*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****
Hi Michael,
We have demoed sCMOS cameras from Hamamatsu, Andor, and PCO. I found
that Flash 4 has better sensitivity as compared to Andor or PCO's
cameras. I have been told by Hamamatsu's representative that the
Micro-manager driver is very useable, but it does not handle the top
frame-rate of Flash 4.
We are still undecided and I need to understand a couple of issues
before we make the decision.
For our target application (quantitative imaging and analysis of fast
moving specimens) the rolling shutter-only operation of Flash 4 is an
issue. To investigate the performance of global vs. rolling exposure,
we used Andor's Neo with the same settings in either mode. Here is a
dark-field image of an intact sea urchin sperm beating at about 30
waveforms per second:
http://www.mshalin.com/interesting-data/GlobalvsRollingShutter.png
From the images and intensity profiles we see that rolling shutter
introduces motion artifacts such as skew in the shape of head and
flagellum waveform in vertical direction. But, rolling exposure has
visibly better sensitivity and SNR.
I still don't understand the following completely. All inputs from
community and manufacturers will be appreciated.
a) How does global exposure work in Andor and PCO cameras? What
sources of noise have increased contribution when doing global
exposure?
b) For any camera in rolling shutter mode, we can achieve global
exposure by strobing the light-source (such as LED or laser) so that
* the specimen is illuminated right after all the pixels have been
rolled active
* the source is turned-off right before the pixels are read out in
rolling fashion
The cameras take about 10 ms 'to roll the full chip'. So if we set the
exposure to desired global exposure + 20ms and strobe as above, it
seems we again have global exposure. Will noise be any better with
this custom arrangement?
Thanks,
Shalin
website: http://mshalin.com
(office) Lillie 110, (ph) 508-289-7374.
HFSP Postdoctoral Fellow,
Marine Biological Laboratory,
7 MBL Street, Woods Hole MA 02543, USA
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Cammer, Michael
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> We demoed an Andor Neo camera a few weeks ago and was very impressed with it. We couldnt quite get the sensitivity needed for single molecule imaging but were very impressed by its other features. We'd like to get a camera with these capabilities that we may use both with Nikon Elements on one microscope and with MicroManager on another (currently one microscope has a DU897 and we want ta bigger field and wider dynamic range of view for some applications and the other has decade old Orca ER).
>
> Two part question.
>
> 1. Is anyone developing a driver for MicroManager that will take advantage of this camera's many many features?
>
> 2. While we really liked the Andor Neo, does anybody have data or feelings that other sCMOS cameras out there are better-- keeping in mind that drivers for both software packages is also important.
>
> Thank you!!
>
> _________________________________________
> Michael Cammer, Assistant Research Scientist
> Skirball Institute of Biomolecular Medicine
> Lab: (212) 263-3208 Cell: (914) 309-3270
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
> _______________________________________________
> micro-manager-general mailing list
> [log in to unmask]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/micro-manager-general
|
