Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 3 Jul 2014 15:58:07 +0000 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
*****
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.
*****
Thank you, that's very helpful. I wonder whether Cargille is reading this posting :-)
Judy
-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hillary Guzik
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 11:36 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: immersion oil
*****
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.
*****
We actually just ran into this problem at out lab as well. We found that the cargille
has a strong moth ball like odor. The general consensus was that we could not deal
with the odor. The closest oil that cargille carries with out the odor has background
fluorescence. After our test (with confocal and widefield / on multiple brand
microscope (zeiss, olympus, and leica) ) we found that the zeiss oil has the best
performance overall for all of the microscope. We did not have leica oil to test. We
tested the delta vision, zeiss, olympus, and two cargille oils.
Hope this helps.
|
|
|