Archive of the former Yahoo!Groups mailing list: Homebrew PCBs

previous by date index next by date
previous in topic topic list next in topic

Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Thru Hole to SMD transition: How to and What to get

From: Kerry <kwentworth@...>
Date: 2014-07-31

I picked up a model 569 (0.7-3X zoom) at a flea market for $25. It was
dirty and badly out of collimation. I had to take it all apart to clean
the lenses and adjust it. (Harder than it sounds, at least for me!) It
has a 4" working distance and 10X eyepieces. I only use it at the
lowest mag.

On mine, only the left eyepiece is adjustable, by turning the knurled
portion. Like binoculars, you adjust for the difference between your
eyes, and then focus with the rack.

If it is not properly collimated, you will never get the separation to
be right. I never looked through a pair of collimated binoculars until
I collimated a pair myself, but when I did, i said "wow!". With a
collimated binocular microscope, you really do see a 3D image. With
steady hands, it is easy to touch iron to lead and apply solder. You
can tell just how far above the board the iron is.

Kerry


On 7/30/2014 9:50 PM, Kirk Kleinschmidt kirk@...
[Homebrew_PCBs] wrote:
> I didn't know that the eyepieces focus independently... Actually, mine (black metal/plastic?) don't seem to move or rotate at all. Maybe they're stuck? I don't want to simply reef on them (!), so perhaps you can tell me how they're supposed to move/adjust? I just use the main focusing rack at present.
>
>
> Unfortunately, I DO have goofy eyeballs (astigmatism), although at present, as long as my head doesn't move out of position, I can still get a reasonably sharp magnified image with the rack adjuster.
>
> Might there be "wider field" eyepieces for this unit?
>
> And if there are, perhaps the eyepiece magnification could be reduced a bit. At present, the lowest of the two mag settings is usable, but a bit more intense than I might prefer. The high setting seems too be a bit too high.
>
> My model is the "Forty Spencer," 42-I or 42-L (?)
>
> Thanks!
>
> --Kirk, NT0Z
>