2k Microscope Camera? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 10, 2020, 06:16:37 am
content: Any of these cameras worthwhile to go with an Amscope simulfocal?https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=microscope+camera+60+fps&_pgn=2Seems like 1080, 60 fps, HDMI, and SD card, should suffice - not sure what else counts. Auto focus? Sensor size? Other?

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2020, 11:14:36 pm
content: bumpLooking for recommendations on a 1080P 60fps camera.Thx

author: jfiresto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2020, 07:47:14 am
content: You might first see what kind of image comes out of the camera port.This guyrecently added a much better camera to an Amscope stereo microscope and the results were not entirely satisfactory.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2020, 08:26:45 pm
content: Quote from: jfiresto on October 13, 2020, 07:47:14 amSomething about those result seems off; hard to say for sure, but seems off compared to other demos/reports we've seen including various results with Amscope (and Eakins) products. In the end, assuming the particular scope isn't a lemon, I think it's fair to still be on the lookout for a 1080P 60 fps camera - just looking for recommendations on something with reasonable price, functionality, and performance.

author: jfiresto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 14, 2020, 07:38:00 am
content: Something is off, but the author really knows his microscopes and in some, exacting, challenging-to-get-right details the microscope is, as he writes, in very good condition.It may be quite easy to confirm a good image out of the camera port if you can get the eyepiece down to the intermediate image. On mine with its c-mount, you just hold an eyepiece a little bit over the port and view the image – and see exactly what the camera and any intervening optics have to work with. Having raised the idea, I pass on.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 14, 2020, 11:37:22 am
content: Quote from: jfiresto on October 14, 2020, 07:38:00 amrogerSo what 1080 60 fps cameras do you like?

author: jfiresto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 14, 2020, 12:10:22 pm
content: I like the later µ4/3rds cameras from Panasonic, but I have an old microscope with a camera port that was originally designed to project its intermediate image directly onto a 1-inch video tube. I discovered this by holding an eyepiece above the c-mount photo port, hence my suggestion. I have such a camera but it is presently unreachable, because of the virus, and would be costly to ship.If adding a camera to a microscope were a programming problem, it might help to first "unit test" the microscope to discover and verify its actual specifications before "acceptance testing" the microscope+camera system.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2020, 03:11:19 am
content: Saw these two reviews:Any thoughts on these cameras for use with Amscope SM simulfocal?Are there any fundamental advantages to either of the two form factors (“pancake” vs “cube”)?Any preference for video format (MP4, MOV, other)?Edit:Better?

author: jfiresto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2020, 10:23:17 am
content: The "Microscope Camera Upgrade" looked considerably sharper to me at least in the center. It looses sharpness toward the edges faster than it should, however, I find the image underexposed, and he has to refocusa lotafter he zooms. I can only speculate as to the issue(s) and their source(s).The "Decent Cheap HD Microscope Camera" is bright enough for me but is not very sharp even in the center. Something between the specimen and the sensor has much too little resolution, but again I can only speculate as to what.

author: jfiresto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2020, 10:41:58 am
content: For comparison, here is the sort of live video I was getting out of a Panasonic GH3, a mirrorless system camera, mounted on a grizzled stereo microscope:And I was just getting started before I had to send the camera back.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2020, 03:58:30 pm
content: Yep, that looks good. In addition to the scope and lighting, it seems it's a matter of finding the right camera and getting it installed properly, of course.Seems like by now there should be enough Amscope users that someone could point to a camera that gives a similar view for both the human view and the camera view in terms of the area visible and in terms of lighting and sharpness; maybe not to the exact same edges but for a reasonably similar area.On a related item, how much difference for soldering does 30 fps vs 60 fps make at 1080P with HDMI (seems that USB 2.0 is somewhat bandwidth constrained for the video/motion required)?Also, still trying to understand if the pancake or cube form factors have any fundamental advantages or if maybe one design came first and the other came later, etc.... Beside being able to plug cables on the side vs the top, what's the diff?

author: tkamiya
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2020, 04:47:53 am
content: I have this one:https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07RRSHYB4/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1I bought it for $150. It doesn't reach 60 frame/second at high resolution but is there really need for this with subjects in microscope?

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2020, 02:57:11 am
content: I'm thinking about one of these to go with an Amscope SM-4NTP with a 0.5 Barlow and some lights:Model TBDhttps://www.amazon.com/HAYEAR-Industrial-Electronic-Digital-Microscope/dp/B07NSNQSGKor this:HY-3307https://www.amazon.com/Industry-Digital-C-mount-Microscope-Recoder/dp/B015U163T0/ref=sr_1_5?crid=111QL0YEZR7TB&dchild=1&keywords=hayear+microscope+camera&qid=1603334184&s=electronics&sprefix=hayear%2Celectronics%2C158&sr=1-5http://www.ioioa.com/Show.aspx?PID=461I've heard that the model TBD is Hayear's previous generation "pancake" form factor and that the HY-3307 is the current generation "cube" form factor. Not sure if there are any material differences other than the housings; supposedly the software is the same. Not real sure about this.Also, not sure how many megapixels are needed - seems like MP just effect any still images. My main plan would be to plug the camera directly into the HDMI input of a 24" display and try to get 60 fps at 1080P. Don't know if that's fast enough to avoid lag and facilitate "seamless" soldering motion.Also, not sure if it is a mistake to go without autofocus, or if that is a nice to have but not really necessary. Autofocus seems to decrease the camera model choices, and increase the price.I'm starting to think that the optical view will be primary and the camera/display view will be secondary but maybe I have it backwards.... really not very certain about any of this. Along this line, in case anyone wants to go over here and weigh-in on what I'm thinking might be some fundamental questions on this whole project.....https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/the-ergonomics-of-microscope-soldering-direct-optical-view-vs-cameramo-257888/Thx- another to throw into the mix:https://www.amazon.com/HAYEAR-Industry-Inspection-Microscope-Recorder/dp/B07PQ84Y87/ref=pd_di_sccai_14?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B07PQ84Y87&pd_rd_r=88fde8b9-f29b-45c5-9783-457a4c375443&pd_rd_w=5igMg&pd_rd_wg=It19j&pf_rd_p=5415687b-2c9d-46da-88a4-bbcfe8e07f3c&pf_rd_r=6JA8CK83KQ9CVXZE0KZR&psc=1&refRID=6JA8CK83KQ9CVXZE0KZR

author: jfiresto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2020, 06:51:37 am
content: The HY-3307 product copy shows 14 megapixels and consistent pixel and image sizes. When combined with a suitable reduction/relay lens, I expect that should enough for the microscope. How many pixels you need depends on the microscope's optical resolution.Here, the microscope is a manual lens and should do the focusing. If you need autofocusing, the third, photo tube and camera adapter are not set up to get the best image out of the microscope.

author: tkamiya
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2020, 11:02:56 am
content: I think 14MP is too much. Common microscopes cannot resolve anywhere near that. I went with 5MP version. For a given sensor size, more pixels there are, less dynamic range. They make huge image files, too.

author: jfiresto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2020, 11:41:44 am
content: I used the sun to measure the numerical aperture of a Wild M7A stereo microscope (or rather its objective) and got 0.07. That is not very high for a CMO model and has been stuck near there since 1971 to maintain backwards compatibility. To adequately resolve 0.07, the camera might need up to 36 megapixels, at six pixels per line pair (150% of the Nyquist limit). I found 16 megapixels is too little after eliminating a few resolution killers. [EDIT: That is with a fair sized, 4/3-inch sensor and no photo relay lens.]

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2020, 12:51:14 pm
content: I have a blue 1080p60 camera labeled "XCAM"have no complaints. Works fine.But be aware when picking a camera for a trinocular port that they are not all the same. (Camera sensor size and trinocular ports)Some of them will end up projecting an image on the camera sensor that is larger than the sensor itself. So the camera only see's a center portion of the image. You will have to get a 0.5x camera adaptor if this is the case.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2020, 07:08:52 pm
content: Quote from: tkamiya on October 22, 2020, 11:02:56 amI'm with you on no sense in making files bigger than they need to be. Thanks for raising the point about the relationship between sensor (pixel) size and dynamic range.That stimulated me to find this:https://isl.stanford.edu/~abbas/group/papers_and_pub/pixelsize.pdfSo given all the above - what do you think are the optimum camera parameters for soldering with a scope such as Amscope SM-4NTP? As much as I would like to optimize for everything, I think the most important attributes are those which impact the HDMI video viewing with the still image captures being a secondary but still useful consideration. With respect to the monitor, it would seem that a 1080P monitor at 60 Hz (or possibly 120Hz rather than 144 Hz) would be appropriate; probably an IPS. In any event, the feedback around here indicates that camera viewing is going to be ancillary to the primary direct optical viewing - but as long as we're dialing it in, we may as well dial it in.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2020, 07:31:10 pm
content: Back to the pixel size vs dynamic range question.I see Hayear, for example, has a bunch of cameras with similar but different specs. For example, two models might both provide HDMI with 1080P at 60 fps, but one is 14 MP and one is 34 MP. So if we are willing to give up 20 MP we can get some more dynamic range, which I can believe is a good tradeoff (although per the article, I have not yet determined the specific optimum).So, the question follows.... when we reduce the MP count to get more dynamic range the increased dynamic range will no doubt be visible to some extent on a still frame image. But presumably to get the different pixel count we adjusted the pixel (sensor) size. In the process of doing this (changing sensor size, reducing pixel count, and increasing dynamic range) did we also increase the dynamic range for the HDMI video as well as the still frame image? I'm guessing yes, but thought I'd check..... Thx

author: jfiresto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2020, 08:16:57 pm
content: My impression is the deciding factor for S/N ratio is the total sensor area.My guestimate is that an SM-4NTP needs at most a 24 megapixel sensor to fully resolve its Greenough optics.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2020, 09:26:02 pm
content: Quote from: jfiresto on October 22, 2020, 08:16:57 pmI'm thinking that if 24 MP happened to be the target and the choices, for example, happen to be 14 or 34, then it might make more sense to go with 14 for two reasons: 1) the tradeoff in the direction of 14 would bring more dynamic range at the expense of resolution, but if the direct optics are going to be the primary use and the camera/monitor are going to be more ancillary/quick reference/collaboration, then the extra dynamic range will likely be more useful than the extra resolution. (I think?). Only reason to go the other way might be if you were trying to capture and share the digital image beyond the 1080P review monitor for review by someone else on a computer where they could zoom in for more detail. 2) it would help keep file sizes smaller.Just trying to think this through and make sure I'm at least headed in the right direction.

author: jfiresto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 06:40:44 am
content: I first consider the image sensor size as that will determine how much light and what kind of camera adapter you will need.Before you get too far, however, I would check the quality of the image out of the microscope's photo port. Some mass-market microscopes neglect it in favor of good images out of the eyepieces, as that is good enough to sell the microscope. For those, an adapted webcam or low end cellphone camera is good enough in the photo port, so that is what they include or sell, often with wildly flattering descriptions.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 08:34:47 am
content: If you're going to display the image from this camera on a 4K screen, why have more than 4MP?Microscope images of PCBs are all about focus, lighting and dynamic range - these are by far and away the greatest limitations when it comes to getting useful images that show clearly whether, say, a QFN is soldered properly. Resolution really is a non-issue by comparison.

author: jfiresto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 09:58:10 am
content: Quote from: AndyC_772 on October 23, 2020, 08:34:47 amI agree with you in spirit, but perhaps a 4K screen is not the best example: it would need a perfect sensor sampling 3840 x 2160 x 2^2 = 31.6 million points to fully and faithfully drive each screen pixel. The 4K screen, itself, probably has more resolution than you can get out of the microscope.Perhaps I should have emphasized this early, but numbers like 24 and 36 megapixels are upper bounds for the start of ridiculous pixel counts. The actual ridiculousness will start at a lower number, possibly much lower, depending on the microscope and how much you have to crop the image.EDIT: I found a microphotograph taken with a 12 megapixel camera where you can clearly see a lower number, where the microscope runs out of resolution. I will post it later.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 09:32:13 pm
content: Quote from: jfiresto on October 23, 2020, 09:58:10 amPlease do. Thx

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2020, 01:23:11 am
content: A really cheap $12 HDMI USB capture card I recently bought makes any decent HDMI capable camera ilike a DSLR nto an acceptable camera, and for some reason even that running over USB 2 is much faster than any USB 2 camera, and the detail and color are really good. So thats another option if 1080P resolution is enough for you..If you need more the pictures from the newest larger format Raspberry Pi camera look spectacular, it takes any C mount lens, and isn't that expensive compared to similar cameras. Paired with a Pi 4 and its gigabit Ethernet you can probably do very well on a small budget.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2020, 02:57:58 pm
content: Really nice review of a Hayear camera:The camera might be ok or not (seems to be doing 1080i rather than 1080P?), but this reviewer (DestructiveBurn) doesverynice reviewing with a very nice video review setup. He seems to be pretty far down the path on how to use cameras to review cameras, and he has some very nice reviewing skills and style.Overall, this review leaves lots of bread crumbs that can help lead to insights and questions for still more camera and microscope related research, but even more interesting is that if DestructiveBurn isn’t already an EEVer I think he would be fit right in a as very good forum member.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2020, 03:55:34 pm
content: Another Hayear camera model:https://youtu.be/r34OOIVRddYLots of breadcrumbs but the point this reviewer makes early in the video that resonates a lot is that Hayear should do a better job of labeling their products with model numbers. Their web site often gives a bunch of specs but no model number, and the model numbers don’t seem to be on the cameras. Marketing 101 booboos.I guess Hayear doesn’t play much baseball where they say “you can’t tell the players without a roster”, and btw even with a roster you still can’t tell the players if there are no numbers on their uniforms. Pretty much the same for soccer and all sports and all products.