscope with 100x eyepiece for pivot/jewel work.

Yes, it depends on everyone's needs and comfort. I did those before :

1- Ordered 4x and 10x from Aliexpress. Very cheap, magnification of 10x feel like 5x and glass has some staining on the reflective coating.

2- Ordered an 4x aluminium and 10x H1 directly from Asco. They are great compared to the cheap ones but still struggling to use it comfortably with loupe holder.

3- While ordering a bunch of tools and supplies at a canadian material house, I stumbled on clip-on loupes which isn't expensive so I ordered a 4x clip-on. I also bought a 3.5x reading glasses at a drugstore. This is my perfect setup and view is great (3.5x glasses is good by itself for general work and with the 4x, I can get close enough even on the tiniest parts. I still use the Asco 10x for closer inspection.

4- I also bought a cheap electronic microscope from Amazon and while magnification is good enough, handling and illumination is something i really struggle as I need to look on my iPad for the view and the direction seems reversed both ways, making it hard to coordinate hand-eye movement under it.

I'm currently thinking about buying a stereo microscope for inspection to replace the cheap electronic microscope. Not sure which one is a good option.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KarlvonKoln said:

I use a microscope for jewels also.  Outside of that, I kinda built up my supplies on a shoestring budget.  I have some strong reading glasses for when I just need to see what I'm doing close-up. I also have a headset magnifier that Sarah got for me. I have a couple triplet loupes in my tool chest. But, this'll sound weird, the magnifier I seem to grab the most is a little lens array that I salvaged from an old video recorder. It's even more powerful than any loupe I have. I can even make out cracks in jewels (but I still use the microscope for a better look). It's ideal for initial inspections.  But generally, with my astigmatism and other eye issues, I like to keep a variety of things around and grab whichever one I need to, so as to get the view I desire.  I need lots of options.

This might just be true for me also. We'll see. Excuse unintended pun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2020 at 3:51 AM, nickelsilver said:

I really notice a difference, they just have a nicer undistorted image.

So, after this conversation, I went ahead and purchased a Bergeon aplantic from ofrei, 4X at 2.5" and yes, there is noticeably less outer view distortion with it. not bad. not bad at all. I've swapped it out with a regular loupe and use it now with a holder ring and is in my regular rotation of loupes, cheaters with clip-ons, mag visors and my scope lol. I think I'll wind up being "that guy" with a huge collection of loupes all over the place, using one for this, one for that...

one thing I do do though, is drill tiny holes all around the periphery. not many, just a few. it helps a great deal with relieving the fog build up I seem to get all the time. I have one that came with a large opening but I'm not a fan. it's distracting. but the tiny holes work for me. 

thanks for the aplantic tip. I might look into others.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, MechanicMike said:

So, after this conversation, I went ahead and purchased a Bergeon aplantic from ofrei, 4X at 2.5" and yes, there is noticeably less outer view distortion with it. not bad. not bad at all.

I only use them to check alignment while using punches & staking tool as it's almost (ALMOST) impossible to use microscope in such cases. But still possible ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Poljot said:

I only use them to check alignment while using punches & staking tool as it's almost (ALMOST) impossible to use microscope in such cases. But still possible ?

Lol the only thing i use my scope for is inspection. I can't fit everything under there and I sure as heck haven't mastered the art of hand-to-eye-thru-microscope thingy yet lol?

You mess with your lume project yet? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, MechanicMike said:

Lol the only thing i use my scope for is inspection. I can't fit everything under there and I sure as heck haven't mastered the art of hand-to-eye-thru-microscope thingy yet lol?

You mess with your lume project yet? 

It depends on the microscope - some probably are not so good, or simply not suitable for watch repair. My Meiji with light is amazing for watch repair related tasks.

No, not yet, as i've decided to leave my Omega as-is, and i do not have any other candidates to experiment with lume. Besides, i have finally received my "lost" parcels almost 6 weeks after ordering them from UK. I don't want to order anything before Christmas & New Year as it will take forever thanks to "speedy" Mail service. I have a joke about Royal Mail & Canada Post, but it's still in-transit between UK and Canada.. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Poljot said:

It depends on the microscope - some probably are not so good, or simply not suitable for watch repair. My Meiji with light is amazing for watch repair related tasks.

No, not yet, as i've decided to leave my Omega as-is, and i do not have any other candidates to experiment with lume. Besides, i have finally received my "lost" parcels almost 6 weeks after ordering them from UK. I don't want to order anything before Christmas & New Year as it will take forever thanks to "speedy" Mail service. I have a joke about Royal Mail & Canada Post, but it's still in-transit between UK and Canada.. ?

It's not looking good for the home team either. The Hampden jewels are still lost in space and was even sent a second pair, with no sign of them. 

Hey good choice on the Omega! Kudos! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Dear all,

for me wearing glasses one of the best designs for a watchmaker's loupe is the old English style. Two lenses - 50 and 100mm focal length - that can be swung into place before the spectacle lens. Three magnifications at your fingertips. Cousins sells those.

89164193_Screenshot_2021-03-07-15-43-21-491_com.opera.browser01.thumb.jpg.ff87bfbcc113b129d028da91e3a94b2e.jpg

However those are so cheaply made there's no joy using them. Cheap lenses, cheap mechanics, flimsy clip. Does anyone know of a brand that makes them the proper way? 

Thanks and all the best from Hamburg

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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

    • I'm presently using a cheap supermarket ultrasonic cleaner, with L&R #111 cleaner and #3 rinse solutions. I cut a bit off the bottom of an appropriate size plastic sports drink bottle, which is a perfect fit around the mesh basket I use (~65mm diameter). That allows me to use mostly water in the machine tub and cleaner or rinse only in the small plastic container. I keep the solutions that are still fit for use in small glass jam jars. I use the cleaner then two rinses, then the mesh basket balances on my bathroom radiator (once it stops dripping) to dry the parts with moderate warmth. Prior to that I tried just lighter fluid (eg. generic zippo fluid) and just soaking / swirling parts in the glass jars, but the movements did not run at all well afterwards, they were still acting gummed up. The proper solutions make a world of difference & the watches now work as they should!    
    • Have to agree with you. Will not do another. Did not enjoy the time spent. However, it was worth it to know that I understood how to disassemble, look for defects, repair and then assemble. Timegrapher? No facility to alter anything other than the stud. Everything is metal to metal.
    • Couple of things H. There surely seems to be a reoccurring fluctuation pattern  of somewhere around every 5 minutes. More noticable with your crown left trace having a large peak gradually reducing to 2 small peaks and troughs then back up to another large peak. Nev posted a download link to a book by Harold Kelly not so long back that i started to read while i was away. There was a good section on wheel and pinion ratios, rotation periods of wheels of different beat frequencies that's worth a read. Then something that bugs me comparing the amplitude and timing rate changes with your dial up trace which i chose to avoid wheel imbalances . The amplitude fluctuates by an extreme of 30 ° and the rate fluctuates by an extreme of 21 seconds as per your reading. In normal circumstances a movement dropping its power over the course of the mainspring unwinding, a hairspring acting isochronical will maintain its rate almost to the end of the power reserve. Similarly power wound into a movement increasing its amplitude from 265° to 295° a hairspring again acting isochronical will again maintain its rate aside from a brief few moments until it settles into it's rate. From that it seems to me that because the amplitude difference isn't big enough to affect a rate change then the amplitude fluctuation cause is not coming from anywhere but from the balance. So its whatever is causing the rate to change increase and decrease within the balance is also slowing and speeding up the hairspring swings. I'm not quite sure if I've just gone around in circles with that, it made sense to me when i started  😅 We did have a discussion a while back when i asked if rate could come from that point as well as from the regulator pins. This area can be electro stiffened in high grade hs i remember was the answer. I remember that over Ross's issue with balance endshake.
    • somewhere in the universe although as I'm answering this I remembered which discussion group. Somebody had a similar question loss basically expanded it to the watch would totally disintegrate in my think like 30 years. I'd have to go back and find the original discussion if I can the person seem to think that they hairspring would disintegrate like you describe and just metal on metal wearing out the entire watch. Except of course we all work on watches over 30 years and they obviously do not disintegrate. Plus somebody came along and explained why hairsprings do not have the same issues as mainsprings. Although hairsprings do end up with watchmakers insisting on bending and playing with them and torturing them etc. and that obviously is not good for the metal at all. one of the problems that you're having here it is what is the purpose of the test that started this discussion? Let me go and snip out the original image as you can see from images above this watch is horrible. Or is it? What is the purpose of the images up above in other words what exactly would use this test for? The real purpose this test is show the effect of amplitude on timekeeping. Or specifically you're looking for mechanical issues that are causing fluctuations in amplitude which unfortunately shows up  with timekeeping. or basically everything affects timekeeping but amplitude is affected by the mechanical characteristics of the watch from the mainspring to the balance wheel and unfortunately as it's a mechanical watch your always going to have power fluctuations. so how do we rule out unacceptable fluctuations versus the natural characteristic of the watch? Usually if you can find a repeating pattern you can narrow it down to the offending components for instance I'm attaching a PDF. on the second page of the PDF it talks about 21st-century equipment versus paper tape timing machines. Then they give an example of timing problems solely caused by a faulty component. although off you have a user's manual for a paper tape machine it does explain that you can find faulty components by looking at the variations on your paper tape seeing how often they repeat and do the same thing without the fancy software. Even though it was claimed that you couldn't do that in other words you couldn't find a pattern? One of the problems that comes up with modern LCD-based timing machines versus software is limited screen size. In other words it makes it very hard to look for patterns you'll see variations in numbers but it's hard to tell what's going on which is why the display above is really nice to see if there is a problem. for instance here's a paper printout from a witschi timing machine it does look distorted because I changed the speed at which the image would move across the screen. In other words I was trying to figure out a way to extend the screen to being much longer as I was looking for a pattern as you can see there doesn't appear to be a pattern at all so basically we end up with a watch that I cannot time at all they cannot really figure out what the problem is and I actually cannot find a pattern even begin the figure out where the problem might be. Plus I agreed to service this watch for free as I was going to use it for the purposes of a lecture. In other words it's a nice railroad grade pocket watch and I wanted to show before how horrible amplitude is and how wonderful it looks after serviced and after servicing it looked exactly the same still horrible. Then I used software for a clock timing machine and came up with this interesting image one a minor problems we have with time plots and  how they look is that they all do things a little bit differently. So this was occurring approximately every five minutes. Then we need another chart then I replaced something in the watch and we now get this one of the things that I was always bothered with was if I had put the hands on after servicing would the watch have Time? Because the pattern was repeating the watch would average that out may  it would have Time. Oh and what did I change somebody had swapped the mainspring barrel for something different were getting a binding between the mainspring in the center wheel pinion. so the problem you're having is what exactly is the problem? the purpose of the test image is to look for mechanical problems causing amplitude problems. Because it's a mechanical watch your always going to have variations so are the variations in this watch abnormal or normal for this watch? Once we eliminate the mechanical issues beyond it's a mechanical watch then you can work on timing issues. for timing issues I recommend going back to the normal display that were used to and make sure you have your averaging times set correctly. In other words while the graphical display is basically real time years of the numbers are averaged over time. Anywhere from 20 to 40 seconds depending upon whose specs you're looking at. So basically they will average out the problems were seeing on this time plot.   one of my amusements with students that go to the same school is that you have different instructors. So this gives you different experiences like what exactly is tight anyway as I don't remember any thing like this? Then did you know that Rolex at least in Geneva as I visited their service center replace all the screws in the watch every time they service the watch. then why did they do that because they use power screwdrivers and tighten those things down as tight as you can get them which has a problem. How many times can you tighten screw down really tight before the hints break off. So they replace the screws every single time. So personally I don't think they have to be so tight that you're in danger snapping head off that's too tight in my opinion. but the screws definitely shouldn't be falling out either which I've occasionally see and where people just don't tighten their screws tight enough.   Horologica Times -- May 2004 From the Workshop witschi time plot.pdf
    • I guess it is a possibility, but the train wheel bridge was pressed down all the way so I'm not so sure. Then again, the screws weren't tightened at all (imagine being screwed down all the way but using a piece of Rodico instead of a screwdriver). Anyway, the movement is now fully stripped so we'll have to see once I've assembled it again. BTW I found the post where @nickelsilver wrote about tightening screws: As he writes: "In school, if your screws aren't tight, like you think they might snap, you get your movement tossed in the sawdust box!" I'm really curious to know why it is so important to tighten the screws that hard. I usually stop when it feels like there is no chance the screw can start to unscrew itself. Also, screwing down that hard requires perfectly dressed and perfectly sized screwdrivers to avoid slippage and/or damaging the screw slot.
×
×
  • Create New...