CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

March 2013

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
Sender:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 4 Mar 2013 08:00:38 -0800
Reply-To:
David Baddeley <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From:
David Baddeley <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (52 lines)
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****

A DSLR and some L-series glass might also do the trick, at somewhat more cost than a coolpix, but probably still less than a specialised scientific offering. Canon and Nikon both have SDKs if you want to control from the computer, although they are pretty messy and would incur a fair bit of pain before you got anything working (I had a look at the canon SDK last year, and concluded it'd be a ~ 2 week job to get it working nicely). That said, the remote control software that they come with isn't half bad, and we used one of them extensively as a sighting camera on the side port of one of our microscopes. If only they offered monochrome sensors ..., then again with 18+ Mpixels you might be able to get away with just binning. Are you looking to do fluorescence, or just brightfield/transmitted? The commercial DSLRs also tend to have IR blocking filters which make them pretty useless in the far red, although there are a couple of outfits which sell modified
 cameras where they've removed the filter. There are also a few tales on the web of people removing the bayer mask from a DSLR to get a monochrome chip, but you unfortunately have to remove the microlenses first to get there. If you have a good light budget, and are prepared to sacrifice one camera to experience it might just work. 

Best wishes,
David 


________________________________
 From: Guy Cox <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] 
Sent: Sunday, 3 March 2013 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: Cheap scope components
 
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****

Sounds to me like you need a camera rather than a microscope.  I recently bought a Nikon Coolpix L310 which when set on macro will easily get down to 2x2 cm.  It has a 21x zoom range and has 14 MP.  Cost $149.  

                                                           Guy



---Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Andrew York
Sent: Monday, 4 March 2013 2:59 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Cheap scope components

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

I'm looking for some advice about buying or building my own low-mag brightfield microscope. I want the following capabilities:

* Brightfield illumination
* Cheap ccd or cmos camera with as many pixels as possible (>10 MP ideally), no eyepieces required, acquiring to a computer.
* Large field of view, ~2x2 cm
* Adjustable zoom would be nice, over a moderate range (maybe a factor of 4)
* Resolution limited by camera pixel size rather than aberrations or diffraction (if possible)
* Manual controls, no automation required in the optics
* Room between the objective and the tube lens for a dichroic, which I might want to insert later, for free-space coupling of illumination beams.

Is there an obvious commercial solution that is good and cheap? If not, any advice on where to buy the components is appreciated.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2