Thalestris24

I'm pretty sure all the uncropped microscope images I've seen taken with a smartphone via the eyepiece show much vignetting. It's probably unavoidable - but always worth a fiddle! Maybe experiment to find the best distance and do something with the phone holder? The holder I ordered is this style but I won't get it until next week. Louise ps my phone isn't good with low light - but probably fine with a microscope!

ps the beta version link returns 21.02.20.13 - must be the latest version!

I would click on the beta version link. It's possible the ascom driver has been in development and the beta is the best so far...

That looks good! Is that with the beta driver? I think that's the one you have to use. Any response from the qhy forum?

You've missed something, Dave... How is the camera appearing in Device Manager?

When you resurface - nicely refreshed, Dave! I would go through the manual step by step to make sure you have installed it properly i.e. exactly as they describe . In particular, make sure the driver shown in Device Manager is correct after you've installed the camera. Reading the qhy stuff again, it's a bit ambiguous when they talk about the 'system pack' on the one hand, and the beta release on the other. If in doubt, check with Mr Q! Also, whenever I've had problems with qhy ascom drivers, I've switched to their system driver and their EZCap_QT software, as a sanity check Good luck! Louise

So you can choose your camera correctly and bring up a screen like this (simulated) one: You can tick logging which might help by giving you some data. Louise

Probably don't need to run the diagnostics as such, but it has the choose and connect to device -> camera and look at properties options.

It's worth always disconnecting and then doing a cold boot (not just a reset) and reconnect the camera cables in the right order, if specified. I know these things can drive you nuts - I can empathise!! I'd definitely post on the qhyccd forum (but make sure you have internet security/antivirus running before going anywhere near!). Chances are, if you have a problem, someone else will have posted about the same or similar thing. Have you tried the Ascom diagnostics? Louise

5m for usb 3 might be a bit long. I would try usb 2.0 if you can't run a shorter cable. So much trial and error with usb camera connections! Louise

Hi Dave I take it you installed the current QHY 'system pack' which includes an ascom driver? Qhy are notorious for dodgy drivers, though (in my experience). It's a beefy-looking camera! Lol. I imagine it needs a good quality usb 3.0/3.1 connection. I have an old i5-2500k desktop (from 2012, I think) which has 'usb 3.0' but it doesn't work too well with a lot of things and I can't do anything about it Even third party usb 3.0 expansion cards don't work properly a lot of the time, so it's probably down to the chipset. So if there's any doubt, I'd try it in an alternate system, if possible. I take it you posted on the qhy forum? Any suggestions from there? I see you did have it working at one point - yeah, always worth rolling back, even if it's a bit of a pain... Louise

I've only ever used Sharpcap for eeva - I've no idea what might be available for phones. Do mention my name to alert me if you get anywhere! I might have a go myself one of these days... Thanks Louise

Hi Vlaiv I was wondering if you've done an astro imaging through the EP? Louise

Yes, that's what I did - it's all set up. I've had it up and running with the kit eps and the Starguider for quite a while now Louise

PS it's almost essential to have the image train parfocal with the visual. It's also nice, but not quite so essential, to have the imaging fov the same as the visual In the imaging train the 'eyepiece' is being used (afocally by me) as a projection lens, also called a photoeyepiece. Confusingly, advanced users often just call them eyepieces - for a long time I didn't understand what they were talking about! Louise

Ok, though the image quality using the Starguider have probably been good enough. Could always be better, I suppose. I'll dwell upon it Oh, I previously posted some images of diatoms at 100x in the microscopy section: Thanks Louise

Well, I'd need 2 of them...

Hiya The microscope does have 23.2mm eyepieces but I've made adapters to fit on the outside of the 23.2 recetacles. That allows me to get the whole 23.2mm diameter. The trinocular imaging path is slightly wider As mentioned my oculars only give an 18mm fn. You can certainly buy 20 and 22mm ones for 23.2mm receptacles but greater than that normally requires 30mm eyepieces/receptacles. I'm waiting for a phone adapter to allow me to take the occasional images through the eyepieces though I use a dslr for more serious imaging. Thanks for doing the above comparison - hmm... the Starguider looks better than the aspheric there? I think the 40x objectives (probably the one I use most often, but also 60x and 100x) work out at something like f/100 or greater. However, illumination is provided by bright LED Louise PS I should mention that my microscope only cost £216 new so it's not worth spending a lot of time, trouble and money on it. I am, though, a compulsive tinkerer

Yeah, Celestron do 1.25" EPs for their spotting scopes. But no worries, I'll wait and see what that Svbony aspheric is like and take it from there. Unfortunately, it's coming from the EU and there are delays... Estimated delivery is this Thursday but I'm pretty sure it won't get here until next week. Cheers Louise

Hi again I suppose the main difference, visually, with a microscope that the view is almost just 2D so very little depth that's in focus (depending on objective power). In that case it's just rectilinear, chromatic and spherical distortion one wants to minimise. The spherical and chromatic distortions comes largely, if not wholly, from the objective (I think!). So for the EP it's really just the rectlinear distortion one wants to minimise though a small amount is still acceptable. One does want good contrast. It's like with engineering generally - good enough will do! The imaging side is naturally a bit more demanding but, even so, most of the time you end up cropping around the subject of interest which will likely be occupying the central area of the (objective's) fov. Still, having an EP with a largely flat field makes everything nicer and easier. At the end of the day, as with astro observing (which I've done very little of!), one just wants a pleasant experience Oh, it's easy to 3D print appropriate adapters. For the EPs I can remove the 1.25" barrel from the astro EP and connect the optical part with the microscope via a 3d printed adapter (threads can be challenging and it usually takes me several goes before I get it just right!). The imaging train keeps the 1.25" barrel and connects via a1.25" astro helical focuser, and then a 3D printed adapter that connects it to the trinocular port. All seems to work ok . Louise

Ok, ok - I'll come clean! I'm actually mainly looking for eyepieces for my microscope! I was afraid if I'd said that at the beginning I wouldn't be taken seriously. Just as if I'd raised the same question on the microscopy forum, the purists there might have shot me down! Just by experimenting with astro eyepieces I can get much wider views than standard microscope oculars. I have a trinocular instrument and have been imaging afocally via the BST Starguider and getting good results. Anyway, so using the eyepieces visually is where the eye relief comes in. The standard microscope eyepieces don't have a great deal of eye relief and it drives me nuts having to keep putting my glasses on and taking them off again. The 25mm focal length is equivalent to a standard 10x microscope eyepiece. Dividing the focal length into 250 gives you the magnification so I wanted to stay close to the 25mm. My current 10x eyepieces have a field number of 18mm which is rather small. I've measured the Starguider with a calibration slide as up to 23.4 and via the trinocular as 24mm - much better, even with some distortion around the edges. Now, at the moment, I have the Starguider for the imaging side so I need two EPs for the binocular visual. Obviously that doubles the cost which is why I ideally want to keep the EP price down but still for them to be as good as the Starguider. It might be that if I found a very good EP I could use for the oculars and the imaging, in which case I'd need 3 off! I could then use the Starguider for astronomy . I've ordered one of the recommended aspheric lenses this morning. There is a part of me that says 'something so cheap can't be any good!' but I'm willing to give it a try. If the worst comes to the worst, I can just get a couple more Starguiders and be happy - except, as mentioned, I only just get the eye relief I'd need and a couple of extra mm would be more comfortable! So, there you have my confession! Thanks in advance for your indulgence! Yes, your images above are quite nice - come out well! Louise

On the face of it, it does look quite impressive for not very much! Can I ask exactly how you took the above image? Thanks Louise

Hi I've seen that on CN but I didn't, and still don't, know what I'm looking at! Anyway, apart from the Starguider, they mostly look too bulky and out of my price range. I need a bright, flat field, with large field stop that I can image through afocally without too much distortion. - preferably for less than about £50-£60 Thanks Louise

Elsewhere the eye relief is quoted as 16-20mm for the bst 25. I think that's maybe because of the rubber eye cup which you can easily remove. Not sure if it's the same with the ef 27. It's the focal length I want to keep to around 25mm. The point is I want to be able to comfortable use the ep whilst wearing glasses. Having the large lens diameter that I get with the bst 25 is nice. I think life is too short and I'll get another Starguider, or two. At least I know where I am with them. Thanks for your time and advice - much appreciated, as always. Louise

Yes, it's confusing trying to compare various parameters - which is why I posted on here! FLO quotes the ovl ef 27 eye relief as 23mm and the bst 25mm as 20mm. I suppose the max value is taken from the glass surface. But, anyway, the absolute value doesn't matter - just the difference between the two eyepieces and whether one is longer than the other. I think I'm probably getting the feeling that the ef 27 isn't really any better than the Starguider and I won't know whether the ef 27 has longer eye relief but pretty much the same quality unless I try one. I already know the Starguider is ok and it's hard to tell if the ef 27 would be worth the extra money (£65 vs £45 for the Starguider). I don't want to spend any more than the cost of the ef 27. Cheers Louise