Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

I recently had a demo of the CARV system which was quite impressive
and raised an interesting question that I had not considered before.
The major difference I see between the CARV and the other systems is
the microlens dual disk in the Yokogowa scan head that Perkin Elmer
and Solamere use.  However, the CARV people pointed out to me that
the lenses only function in the excitation path.  Since we are always
reducing the light as much as possible in order to keep cells alive,
this should be (and my limited experience agrees) a non-issue.  Also,
since the CARV uses an arc source, you don't have the limitations of
the laser lines, nor the expense.  The question is, am I missing
something here as to why the Perkin Elmer system should be in any way
superior to the CARV system, given equivalent CCD cameras?  Thanks-
Dave
--

Dr. David Knecht
Department of Molecular and Cell Biology
University of Connecticut
91 N. Eagleville Rd.   U-3125
Storrs, CT 06269-3125
[log in to unmask]
860-486-2200      860-486-4331 (fax)
home page: http://www.sp.uconn.edu/~mcbstaff/knecht/knecht.html