CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

June 2013

CONFOCALMICROSCOPY@LISTS.UMN.EDU

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

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Craig Brideau <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 28 Jun 2013 11:18:45 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (37 lines)
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****

There will be quite a bit of power loss through the objective, depending on
your magnification and numerical aperture.  You really should measure the
power after the objective, if possible.

Craig


On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 6:07 AM, Christophe Leterrier <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> Dear microscopists,
>
> I'm sure this is quite a stupid question. I keep seeing laser power
> expressed as W/cm2 or kW/cm2 in super-resolution articles. I have a laser
> for which I know the power out of the coupling fiber (let's say 50 mW),
> that I use to illuminate the full field of a 100X, NA 1.49 objective
> (similar to a TIRF laser setup, but not inclined). How can I estimate the
> power density on the sample, assuming that there is no power loss in the
> objective? It looks like I need to know the field of view area, but I'm not
> sure what surface is actually illuminated : it is at least as large as the
> ocular field of view, but could it be larger?
>
> Thanks for your help,
>
> Christophe
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2