The Brock Microscope...

[mystika1]

Is it that bad? I hear it referred to as a toy more often than not. I just won the $150.00 brock package on ebay for $50 and that includes shipping. I was told that this model (model 70)along with the purchase of the higher objectives on the website can cover high school science needs pretty well. Now I don't expect it to go that far but....Ifor $50 I would be glad if it will take us to 8th or 9th grade. I want to get opinions from people who actually have one or had one. No..I would not have considered it if I would have had to pay $200 for it. (I am cheap)I do think that is a bit much. Anyway...I had a toy microscope as a child that I couldn't see a darn thing with...that is what I think of when I hear someone say "toy microscope." My kids are young and I would like to have something that gets used. It is no good for me to spend hard earned money on something that I keep on the shelf for special occasions. I want to feel reasonably sure that I can allow my kids to go outside and grab whatever they find and get a closer look without feeling like they will destroy the equipment. My kids go through batteries so fast...they leave things on and so forth. It is nice to see something that does not need batteries.I also want something useful for science lessons. I don't mind unscrewing and screwing objectives....it is not a big deal for me.

 

Opinions,

 

Penny

Edited November 9, 2011 by mystika1

[Guest]

Am I missing something :confused:? The only place I have seen it referred to as a toy has been in this thread:

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3307012#post3307012

 

I am still waiting on the person that posted the comment to elaborate on this.

 

I have owned a good quality toy microscope as a kid and bought an inexpensive microscope for Adrian when he was about five, to play with. The Brock is nothing like that! While I bought mine new, I have no regrets for paying full price. Here's the Rainbow description on it:

 

http://rainbowresource.com/prodlist.php?subject=11&category=3314

[KathyBC]

We have a Brock Magiscope. No, it is nothing like those toy microscopes we had as kids - you can actually see things in this, lol. It is very sturdy, which works for our family, too.

[mystika1]

Am I missing something :confused:? The only place I have seen it referred to as a toy has been in this thread:

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3307012#post3307012

 

I am still waiting on the person that posted the comment to elaborate on this.

 

I have owned a good quality toy microscope as a kid and bought an inexpensive microscope for Adrian when he was about five, to play with. The Brock is nothing like that! While I bought mine new, I have no regrets for paying full price. Here's the Rainbow description on it:

 

http://rainbowresource.com/prodlist.php?subject=11&category=3314

 

That is one thread that I noticed today but I have also noticed it referenced as "not suitable for serious use." I joined the K5Science yahoo group and noticed that the Brock Magiscope is a microscope to avoid...according to them. I am not trying to cause trouble. :001_smile:I just want to make sure that I purchased something good. When I read about the Brock in the BFSU(K5Science)group and read the thread today referencing it as a toy....it made me a bit nervous. When I first asked about microscopes most of the replies suggested the home microscope but I am afraid that I would not allow the kids to fully explore and use it as I would be afraid of damaging it. The Brock seemed to be a better choice for us. Of course finding it on ebay for less than half of the retail price pretty much sealed the deal for me.:D

 

Thanks,

 

Penny

[LittleIzumi]

You just need to unscrew to put on the higher lenses, but it is definitely a real microscope. It's also fabulous how it uses light so there's no battery/light bulb to replace.

[mystika1]

You just need to unscrew to put on the higher lenses, but it is definitely a real microscope. It's also fabulous how it uses light so there's no battery/light bulb to replace.

 

That is one of the reasons I bought it. I won't have to buy bulbs or batteries ever! I spend enough on batteries as it is...even after buying what seems like a billion recharging batteries. The ruggedness is also the reason.

 

 

:001_smile:

Penny

[Guest]

That is one thread that I noticed today but I have also noticed it referenced as "not suitable for serious use." I joined the K5Science yahoo group and noticed that the Brock Magiscope is a microscope to avoid...according to them. I am not trying to cause trouble. :001_smile:I just want to make sure that I purchased something good. When I read about the Brock in the BFSU(K5Science)group and read the thread today referencing it as a toy....it made me a bit nervous. When I first asked about microscopes most of the replies suggested the home microscope but I am afraid that I would not allow the kids to fully explore and use it as I would be afraid of damaging it. The Brock seemed to be a better choice for us. Of course finding it on ebay for less than half of the retail price pretty much sealed the deal for me.:D

 

Thanks,

 

Penny

 

Penny, I am sorry if it appeared that way but I was not trying to imply that you were trying to start trouble. I am just still puzzled by the comment posted in the other thread earlier today. I did take a quick look on the BFSU Yahoo group out of curiosity (I am a member also) and did not see anything derogatory there. I have spoken to Dr. Nebel via e-mail on one occasion and judging by his character I am pretty certain it did not come from him. Anyway, it doesn't really matter! I would not spend over $200 on a toy :). Whatever some may choose to say about it is their problem. We are very happy with our purchase. Will I buy something else in high school? Very likely. This does not make the Brock a toy though ;).

Edited November 9, 2011 by Guest

[Guest]

You just need to unscrew to put on the higher lenses, but it is definitely a real microscope. It's also fabulous how it uses light so there's no battery/light bulb to replace.

 

It was all these added features that made it a good choice for us too :). And changing the lenses is not an issue for us either.

[mystika1]

Penny, I am sorry if it appeared that way but I was not trying to imply that you were trying to start trouble. I am just still puzzled by the comment posted in the other thread earlier today. I did take a quick look on the BFSU Yahoo group out of curiosity (I am a member also) and did not see anything derogatory there. I have spoken to Dr. Nebel via e-mail on one occasion and judging by his character I am pretty certain it did not come from him. Anyway, it doesn't really matter! I would not spend over $200 on a toy :). Whatever some may choose to say about it is their problem. We are very happy with our purchase. Will I buy something else in high school? Very likely. This does not make the Brock a toy though ;).

 

Hi:001_smile:

This is the post from the K5Science thread...(I copied and pasted it here for convenience)

 

The Brock Magiscope (as I see it by Googling: Brock Magiscope) is a single tube

with an objective lens at the bottom end and an eye piece lens at the top end of

a single tube. The combination of these two lenses does make it a compound

microscope.

 

However, its simple tube design makes it necessary to remove your specimen from

the stage, screw out one objective lens and screw in another in order to change

power. Then you will have to replace your specimen, relocate, and refocus on

what you are trying to see. This can be extremely frustrating to say the least.

Often you will not be able to relocate under high power what you were looking at

under low power.

 

With the three objective lenses mounted in a rotating nosepiece, you can easily

switch back and forth between powers without losing the position or focus on

what you are looking at. I consider this essential. in viewing almost anything

there is a constant need/desire to move the specimen under low power, locate a

point of particular interest, switch to high power to examine that point more

closely, then switch back to low power, move the specimen again, and so on.

 

Then there is the lack of focusing knobs on the Brock Magiscope; you focus it by

twisting the tube. This will make focusing, especially fine focus extremely

cumbersome; often you will need to be holding the microscope with one hand while

you twist the tube with the other. I consider focusing knobs, especially the

fine adjustment essential. As you view things through a microscope, especially

under higher powers, you will experience a constant need/desire to a make slight

adjustments in the focus. (It involves depth of focus; you simply can not see up

or down in the specimen without adjusting the focus. Watch an experience person

viewing something through a microscope; note that they they will be constantly

twiddling the fine focus knob to gain real 3-D view what they are examining.)

 

Thirdly, the Brock Magiscope seems to lack a condenser, i.e., a means of

adjusting the amount of light coming through the specimen to your eye. I

consider this essential as well. The clarity of what you are looking at is often

changed dramatically by by adjusting the light.

 

Finally, and strange to me, the price of the Brock Magiscope is equivalent

to--even more when you consider that each additional lens is extra--than the

price of good microscope with all the features that I consider essential.

 

Bernie Nebel

 

The actual thread is here. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/K5science/message/1383

 

Then he stated again in another thread.... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/K5science/message/1361

 

Sorry I did not get a chance to respond to your question before I was knocked

offline for the last 10 days by the hurricane.

 

Please read the "Microscope Recommendations" document in the files section of

this site. You will find that the Brock microscope has none of the features

(rotating nose piece, focusing knobs, condenser) that I consider essential. It

is not even that much less expensive than a decent microscope. Therefore, I

cannot recommend it.

 

I hope this is not too late to help with your making your decision.

 

Bernie Nebel

 

 

That made me feel a bit nervous.

Thanks,

 

Penny

Edited November 9, 2011 by mystika1

[Guest]

Hi:001_smile:

This is the post from the K5Science thread...(I copied and pasted it here for convenience)

 

The Brock Magiscope (as I see it by Googling: Brock Magiscope) is a single tube

with an objective lens at the bottom end and an eye piece lens at the top end of

a single tube. The combination of these two lenses does make it a compound

microscope.

 

However, its simple tube design makes it necessary to remove your specimen from

the stage, screw out one objective lens and screw in another in order to change

power. Then you will have to replace your specimen, relocate, and refocus on

what you are trying to see. This can be extremely frustrating to say the least.

Often you will not be able to relocate under high power what you were looking at

under low power.

 

With the three objective lenses mounted in a rotating nosepiece, you can easily

switch back and forth between powers without losing the position or focus on

what you are looking at. I consider this essential. in viewing almost anything

there is a constant need/desire to move the specimen under low power, locate a

point of particular interest, switch to high power to examine that point more

closely, then switch back to low power, move the specimen again, and so on.

 

Then there is the lack of focusing knobs on the Brock Magiscope; you focus it by

twisting the tube. This will make focusing, especially fine focus extremely

cumbersome; often you will need to be holding the microscope with one hand while

you twist the tube with the other. I consider focusing knobs, especially the

fine adjustment essential. As you view things through a microscope, especially

under higher powers, you will experience a constant need/desire to a make slight

adjustments in the focus. (It involves depth of focus; you simply can not see up

or down in the specimen without adjusting the focus. Watch an experience person

viewing something through a microscope; note that they they will be constantly

twiddling the fine focus knob to gain real 3-D view what they are examining.)

 

Thirdly, the Brock Magiscope seems to lack a condenser, i.e., a means of

adjusting the amount of light coming through the specimen to your eye. I

consider this essential as well. The clarity of what you are looking at is often

changed dramatically by by adjusting the light.

 

Finally, and strange to me, the price of the Brock Magiscope is equivalent

to--even more when you consider that each additional lens is extra--than the

price of good microscope with all the features that I consider essential.

 

Bernie Nebel

 

The actual thread is here. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/K5science/message/1383

 

Then he stated again in another thread.... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/K5science/message/1361

 

Sorry I did not get a chance to respond to your question before I was knocked

offline for the last 10 days by the hurricane.

 

Please read the "Microscope Recommendations" document in the files section of

this site. You will find that the Brock microscope has none of the features

(rotating nose piece, focusing knobs, condenser) that I consider essential. It

is not even that much less expensive than a decent microscope. Therefore, I

cannot recommend it.

 

I hope this is not too late to help with your making your decision.

 

Bernie Nebel

 

 

That made me feel a bit nervous.

Thanks,

 

Penny

 

Penny, I consider this constructive criticism (which is what I would have expected from the other poster who also is a scientist) and I do see what Dr. Nebel is pointing out and why, as I said before, I will more than likely buy another microscope for high school. For the purpose that I wanted it for now, this microscope is great. Also, you will notice he did not call it a toy, and made a point of saying that from what he sees by Googling Brock Magiscope ;). He did make it clear that he has not seen one up-close or used one.

 

ETA: Thank you for posting and linking this :).

[KrissiK]

When I taught jr. high science we used the Brock Magiscope and for the purposes we had in 7th grade, it was perfect. Now, it was 10 years ago that we used it, but it was simple, I loved the fiber=optic light source and for jr. highers, I didn't have to worry about things breaking.

[mystika1]

Thanks going out to all of you. I guess I just needed a bit of reassurance. I know my kids will love it. They have been asking for a microscope. Now I need to find a good telescope.:D

 

Thanks,

 

Penny

[ElizaG]

I am still waiting on the person that posted the comment to elaborate on this.

I have owned a good quality toy microscope as a kid and bought an inexpensive microscope for Adrian when he was about five, to play with. The Brock is nothing like that! While I bought mine new, I have no regrets for paying full price

:iagree: The Brock is a real, serious microscope designed for children. Calling it a toy is like saying the Stokke Tripp Trapp is a "toy chair," or that children's clothes are "toy clothes," or that a Montessori classroom is a "toy school." Children have different needs from adults, and IMO it makes a lot of sense to provide them with high-quality tools that have been created specifically to meet those needs. Unfortunately, there aren't many such things on the market, probably because there aren't a lot of people like the inventor of the Magiscope.

 

We paid full price as well, and consider it one of the best homeschooling investments we've made. I'm planning to get some more lenses and the field case for a family Christmas present. It's wonderful that our children can use this microscope right now, indoors or out, without a lot of fuss. There will be plenty of time in the high school years for them to get accustomed to adult microscopes in all their complexity (both positive and negative).

 

BTW, I first learned about the Brock Magiscope through The Private Eye web site. This is an all-ages curriculum, designed by a Montessori teacher, in which the participants use 5x jeweler's loupes along with some simple prompts to encourage analogical thinking. No jargon, no big investment in fancy apparatus with adjustment knobs, but it inspires some very interesting scientific thinking, as well as art and poetry. It's great for children aged ~5 and up, as well as for adults who've kept (or want to regain) the ability to find great richness in simple experiences. :)

[Guest]

BTW, I first learned about the Brock Magiscope through The Private Eye web site. This is an all-ages curriculum, designed by a Montessori teacher, in which the participants use 5x jeweler's loupes along with some simple prompts to encourage analogical thinking. No jargon, no big investment in fancy apparatus with adjustment knobs, but it inspires some very interesting scientific thinking, as well as art and poetry. It's great for children aged ~5 and up, as well as for adults who've kept (or want to regain) the ability to find great richness in simple experiences. :)

 

OK... now you know I am stuck checking out Private Eye :lol:! I have never heard about it before. Thank you for posting the link :)!

[ElizaG]

OK... now you know I am stuck checking out Private Eye :lol:! I have never heard about it before. Thank you for posting the link :)!

You're welcome! (Though now I can't find the place where I read that the creator was a Montessori teacher. I might be mixing her up with someone else.)

 

Just in case you need something else to look at ;) ... their site also recommends the Eames' movie, Powers of Ten, but we like this wordless Canadian version better:

 

Cosmic Zoom

 

It would be a neat supplement to any curriculum involving magnification or microscopy.

[Guest]

You're welcome! (Though now I can't find the place where I read that the creator was a Montessori teacher. I might be mixing her up with someone else.)

 

Just in case you need something else to look at ;) ... their site also recommends the Eames' movie, Powers of Ten, but we like this wordless Canadian version better:

 

Cosmic Zoom

 

It would be a neat supplement to any curriculum involving magnification or microscopy.

 

There is a post in the testimonials from a Montessori school director but other than that I did not see anything linking the creator to Montessori. No worries :lol:! I am constantly researching different things and am prone to mixing up/ combining information too :tongue_smilie:.

 

Thank you for the video link. I was just watching it with my little night owl (my little guy Malcolm) and he couldn't take his eyes away from the screen. I have to show it to Adrian tomorrow (um... I mean today :lol:). It's past my bedtime so I better sign off.

 

Thanks again :)

[TheHomeScientist]

:iagree: The Brock is a real, serious microscope designed for children. Calling it a toy is like saying the Stokke Tripp Trapp is a "toy chair," or that children's clothes are "toy clothes," or that a Montessori classroom is a "toy school." Children have different needs from adults, and IMO it makes a lot of sense to provide them with high-quality tools that have been created specifically to meet those needs. Unfortunately, there aren't many such things on the market, probably because there aren't a lot of people like the inventor of the Magiscope.

 

We paid full price as well, and consider it one of the best homeschooling investments we've made. I'm planning to get some more lenses and the field case for a family Christmas present. It's wonderful that our children can use this microscope right now, indoors or out, without a lot of fuss. There will be plenty of time in the high school years for them to get accustomed to adult microscopes in all their complexity (both positive and negative).

 

BTW, I first learned about the Brock Magiscope through The Private Eye web site. This is an all-ages curriculum, designed by a Montessori teacher, in which the participants use 5x jeweler's loupes along with some simple prompts to encourage analogical thinking. No jargon, no big investment in fancy apparatus with adjustment knobs, but it inspires some very interesting scientific thinking, as well as art and poetry. It's great for children aged ~5 and up, as well as for adults who've kept (or want to regain) the ability to find great richness in simple experiences. :)

 

Yeah, it is a toy, if you define a toy as something to play with rather than something to use for serious work. I don't say that to hurt the feelings of people who already have a Brock. I say it because I'm more concerned about people who are trying to decide what to buy, and the Brock is a terrible choice. In terms of microscope technology, its mechanicals are state-of-the-art for circa 1700 AD.

 

If the Brock were the only thing available, fine. But there are many, many competing alternatives that are much, much better choices. For example, the National Optical model 109 costs about the same amount as the basic model Brock and little more than half as much as a Brock with all the options, and the standard 109 is a considerably more capable microscope than the loaded Brock. It's sized for elementary school kids, and is very durable. It's also useful for kids from kindergarten age through middle- or junior high school.

 

The model 109 has a standard turret, which allows you to change magnifications instantly, which is essential for serious work. It has actual focusing knobs--for both coarse and fine focus--which are essential for serious work. It has a diaphragm, which is essential for serious work. The Brock has none of those.

 

Of course children have different needs, and the model 109 (as well as similar models from other vendors) are designed for those needs.

[ElizaG]

Yeah, it is a toy, if you define a toy as something to play with rather than something to use for serious work. I don't say that to hurt the feelings of people who already have a Brock. I say it because I'm more concerned about people who are trying to decide what to buy, and the Brock is a terrible choice. In terms of microscope technology, its mechanicals are state-of-the-art for circa 1700 AD.

No hurt feelings. We just don't agree on what features are most desirable. I think the jeweler's loupe -- which is state of the art for what, Ancient Greece? :) -- is in some ways even better suited to this age group. The Brock is a way to incorporate microscopy into children's explorations, with a very low likelihood of the tool itself becoming a distraction or limitation. (No matter how much fortification they've added to the National Optical scopes, I don't think we'd be likely to take one to the beach, for instance.)

 

From your posts, it seems that you might be coming at all this from more of an adult perspective, in which younger children's scientific experiences are mainly of value as a direct preparation for high school and college work. But maybe I'm wrong here. I'd be interested in hearing more about your philosophy of elementary science education. :)

[TheHomeScientist]

No hurt feelings. We just don't agree on what features are most desirable. I think the jeweler's loupe -- which is state of the art for what, Ancient Greece? :) -- is in some ways even better suited to this age group. The Brock is a way to incorporate microscopy into children's explorations, with a very low likelihood of the tool itself becoming a distraction or limitation. (No matter how much fortification they've added to the National Optical scopes, I don't think we'd be likely to take one to the beach, for instance.)

 

From your posts, it seems that you might be coming at all this from more of an adult perspective, in which younger children's scientific experiences are mainly of value as a direct preparation for high school and college work. But maybe I'm wrong here. I'd be interested in hearing more about your philosophy of elementary science education. :)

 

Well, I'm not sure I'd dignify it as a "philosophy" but my practice has always been to treat kids as just smaller versions of adults. I don't lie to them. I don't talk down to them. I recognize that a young child is just as intelligent as he or she will be when fully grown, but simply lacks data and experience. I've never bought into the idea that it's somehow "protecting" children to lie to them about reality. If anything, I think most kids are more capable of dealing with unpleasant reality than many adults are.

 

I believe that nearly all kids are natural scientists, because all of them possess the one key aspect of a scientist: curiosity. At least they all possess it until its drummed out of them, which is one of the reasons I'm such a strong proponent of home schooling. So, if a kid asks me a question, I drop what I'm doing an dive in to help the kid try to figure out the answer.

 

And I think it's important to give kids the tools they need to exercise their curiosity. Sure, a simple magnifying glass is great. It's a whole lot better than nothing, as is the Brock Magiscope. But a real compound microscope with post-1700 features is much better still. I don't believe it'll confuse a kid. I've watched too many young children take the ball and run with it when they were given access to a real microscope. And I'm talking 5 and 6 years old. I simply think it's a big mistake to give a kid an inferior tool when a much superior tool can be had for the same price.

[Guest]

No hurt feelings. We just don't agree on what features are most desirable. I think the jeweler's loupe -- which is state of the art for what, Ancient Greece? :) -- is in some ways even better suited to this age group. The Brock is a way to incorporate microscopy into children's explorations, with a very low likelihood of the tool itself becoming a distraction or limitation. (No matter how much fortification they've added to the National Optical scopes, I don't think we'd be likely to take one to the beach, for instance.)

 

From your posts, it seems that you might be coming at all this from more of an adult perspective, in which younger children's scientific experiences are mainly of value as a direct preparation for high school and college work. But maybe I'm wrong here. I'd be interested in hearing more about your philosophy of elementary science education. :)

 

Good reply Eleanor! I couldn't have said it better myself. I replied in the other thread so I won't bother to take the time to do so again here. I think you have covered what I wanted to say much better than I :). I will say this though on philosophies, I am truly glad I have read some of Montessori's books. They have truly enriched my way of thinking :)!

[Jean in Wisc]

I haven't tried to read all the posts, but I have both a Brock and the Sonlight microscope that everyone recommended. My daughter was making noise about going into an area of biology/agriculture, so I stepped up tot he Sonlight scope rather than using the Brock through high school. If I had known what I know today, I would not have spent the money.

 

I used the Brock and loved it. We can pick it up and run down to the pond and use it outside without electricity. It is hardy (dropped and survived), and easy to use. Yes, you have to screw and unscrew the lenses, but if you are only using it a few times through high school biology and when the kids are interested in something, I don't think it is that difficult to take the time to do that. My daughter took a biology class in college, and the teacher asked her what she had for a microscope. She was able to tell him she had one just like the one they had in college...he was surprised and thought it really cool that she had a spiffy microsope at home. ??? Still not sure it was worth the extra money.

 

The optics are good.

 

The highest power (is the the 40X? I should check but...), is not worth buying, however. The microscope's lack of fine focus just makes it too hard to use. I thought that would be a problem, but then I found out as we worked through the school year that Apologia Biology used that high of a power almost never. For the little we would have missed out on, I did not need to step up.

 

As far as lighting goes, yes, you have to be creative. I have a lamp I set near the filament if I don't have enough light. It isn't as automatic...you have to move the lamp closer or further away or work near a window. Again, for as little as the microscope was really used in high school, I would have been able to deal with it. If I had a child who was doing dozens of microscope labs in high school (and we DID do a lot of units on microscopes over the years) where they had to spend hours adjusting light and needed that extra fine focus on high power, yup, the Brock would not be the best. For our usage, it was just fine!

 

If I were going to buy a microscope today for the kids to use from elementary to high school, I'd still buy the Brock. The difficulties we would encounter with high school labs would not have been worth missing out on what we did outside and with little fingers. If I were going to buy one for high school only and wanted to have the "right" scope, then yes, I'd go back to my Sonlight scope.

 

I think that if I keep only one of them after the school years are over, I'll keep the Brock. It is more versatile and less fragile.

 

FWIW,

Jean

[swainsonshawk]

We've used the brock in a charter school. It was the microscope used by the middle school students. I liked it for its ease of use and durability. I would see no problem buying it.

[melissel]

I haven't tried to read all the posts, but I have both a Brock and the Sonlight microscope that everyone recommended. My daughter was making noise about going into an area of biology/agriculture, so I stepped up tot he Sonlight scope rather than using the Brock through high school. If I had known what I know today, I would not have spent the money.

 

I used the Brock and loved it. We can pick it up and run down to the pond and use it outside without electricity. It is hardy (dropped and survived), and easy to use. Yes, you have to screw and unscrew the lenses, but if you are only using it a few times through high school biology and when the kids are interested in something, I don't think it is that difficult to take the time to do that. My daughter took a biology class in college, and the teacher asked her what she had for a microscope. She was able to tell him she had one just like the one they had in college...he was surprised and thought it really cool that she had a spiffy microsope at home. ??? Still not sure it was worth the extra money.

 

The optics are good.

 

The highest power (is the the 40X? I should check but...), is not worth buying, however. The microscope's lack of fine focus just makes it too hard to use. I thought that would be a problem, but then I found out as we worked through the school year that Apologia Biology used that high of a power almost never. For the little we would have missed out on, I did not need to step up.

 

As far as lighting goes, yes, you have to be creative. I have a lamp I set near the filament if I don't have enough light. It isn't as automatic...you have to move the lamp closer or further away or work near a window. Again, for as little as the microscope was really used in high school, I would have been able to deal with it. If I had a child who was doing dozens of microscope labs in high school (and we DID do a lot of units on microscopes over the years) where they had to spend hours adjusting light and needed that extra fine focus on high power, yup, the Brock would not be the best. For our usage, it was just fine!

 

If I were going to buy a microscope today for the kids to use from elementary to high school, I'd still buy the Brock. The difficulties we would encounter with high school labs would not have been worth missing out on what we did outside and with little fingers. If I were going to buy one for high school only and wanted to have the "right" scope, then yes, I'd go back to my Sonlight scope.

 

I think that if I keep only one of them after the school years are over, I'll keep the Brock. It is more versatile and less fragile.

 

FWIW,

Jean

 

I agree with Jean's and 4evercanucks' reviews. We've had a Brock for years and use it all the time (most recently to examine a moldy tomato and a carpet beetle nymph at shockingly high magnifications *shudder*). I'm not sure what a fine focus knob would add, because our views of these things were crystal clear as it was. The kids find it very simple to slide the tube to focus better. I don't usually need to add an extra light source unless it's a cloudy day or nighttime here, and then I just lay a flashlight on the table near the filament.

 

It would be nice to be able to not have to remove the tube to change lenses, but it's not enough of a hardship that I would forgo the sturdiness of the product and the incredible warranty for it. You definitely do not have to take the specimen off the stage to change lenses. The tube slides upward and out toward you--the specimen stays where it is. You do have to refocus afterward, but if my memory serves, you'd have to do that anyway when you changed magnifications with a conventional microscope, wouldn't you? Maybe just slightly, but even so, it still has to happen.

 

We're happy with our Brock. Like Jean, I'll probably buy something else when our science gets to where we're doing high-level microscope work on a regular basis, but for now, our Brock serves us well. It goes in the yard, on nature walks, on vacations, etc. I don't consider it a toy; I consider it a high-quality microscope in a form kids can use easily and well without having to worry about fragility or power sources.

[Guest]

Wow... and I guess Susan Wise Bauer and Jessie Wise are recommending toy microscopes for our kids for the Logic stage!

 

For those that have the WTM 2004 edition like I do (I am not sure what page number in the previous and later editions), it can be found on page 396 under "Reference Materials for All Four Years" :D.

 

Also, Susan Wise Bauer's name can be seen in the testimonials, in the Brock website here:

 

http://www.magiscope.com/testimonials.htm

 

ETA: This is in response to prior comments made about the Brock in this thread. It is not meant to be taken literally, should anyone read this post without reading the prior posts in this thread ;).

Edited November 10, 2011 by Guest

[Jen500]

Wow... and I guess Susan Wise Bauer and Jessie Wise are recommending toy microscopes for our kids for the Logic stage!

 

For those that have the WTM 2004 edition like I do (I am not sure what page number in the previous and later editions), it can be found on page 396 under "Reference Materials for All Four Years" :D.

 

Also, Susan Wise Bauer's name can be seen in the testimonials, in the Brock website here:

 

http://www.magiscope.com/testimonials.htm

 

No need to get bent out of shape. I :001_wub: SWB but I don't consider her an expert in every subject.

[Guest]

No need to get bent out of shape. I :001_wub: SWB but I don't consider her an expert in every subject.

 

That was not what I was trying to say, but I am sure she researches a product before putting her name in their website or including it in her book ;).