Defeating the mantis part 2

clunkers.

The frame speed of my Mantis is roughly 1 GHz. It's a good idea to clean the lens once a year maybe. The Mantis lens is about 5 inches above the object plane, so the fume situation isn't nearly as bad as something that has to get close. And the lenses are glass, not plastic.

More like $2K new for the "compact" version, which is ideal for an engineer's workbench. It's good optics, absolutely flat field, uniform illumination and focus everywhere, and that's not a cheap simple lens.

I expect an engineer to design the equivalent of maybe a million dollars worth of stuff per year, $20K per week. Anything equipment or software or books or whatever that helps is usually a bargain. A Mantis will last for at least 10 years, which is $200 a year, maybe 50 cents a day after the tax breaks. One FPGA simulation thing licenses for a few thousand dollars a year per seat. A high-end oscilloscope can cost $200K.

Ditto a good oscilloscope, a good benchtop DVM, a really good PC and dual monitor, Metcal iron, whatever they need. Equipment is cheap and people are expensive.

John

Reply to
John Larkin
Loading thread data ...

On a sunny day (Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:22:22 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

clunkers.

Have you ever thought about retiring?

Reply to
Jan Panteltje

clunkers.

What a weird question.

I'd never want to retire. I don't want to die, either.

John

Reply to
John Larkin

clunkers.

Yeah, John could take his money, move to someplace good to live, set up a nice lab and spend all his time doing fun stuff, maybe set up a corporation to help with taxes. Wait a minute...

Reply to
Spehro Pefhany

On a sunny day (Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:00:47 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

How about becoming president?

Reply to
Jan Panteltje

Have you ever thought of using the proper tools?

--
You can\'t have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

do anything.

Linux,

working

No surprise there!

--
You can\'t have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

On a sunny day (Thu, 17 Sep 2009 12:54:53 -0400) it happened "Michael A. Terrell" wrote in :

Have you ever though tof joining the proper newsgroup? As you contribution here regarding design is 0, was 0, and will be 0. Try alt jims.groupies.

Reply to
Jan Panteltje

Try growing up. You are always touting a piece of crap as the greatest design ever, while people laugh at you.

--
You can\'t have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Not everyone wants to do SMT work as a business. Some of us are hobbyists who are increasingly finding themselves caught up in the forces of the wake (turbulence) of SMT trends in the mainstream industry. While boards are cheaper to make because that is also a mainstream trend, rework is getting more expensive and hobbyists may arguably do more rework than most.

I'm sure $2K is a cheap expense item for business. It can be the difference between doing it, and not, for many if not most looking at this as a hobby. Even the resale marketplace for these is high. They hold their value. So a hobbyist cannot even go there to pick up some of the slack.

I'd just design and build one, if I could get the raw glass materials. But for one-off, only value-added, finished lenses are available. Which brings the cost right up, again. Raw glass is only sold in large quantities, now. So that's yet again a problem.

Good unit, though.

The idea of using commodity camera systems is a good one, if it can be made to work well. However, I'm NOT in Jan's camp here regarding the requirement of an entire computer system and software just to get there. But I did find a path, I think. Old camera lens systems are being sold for just a few dollars apiece at Goodwill. Whole shelves of them, here. I'm dismantling those to get the lenses and I'll see about a solution this way.

Jon

Reply to
Jon Kirwan

I am a president. But of the USA? Not for a billion dollars.

John

Reply to
John Larkin

clunkers.

Doggone, why didn't I think of that?

John

Reply to
John Larkin

For hobby stuff, a good set of goggle-type magnifiers, and maybe a cheap stereo microscope, are fine. But I work with this stuff 60 hours a week, and my eyesight has always been terrible and it's not getting better. And using a Mantis is a brilliant visual event anyhow.

The "toy" USB microscopes are great for inspection and for documenting stuff, but not so good to work under.

John

Reply to
John Larkin

If I had to do this 60 hours a week, I'd not even be wrangling with the question. As it is, and it is hard to say for sure because I'm not yet set up to do much, I'd probably do it maybe a two hours a week. If that much. I'd like a Mantis, of course. But so far as I'm able to tell, used ones hold their value. So I need to find someone local going out of business where I can get a 'sweet-heart' deal. I got some lasers, a 7 1/2 digit HP multimeter, and optical supplies that way. Could happen, again, I suppose. I'll keep my eyes out for one.

I get that. Need some distance there. And higher mags generally mean the optical system gets closer to the board, given a chosen optical approach. The game is in selecting glass types and arrangements for better results, or if doing this digitally with CCDs or the like, then about having sufficient resolution combined with whatever optical system is in place and the associated software to make good use. Jan is dinging around with the latter choice. I'm glad he is exploring it, as it may turn up a useful result. In the meantime, I get to play with lenses I'm extracting nearly for free from old camera systems and meanwhile keep my eye peeled for a used Mantis or Meiji.

Jon

Reply to
Jon Kirwan

I recommend thinking twice about disassembling lens groups. Except for very old lenses, they are calculated to work as a group.

Reply to
JosephKK

I have just a little bit of optics in my background. Basic geometric, fraunhofer diffraction, spatial filters, etc. I've designed, ground, and built a few eyepieces for the three telescopes I also built and tested (two of which I also designed.)

I don't need to think twice before taking them apart. I'll test what I find and then think about some possible re-arrangements. If nothing comes to mind, nothing does. But I'm hopeful. Worst that happens is that I have a few dozen very, very cheap and decent quality lenses I'll use for something else.

Jon

Reply to
Jon Kirwan

uniform

lens.

At the skill level asserted there is no issue. I doubt i will remember though, so don't get mad if a say such a thing to you again.

Reply to
JosephKK

No problem. I will probably forget faster than you do. So I won't even know to complain. ;)

Jon

Reply to
Jon Kirwan

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.