Microscope upgrade

I bought my present compound microscope (an Apex Practitioner) for £100 nearly 10 years ago. It's been amazingly good for the price, but hoping to do better, I wanted to upgrade. Given the quality of the results I can produce, this is a problem as I'm into the uncomfortable valley between what I can currently do and a five figure sum for a top brand instrument - undoubtedly better but also undoubtedly overpriced - a £10,000 microscope cannot, according to the laws of physics, be 100 times better than a £100 instrument. Eventually, after much dithering, I zeroed in on candidates, and asked for a quote from a UK company I have bought several microscopes from in the past. I was shocked when they came back with a quote for £2,700 (including £150 for delivery!), so I shopped around. The microscope I was interested in comes out of a big Chinese factory and crops up under various names all over the place. By shopping around I managed to find very similar kit (may not be absolutely identical) for £1,200. 

To buy or not to buy? I've bought a lot of Chinese optics over the last 10 years. They cannot be beaten on price, but there is a problem. The Chinese megafactories churn out the optics but the quality control is not as good as the expensive named manufacturers. There are good copies (absolute bargains), and not so good copies. The only way to find out is to buy one and try it. And then send it back if you're not happy - a hassle, but a major saving. So what did I get? 

• AmScope T720Q-EUL trinocular compound microscope. This has Kohler illumination (too complicated to go into here, Google it if you want to know more), widefield 10x eyepieces and a quintuple nosepiece with 4x, 10x, 20x, 40x infinity plan objectives, and a 100x oil objective which I don't plan to use and may replace with something else. 
• I also bought a dry darkfield condenser (since I don't plan to use the 100x objective) to allow me to use darkfield illumination. 
• Camera adaptor: 23mm trinocular port to T2 adapter with a 2x reduction lens, plus a T2 to Sony E mount adapter. This allows me to mount my Sony a6500 body on the trinocular port. Fitting cameras to microscopes is a dark art and something I've had problems with in the past. Choosing a 2x reduction lens was an educated guess based on reading what was needed for an APS-C sensor. This made me nervous - but I got it right! Although the camera is not parfocal with the eyepieces this isn't a problem in practice. The field of view on the camera sensor is also slightly wider than that through the eyepieces. Microscope firms are now obsessed with USB cameras, but even the best ones costing over £1,000 pounds aren't a match for a camera such as the Sony a6500 - the resolution isn't the problem, exceeding that of the microscope optics, but image quality and dynamic range is. 

Cons: 

• There's a lot of plastic, parts that would be better as metal. In general the construction feels a bit flimsy, although the stage controls, focus, etc. are fine. In practice, it works, and it is lighter than a fully metal instrument. 
• Lots of microscope snobs will tell you "This is not true Kohler illumination". I don't know about that, I can only judge by the results I am able to achieve. 
• I don't plan to use the 100x oil objective but it comes with the microscope. I may replace it with something else.

Pros:

• It (nearly*) all fits together and it works! Phew!
• It's more convenient to use a trinocular microscope than clamping the camera onto the monocular eyepiece as I've been doing for the past 10 years!
• Image Quality: As expected it's not 10 times better than my old microscope but it is definitely better. Overall, together with the improved ergonomics, I feel I made the right purchase. As with cameras (and ovens!), the instrument itself is only half the story - the person using it is as important. 

*And now the bad-ish news

The darkfield condenser I bought does not fit the microscope. My fault, but AmScope don't make a darkfield condenser which fits this microscope. I have been able to find one elsewhere, but given the cost (a third of the price of the microscope) and how useful it is likely to be to me, I am currently exploring other solutions (more of that later). 

In summary

• Lots more experimentation to come, photos to date on BlueSky. 
• Credit to AmScope. For 99% of users, the microscope snobs are wrong about AmScope.

Diffusion Diffusion Diffusion

click for full size image

I've written so much about theimportance of diffusion in macro photography and microscopy that I almost feel guilty about mentioning it again. Almost, but not quite. So here's a practical demonstration of how much detail is lost without adequate diffusion. 

Kalanchoe leaf, 100X.

 

Buy one, get one free

This week I have taken delivery of several parcels, including one from Germany. This one had a hitchhiker, a Long-tailed Silverfish, Ctenolepisma longicaudata. They look distinctively different from our familiar Silverfish, Lepisma saccharinum. I was able to key this out and demonstrate the key feature, that the large erect setae on the side of the body are saw-toothed. 

Keyed using:
https://www.fhi.no/globalassets/dokumenterfiler/rapporter/2019/long-tailed-silverfish-ctenolepisma-longicaudata---biology-and-control.pdf

 

Entomology Update - August 2025

August was a varied month, a little rain (not enough), heatwaves, but some notable finds. 

Kybos Confusion!

For the first time ever I've managed to identify a Kybos leafhopper to species level. That's where the problems started. 

This is either genius ... or incredibly stupid

Have I stumbled across a useful finding?

One of those days...

The ups and downs of entomological aspiration...

Crazy Paving

Insect populations are declining. They are declining fastest in urban areas (including Leicester which is included in this study). 

August notable finds:

• Chaetostomella cylindrica
• Macrosteles sardus, first records for VC55
• Phasia barbifrons, a parasitoid of shieldbugs
• Short-winged Cone-head, Conocephalus dorsalis
• Dicyphus tamaninii, first records for VC55
• Macrosteles viridigriseus, probably common but rarely recorded.

Read previous updates

Latest photos

Crazy Paving

Insect populations are declining. They are declining fastest in urban areas (including Leicester which is included in this study). The causes are:

• Paving over soil
• Reduced tree cover
• Gardening - excessive tidiness, non-native plants, chemical use.

All of these are easily solvable (compared, say, to climate change). I see no willingness to take the actions needed to solve the problem. 


Ellis, E. E., Campbell, S. A., & Edmondson, J. L. (2025) Drivers of nocturnal and diurnal pollinating insect declines in urban landscapes. Proceedings B, 292(2052), 20250102. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2025.0102

"Insect pollinators are essential for terrestrial ecosystems, delivering key ecosystem functions in the face of anthropogenic disturbance. Urbanization may be a key threat to pollinator communities. However, the scale of the threat remains unknown due to an overwhelming research emphasis on bees and a lack of comparative studies on hyper-diverse pollinating taxa such as nocturnal moths. As a result, it remains unclear which pollinator groups are most vulnerable to urbanization, and which habitat features are most critical for supporting them. We conducted a large-scale assessment of the effects of increasing urbanization on the diversity of bees, hoverflies and nocturnal moths in urban horticultural sites (allotments) across three cities. We report up to a 43% reduction in species richness along urbanization gradients, suggesting that a wide range of pollinators are under threat in urban landscapes. We show that these declines are driven by taxon-specific landscape drivers such as the reduction of tree canopy and semi-natural habitat, suggesting that urban insect conservation depends on the preservation or expansion of habitat features specific to different threatened taxa. We found that relative to bees, moths and hoverflies are particularly sensitive to urbanization, and we highlight the importance of including these frequently overlooked pollinator groups when assessing the biodiversity impacts of environmental change."

One of those days

Unfortunately, the day started with carpet shampooing after I had managed to tip an entire mug of coffee on a new pale carpet. 

While it was drying, I popped out to the local park to check a clump of Galingale, Cyperus longus, for the newly discovered leafhopper Flastena fumipennis. I did find a couple of potential candidates but unfortunately, they were hyper frisky in the 30C heat and pinged off before they could be pooted. 

I did pot a small ladybird, and on checking, this turned out to be a Bristly Ladybird, Rhyzobius lophanthae, a species I've been looking for for years. 

Unfortunately, I managed to lose the specimen before I could get a decent photo. 

It's been one of those days...

 

This is either genius ... or incredibly stupid

We have hugely underestimated the importance of sound communication in Hemiptera (bugs). Part of the reason for this is that many bug sounds consist of low frequency infrasound, e.g. vibrating the abdomen against a plant stem, or high frequency ultrasound, and the equipment needed to work with these frequencies is not widely available. I've written previously about this in Kleidocerys, and my frustration at not owning a conveniently-sized laser Doppler vibrometer. So, what if I told you that I'd figured out (by which I mean accidentally stumbled upon), a way of recording Kleidocerys calls on my mobile phone?

Listen to the soundtrack on this short video - sorry, it's a bit quiet, you'll need to turn your volume up: 

Yesterday, confronted by Alders, I had another go at finding Kleidocerys privignus (no luck, all Kleidocerys resedae, Birch Catkin Bugs). To check the ID's I was photographing them using a floating frame (see: Floating frames for macro photography), where the bug is trapped, unharmed, between two layers of transparent flexible film. Unharmed, but in the case of one of the Birch Catkin Bugs I was working with, pretty annoyed. The film appears to transform the ultrasonic calls of the bug into a lower, hearable frequency. By holding my mobile phone near the floating frame I was able to record the bug's irritation (before releasing it completely unharmed). The question is, would I be able to tell the difference in calls between K. resedae and K. ericae (should I ever find a specimen of K. ericae)?

 

Kybos Confusion

For the first time ever I've managed to identify a Kybos leafhopper to species level. This is a very common but difficult genus where the male aedeagus is of limited help and needs to be supported by imaging the sternal apodemes and dorsal tergites. 

And the winner is ... Kybos betulicola. Except that ... there is taxonomic disagreement over the name (aka Kybos lindbergi / Kybos ludus, see: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/18234077.pdf), but the UK Checklist currently recognizes K. betulicola, so that's what it is for now.

One small step for (a) man, one giant leap for leafhoppers.

 

Entomology Update - July 2025

Much needed rain, now waiting for the Arthropods to respond. August is looking good. 

Contradictory spider

A new study of the invasive Linyphiid spider Mermessus trilobatus contradicts recent results about the spread of Mirid bugs. 

A new springtail: Entomobrya petri

Who will get the first record for VC55?

A walk in the park

Popping out before the rain pays off. 

Lumps, Bumps and Spines

Everyone loves a treehopper, but what are all those lumps, bumps and spines for?

 

Or Else

I'm still on my quest to become less rubbish with bees. After a great deal of hesitation, I splashed out on Else & Edwards monumental Bee Bible, The Bees of the British Isles.

Read previous updates

Latest photos