CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

May 2001

CONFOCALMICROSCOPY@LISTS.UMN.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Tom Moninger <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 29 May 2001 16:52:40 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
Wanda,
I won't get into the gory details but I would avoid anything from Zeiss. We
have purchased three 510s and they have had chronic problems with
installation, operation and especially service. The Lieca and the 2 Olympus
scopes are very nice, I have used them all. The Olympus looks even better
when you factor in price. We have three Biorads of various ages and designs
and they work quite well. In fact, the "Zeiss Snobs" that just had to have
the 510s are all using our BioRad 1024 now. Let me know if you want more
detailed info.
Tom

At 03:29 PM 5/29/2001 +0800, you wrote:
>Dear All:
>
>     Our Department are planing to purchase a new confocal microscope. We are
>focusing on Zeiss (LSM 5 Pascal), Leica (TCS SL) and Olympus (FV300/FV500)
>confocal microscope. Your input are immensely appreciated. Please send a
>mail to me directly.
>
>     Thanks in advance for your response,
>
>     Wanda Wang
>     Dept. of Pathology
>     Univ. of Pittsburgh

Thomas Moninger ([log in to unmask])
University of Iowa Central Microscopy Research Facility
View expressed are my own.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2