CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

May 2009

CONFOCALMICROSCOPY@LISTS.UMN.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3)
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Date:
Thu, 28 May 2009 21:25:50 +0200
Reply-To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Adrian Smith <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
On 26/05/2009, at 4:15 AM, Stephen Cody wrote:

> It is true that the upright microscope multiphoton system at the  
> Ludwig is tuned to fill the back aperture of the 20x 0.95na dipping  
> lens. This was done at installation by fitting and testing with a  
> custom set of lenses for the lens of our choice. I just want to  
> clarify that Olympus could always optimise their system for any  
> objective at the time of installation. I think from memory I chose  
> the 60x WI with cover slip correction for the inverted.


So, the question still stands - has anyone directly tested the older  
20x dipping lens (with tuning to fill the back aperture) against the  
new 25x? (and is allowed to share the data?)

Apparently a theoretical question for those of with existing systems  
but of interest none the less :)

Steve (or Cameron) - you might also be able to comment of the  
performance of the Olympus system with the pre-chirp on the DeepSee on/ 
off (assuming you can turn the compensation off?)


Regards,
Adrian Smith, Centenary Institute

ATOM RSS1 RSS2