CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

February 2008

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:
Michael Weber <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:53:16 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

Darran,

you are right that this development doesn't fit to all the statements 
from the past. However, I am glad that they finally decided to jump over 
their own shadow and moved to a single pinhole system. It's a pain to 
align multi pinhole systems like the 510, especially if one wants to 
perform serious colocalisation analysis. Moreover, it will be difficult 
to offer a multi pinhole spectral system.

Michael


Darran Clements wrote:
> Search the CONFOCAL archive at
> http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> having just had a look at the schematics of the new Zeiss 710, I have 
> noted the introduction of a brand new "Master" pinhole, and was wondering 
> how everyone would feel about this new Zeiss concept of the "single" 
> pinhole and how that squares with what we've all heard from Zeiss about 
> the matter over the last n number of years.
> 
> all the best
> 
> Darran Clements

ATOM RSS1 RSS2