I have that $15 loupe.....it works. I think the BelOmo is better. And of course, the Harold Schneider is better than the BelOmo.
But, the best loupe won't help if one does not have the skills to recognize what they are seeing.
It is the same in any area, not only in gemology, isn't it? With any equipment. But nobody buys a Schneider loupe without having the skills... at least I hope so
But, the best loupe won't help if one does not have the skills to recognize what they are seeing.
This is the best advice one can get a 15$ loupe or a 1500$ loupe won't help if one does not have the skills its better to spend money for knowledge first and only then buy the tools, BTW shih.tzu as Barbra said it works, its not better then other loupes nor worse i am happy with it.
This is an interesting discussion on loupes' I have a Ruper 16X (apparently Japanese) and I quite like it ..... so far...... Has anyone ever used a Ruper and what do you think about them?
This is the best advice one can get a 15$ loupe or a 1500$ loupe won't help if one does not have the skills its better to spend money for knowledge first and only then buy the tools, BTW shih.tzu as Barbra said it works, its not better then other loupes nor worse i am happy with it.
Yes. Beside the skills I honestly don't know why would be somebody getting an expensive loupe (something more than Belomo) unless he/she is grading diamonds all the time. A loupe like Schneider is absolutely pointless for those who work with colored stones most of the time, a waste of money imo.
I was just curious how it compares to Belomo and was surprised with the statement they are equal, this is why I was asking. Just in case somebody will be looking for a cheap good loupe.
Above all, anybody has a diferent perception, this is what Barbra stated 2 years ago
Barbra Voltaire wrote:
Sidebar: On my trip to Moscow in September, I visited the most prestigious gem certification labs. Belemo loupes were on every counter. I had my trusty GemologyPro, Harold Schneider loupe around my neck at all times. Noted Differences: Mine is built better and LOOKS WAY more expensive, but optically, I observed no apparent difference.
Most of the diamond graders (including me) would react with a facepalm. But it's just their opinion, their perception. Naturally no loupe will make you a better gemologist, but this goes without saying, nobody is such an idiot to claim the opposite and has never been (at least I haven't met any).
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:42 pm Posts: 2846 Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
What kind of loupe does the GIA provide for their diamond grading courses?
My Belomo is way way better than the loupe provided by the Gem-A for their diamond grading course. I wish I'd have had my Belomo then, maybe I would have had higher than the 94% I got on my exam.
What kind of loupe does the GIA provide for their diamond grading courses?
My Belomo is way way better than the loupe provided by the Gem-A for their diamond grading course. I wish I'd have had my Belomo then, maybe I would have had higher than the 94% I got on my exam.
In terms of quality it is something you can get on ebay for $10.
Belomo is far superior and (purely to my eyes and in my opinion) high end loupes are as superior to Belomo as Belomo is to the GIA loupe (though at first in a less obvious way). This doesn't matter in case of a general observation of some coloured stone, but does matter a lot when you are working on a VVS-VS diamond clarity.
Despite many might disagree... I have owned Schneider GemologyPro and an older model (the grey one) and honestly cannot recommend any of them. The optics itself is good, but not great. The edges (and the area near to them) are very far from being good enough (unlike in case of Nikon for example which is perfect everywhere and under any angle). Schneider is a very good but terribly overpriced loupe, Nikon offers a better optics but is not widefield, Belomo is widefield but not quite sharp.
For what Schneider costs it is a waste of money I am afraid. GemologyPro at 150 would be a decent loupe, anything over this is ridiculous. It is a bit like paying 2000 bucks for a 0.2ct Cartier solitaire...
Other than my previous disclaimer, that a number of listmembers that I respect have used various expensive loupes, I agree with you.
It is instructive to look at microscope oculars for comparison. This is an area where lots of money has been and continues to be spent on product development in support of various "specifications arms races".
The microscope eyepiece magnifies an "aerial image" that the objective forms, in its front barrel in exactly the same way that a loupe magnifies and image of something placed at it's focal point.
10x is also the standard magnification for microscope oculars. And "back in the day" the field number (ie. Diameter) for the standard 10x ocular was in the neighborhood of 18mm, (just like the original Bausch and Lomb Hastings triplet). Then as computers became available for optical design things were pushed to their limits. So the standard microscope ocular got pushed out to 20 or 21mm as did the 10X jewelers loupe.
Also they started using 30mm diameter eyetubes on microscopes which allowed them to go to bigger diameters. But until about 20 years ago they stalled around 23mm even with the larger diameter eyetubes. Then more recently they started ratcheting up again from 23 to 23.5, 24, 24.5 25 and 26. With 30 mm eyetubes they could still stuff a little more diameter in there and get away with it but they have exceeded the diameter of most of the optical systems that preceed the ocular. When the field number (of a 10x)goes over 23mm the price (for a new one) rises very steeply. These oculars have more corrections in them than any loupe I know of and if I wanted to have an "I got one , you don't loupe" I might trim down the barrel of a Wild ocular , on a lathe. Perhaps that will happen if one comes my way with an "I've been dropped, dent". Otherwise it would sort of be a waste of a good ocular.
When the field number goes up from 23mm the price starts rising very steeply. The Harald Schneider is listed at 10X by 20mm diameter. So it should not be very expensive , considering that you can buy a 10x20 ocular from china today that is very good, for less than $30 retail.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum