Where To Buy Low Cost Trinocular Microscope

Lots on ebay

I worry about a "low cost" trinocular; you'll get what you pay for. With the understanding that no trinocular will provide full-face images, wouldn't you rather build something that will combine pro-level full-face images with every bit of the microscopic capability of the trinocular, for less money than a new microscope? Imaging technology no longer requires high-dollar investments and bespoke equipment.

Step back for a moment and answer "Why?".
"looking at and taking photos of coins" is not specific enough to answer why you need that much magnification.
Most collectors find that 30x-50x is plenty.

And will you use it often enough to even merit a low cost scope?

Okay it looks like I have been given some bad info about what to get. I don't have or want an I Phone nor do I want to build some home made set up. So the next question would a nice 3.5x45 with a digital camera work? Saw a new AmScope 3.5X-45X Stereo Coin Microscope W 144-LED + 1.3MP Camera but it was $527.00 ouch...

Below is what I would like to be able to do. The below photos were taken IIRC an older Nikon SMZ 3.5x225 Trinocular zoom microscope and a Nikon Cool Pix. The last photo was taken by another person, I'm not sure what was used to take that photo.

OK. You're going to run into a technological hurdle - you probably already know this; you seem pretty conversant with microscopes - in that you're going to need two tools as the trinocular will not provide the field of view to shoot full-face coin images.

As regards microscope, I am very much a fan of Brunel. They're a British firm, producing 'scopes which rival far more expensive brands in terms of quality while remaining quite affordable considering what you're getting - they're right up there with Leica, Nikon and Meiji. I've heard good things about AmScope as well, but have no personal experience with them. Aside ebay, I've no accurate personal knowledge of reliable vendors for used equipment, so I won't lead you astray.

For a camera, I will say that there's no real need to follow the path I preach so mightily regarding dSLR's and duplicating lenses, if you're not interested in wrenching that last 10% of quality out of your coin image. There are many here at CCF who use cheap point-and-shoot cameras and even cellphone cameras - various iPhones and the Samsung Galaxy S4 are to my specific knowledge capable of creating grading-quality coin pics - to create perfectly acceptable imagery.

The common thread regarding these point-and-shoots seems to be, somewhat older technology. The current high-megapixel, long-zoom cameras tend to compromise macro performance - sensor pixel density is simply exceeding the small lens' ability to resolve. So, older cameras in the 8MP-ish range (a little less, a little more maybe) seem to be providing our members with excellent results. The tradeoff with them is that they have a relatively small "sweet spot" in terms of the conditions under which they produce quality images. They need to be relatively close to the coin - 3-4" or closer - which forces a compromise in lighting technique.

I was playing with CCF Moderator tights24's Olympus C5000 at the FUN show last year. It's a 2003-era, 5MP camera, and it easily created images of grading quality.

Now, I realize you've specifically disclaimed "home-made" setups, but I want to show you something along those lines. This is my "home-made" setup:



Home-made, yes, but all professional-level equipment used in the fashion it was intended for - no jury-rigging exists. It's capable of everything from full-face images of Morgans to microscopic detail rivaling the best trinocular, it's all run from the keyboard and mouse so I can easily do 100 coins an hour if I wish, and you can duplicate it for about $400 while using a level of knowledge similar to that required for any other coin imaging process.

Just sayin'.

Perhaps a fancy lens, but not one specifically designed for Macro work. They're limited in terms of close focus, usually being unable to focus on anything less than 18" or so from the lens, and therefore all but useless for macro work. Your Sony, on the other hand, has that sort of close-up work designed in, and if you push the camera - find a manual, research its' best Macro settings - you may find it perfectly serviceable for full-face imaging.

The only use for a Trinocular as opposed to a binocular (stereo) 'scope is the third fixture for easy attachment of a camera. They're not an improvement optically. Further, those which come with their own cameras inevitably compromise the quality of the camera by comparison to the same money spent on a "normal" camera which can be adapted to the microscope.

AmScope has an example - a trinocular for $375, or the same with a 10MP digital camera (yet it only displays miniscule 1280x1024 images, barely 1/10 of "10MP") attached for $685. That $310 would buy you a near-new dSLR to attach, with far higher pixel count (what's the effective increase in magnification if your image is 4000 pixels tall, instead of 1000?) and a sensor orders of magnitude larger, which means far clearer images and far more sophisticated camera functions.

Coop's images are excellent and quite serviceable, but can be improved upon. He's using a binocular, with cameras he has on-hand, and is achieving great results with the equipment he's using.

I don't really think the extra-cost zoom feature offers you any advantage with coins, while complicating the optics.