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

Yes, sorry for my mistake about the Olympus system, which
Adrian also pointed out.  But the purpose of my post was
to highlight the difference between the technologies, not
to promote any specific make.

A further point that needs to be made is that Nyquist
applies to spectra too.  So to say that the Zeiss has
10nm resolution is not quite true if it has 10nm per
channel.  This means it has 23 nm resolution.  So with
a Leica, if you set the slit to 5nm (minimum value on an
SP2) you must set the step to 2nm to collect a spectrum
with a true 5nm resolution (and the same would apply to
the Olympus).

Having said all this I agree completely about the relative
merits of the two technologies.

                                                   Guy

> Actually, the Olympus FluoView 1000 does not use a 32-channel PMT array
> for
> spectral detection but slits similar to the Leica system. It differs from
> the Leica in that it uses reflective gratings instead of prisms.
>
> In my opinion, the slit-based spectral systems are great if you want to do
> confocal spectrometry. If you are rather interested in spectral imaging
> for
> spectral deconvolution, I think the PMT array based systems have the
> advantage because of the increased speed.
>
> The Zeiss LSM510 Meta uses a fixed grid with 10 nm resolution. The Nikon
> EZC1si uses 3 gratings with 2.5nm, 5nm and 10nm resolution. In addition
> you
> can create your own spectral imaging windows by combining any of the PMT
> elements. A particularly nice feature of the Nikon is that it corrects for
> differences in sensitivity between the PMT elements to allow to capture
> real
> spectra. In addition, as already mentioned before, the Nikon uses the
> 'DEES'
> system to combine the S and P polarized light for enhanced sensitivity.
>
> With regard to the spectral resolution, last year I did several demo's and
> all systems were very well capable of deconvolving the test spectra (with
> maxima less than 10 nm apart!), even the Zeiss system which in principle
> has
> the worst resolution. I was very surprised by this result. Therefore, my
> advice in this respect is not to get blinded by spectral resolution
> numbers
> if you just want to do spectral deconvolution.
>
> The Zeiss LSM has the advantage of being completely automated and
> controllable through the software. This might be an important
> consideration
> for a microscopy facility with lots of visitors where instruments can be
> used safely as a black-box system. I also find the Zeiss software very
> well
> constructed and easy to use. I like the Nikon confocal software too but it
> hasn't matured as much yet and some smaller issues still need to be
> resolved.
>
> Also take the quality of your local sales and technical support team into
> account. I find it very important that you can really count on your
> representative.
>
> Good luck with your choice!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Kevin
>
> Kevin Braeckmans, Ph.D.
> Lab. General Biochemistry & Physical Pharmacy
> Ghent University
> Harelbekestraat 72
> 9000 Ghent
> Belgium
> Tel: +32 (0)9 264.80.78
> Fax: +32 (0)9 264.81.89
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>
>
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: Confocal Microscopy List
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Namens Guy Cox
>> Verzonden: donderdag 16 november 2006 1:20
>> Aan: [log in to unmask]
>> Onderwerp: Re: General purpose (spectral?) confocal system
>>
>> Search the CONFOCAL archive at
>> http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>>
>> There is one fundamental difference between spectral systems.
>>
>> Systems that use the 32-channel PMT array (Zeiss, Nikon,
>> Olympus) can generate a full spectral image very quickly but
>> at low resolution.  On some you can get higher resolution by
>> putting only part of the spectrum on the PMT array (but I
>> don't think Zeiss have this option).  The PMT array is less
>> sensitive than conventional PMTs so for difficult specimens
>> you have to go back to filter-based detection.
>>
>> The knife-edge mirror approach (only Leica to my knowledge)
>> uses conventional PMTs which means that filters are abolished
>> and you can collect exactly the spectral region you want
>> without trade-offs.  You can also collect a very high
>> resolution spectral image, but downside is that it takes a
>> long time (like, go out to lunch while it's collecting if you
>> want ultimate quality).
>>
>> So it's horses for courses and you need to decide what best
>> fits your application(s).
>>
>> 						Guy
>>
>> Adrian Smith wrote:
>> > Search the CONFOCAL archive at
>> > http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>> >
>> > Dear all,
>> >
>> > You probably noticed my previous email asking for comments
>> on multi-
>> > photon systems. We are also considering the purchase a conventional
>> > confocal system (on an inverted microscope) for use in a multi-user
>> > facility, ie there are large range of general applications
>> envisaged
>> > but none particularly specialized. I do have some users keen on
>> > getting into some FRET work and spectral capabilities are
>> attractive.
>> >
>> > After looking through all the sales material and seeing several
>> > systems (including having some in-house demo units) I'm
>> struggling to
>> > make meaningful distinctions between the major manufacturers so I'm
>> > particularly keen to hear why people have chosen particular systems
>> > over others? Are there particular features that are
>> compelling under
>> > some circumstances (and what are those circumstances?) or
>> does price
>> > and service have the major bearing?
>> >
>> > At this stage we are still open to (almost) all possibilities.
>> >
>> > I look forward to some interesting responses.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Adrian Smith
>> > Manager, Cytometry Facility,
>> > Centenary Institute, Sydney, Australia
>>
>> --
>> ______________________________________________
>> Associate Professor Guy Cox, MA, DPhil(Oxon) Electron
>> Microscope Unit, Madsen Building F09, University of Sydney,
>> NSW 2006 ______________________________________________
>> Phone +61 2 9351 3176     Fax +61 2 9351 7682
>> Mobile 0413 281 861
>> ______________________________________________
>> http://www.guycox.net
>>
>


-- 
Associate Professor Guy Cox
Electron Microscope Unit,
University of Sydney,
NSW 2006, Australia

Phone:+61 2 9351 3176    Fax:+61 2 9351 7682
http://www.guycox.net