*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

 I use the pco edge 5.5 and the pco edge 4.2, and other members of my lab
use the Hamamatsu 4.2. They're all great cameras. The major difference for
me between the pco and the Hamamatsu is that the pco SDK is freely
available:
http://www.pco.de/fileadmin/user_upload/db/download/MA_DCSDKWINE_114.pdf
which allows me to write and publish code that talks to the pco camera.

 The Hamamatsu SDK costs extra, and prohibits us from sharing code we write
that talks to Hamamatsu cameras. This was a dealbreaker for me, so we
complained to Hamamatsu. They were pretty cool about it, listened to our
concerns, and worked out an acceptable solution. However, this process took
too long and I didn't want to delay my project, so I'm using a pco 4.2 now.
Other members of my lab had already bought Hamamatsu cameras and they're
stuck using labview to control them.

 My understanding is that the lower QE of the 5.5 chip is (part of) a
feature, not a bug: you can have 5 transistors, lower QE, and choice of
'global' or 'rolling' shutter, or you can have 4 transistors, higher QE,
and only 'rolling' shutter. Rolling shutter operation requires you to use
pulsed, synchronized illumination, but is also lower noise, so we always
use rolling shutter on the 5.5. If you don't use pulsed illumination, you
get an effective 'blurring' in time across your chip. Since the whole point
of an sCMOS is to go fast, it seems silly to me to use continuous
illumination with rolling shutter in most cases. Of course, if you do use
pulsed illumination, your illumination duty cycle goes down (to zero at top
speed!)

I have no experience with Andor's sCMOS, and would be curious to hear how
they compare. Cooling? Does that matter at high speeds? Kurt Thorn has
written about them:
http://nic.ucsf.edu/blog/?p=464
I'm not sure if he's used comparable pco or Hamamatsu versions.


On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Emmanuel Levy <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> Dear All,
>
> We intend to buy a spinning disk confocal microscope and we are therefore
> looking for the best camera to suit our need.
>
> The main use will be imaging of fluorescently tagged proteins expressed in
> live cells.
>
> One thing is certain, we will buy a sCMOS, but we are unsure of which one
> is best.
>
> For a while, it is my understanding that the Hamamatsu Flash4 V2 was the
> best - but couple of month ago the same chip has been used in the Zyla 4.2
> (Andor) and in the PCO Edge 4.2.
>
> All of them exhibit highly similar characteristics, with QE ~70%, low read
> noise, 100fps with full chip, etc.
>
> I guess the only way to see what exactly are the advantages/drawbacks would
> be to use them in the same setup and compare them side by side.
> Unfortunately I cannot do that and therefore I'd be happy to hear about any
> experience you have.
>
> I insist that only the late models should be compared (released in the fall
> of 2013 I believe). If you have had a bad experience with previous models
> (e.g., Andor Neo), it does not apply here.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Emmanuel
>