*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****

Pardon if this is an ignorant question--why simultaneous scanning, when 
sequential scanning is likely to be what the users want to avoid 
bleedthrough?

In either case, my preference here would be to have each system demo'ed 
in my facility for 3-4 days. We own the FV1000 for three years now, and 
it works very well for what you describe.  What little of the C2 I've 
seen since Nikon integrated the software on the C2 (after we made our 
purchase) is also very good.  But you and the other users should get a 
chance to compare the two systems in daily operation.
Julian

On 1/28/11 3:00 AM, Martin Wessendorf wrote:
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> Dear Dr. Spenser--
>
> On 1/27/2011 7:19 PM, Kathryn Spencer wrote:
>
>>          I'm in a quandary. We are looking at getting an additional 
>> confocal system in our core (we have the FV500). We're looking at 
>> either the Olympus FV1000 or the Nikon C2. Both companies have been 
>> very, very aggressive in pricing and components, to where our two 
>> quotes are essentially identical. Same lasers, same PMTs, same 
>> multi-dimensional acquisition.
>>          This system would be used 95% for fixed tissue imaging, some 
>> cells. Moderately to highly sophisticated users. No real FRAPing or 
>> uncaging, or other modalities than simple, multi-color fluorescence 
>> Z-stacks.
>>          Service from both companies is exemplary, and has been over 
>> the years. We are so fortunate to have other additional systems to 
>> meet other imaging needs, so I am not concerned about expandability, 
>> or future capabilities.
>>          What a fabulous quandary to have. Which system is better? 
>> I've talked to users on both sides, who are completely satisfied with 
>> their choice.
>>          Recommendations? Which one out-performs the other? Honestly, 
>> that will be the difference. Which has better signal to noise? Which 
>> has faster scans?
>>          Thanks.
>
> Given your use for the instrument (--i.e. multicolor z-stacks) and the 
> recent discussions on this list about chromatic aberration, I would 
> suggest testing for chromatic correction before buying.  That could be 
> done either with tetraspec beads, or by doing a 3- (or 4-) color 
> reflectance scan off a mirror.  In either case you'll want to collect 
> your images using simultaneous (not sequential) scanning.
>
> If you do this, let us know what you see!
>
> Martin
>


-- 
Julian P.S. Smith III
Director, Winthrop Microscopy Facility
Dept. of Biology
Winthrop University
520 Cherry Rd.
Rock Hill, SC  29733

803-323-2111 x6427 (vox)
803-323-3448 (fax)
803-524-2347 (cell)
Research Website www.birdnest.org/smithj
Personal Website www.rociada-east.net