Desmid

I’m not really a good source for equipment advice. I am familiar with the names of the more prominent manufacturers but have no first hand knowledge of their relative merits. Many suggest buying used ones on Ebay but that stuff scares me.

I have both a compound and stereo microscopes. The compound is a Leica CME which is considered to be a university level (medical student) instrument. New price is around $1,500 if you stick with the standard setup (I didn’t). But my big leap came two weeks ago when I upgraded my camera to a Moticam 10 Megapixel which costs nearly as much as the microscope itself.

Well I did a search for some microscopes and was surprised at their cost, very affordable. Not sure a stereoscope will satisfy my curiosity, since I want to examine fungal spores. Although at some prices I saw, could afford both. :)
I was curious what kind of set up you have, and if there is any microscopes on the low end you would suggest?

Chesterbperry ... Microscopes are great. If you give it more thought don't underestimate a stereo dissecting microscope. At 20-30x you can see wonders, no specimen preparation is needed, and you don't lose the "identity" of your subject.

Indeed they can, the fungi are not much easier. I am considering getting myself a microscope, had one when I was younger.

I see that you have already received an answer from another spotter. Mosses, lichens, liverworts and hornworts can make your head spin when you are trying to get them ID'd.

Thank you for educating me Elton, I guess the microscopic algae is more your expertise, but could you tell me if this, http://www.projectnoah.org/spottings/179..., is an algae?

In the ever changing world of taxonomy - although algae conduct photosynthesis they are unicellular and do not have specialized tissues. Therefore, most authoritative literature (which does not include Wikipedia) now place them in the Kingdom Protista. (But ask me again in a couple of weeks.)

Should this not be included in plants?