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

 >The exact coverslip thickness is much less important on oil-embedded
 >and immersed specimens.

another thing to be aware of, regarding many general statements about 
resolution, coverslips, and oil immersion:
only true if you work at the right temperature !
Oil changes refraction index with temperature - a lot - and this will drop 
your resolution to about the half under quite usual conditions (e.g. about 
28°C in summer - I am not sure about exact numbers, the specialist here 
know). I think, many people are not aware of that, so I just wanted to 
mention (in non air-conditioned rooms, often it may be an advantage when 
using water+correction, compared to oil+no correction, I think)
Arthur
*************
At 19:45 10.06.2005, you wrote:
>Search the CONFOCAL archive at
>http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>
>Personally, if I'm doing anything that matters (ie
>not using either oil or very low mag) I use a lens
>with a correction collar.  And I take the trouble to
>set it correctly!  The difference I get between a
>normal .75 NA plan fluorite and a .95NA plan apo
>is enormous, and it's not the improvement in NA, nor
>the better colour correction, it's the ability to
>correct SA.  Quicker, easier and more accurate than
>measuring coverslips.  Well worth the cost (which in
>any case is minor if ordered as part of the original
>microscope)
>                                    Guy
>
> > As slight topic drift here but... In general do people bother to measure
> > every coverslip with a micrometer before you use it or do people do
> > something else, eg. measure a few from a box, or assume that #1.5 are
> > 170um?
>  Ian


Dr. Arthur Schuessler
Institute of Botany, FB10, TU Darmstadt
Schnittspahnstrasse 10
D-64287 Darmstadt
GERMANY

Fax: ++49 1212 66151 164568 or +49 6151 164630
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
http://www.geosiphon.de/
http://amf-phylogeny.com/