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

A quick comparison in our lab gave the following:

488 nm (FITC) band of an LED-based light engine (Lumencor): 40 mW
300 W Xenon Sutter illuminator (probably our brightest light source) with FITC EX filter: 70 mW

both measured at the exit of the fiber or light guide.

I agree that LED based light engines are probably at least as good (power-wise) as most lamps, plus they have other benefits. Charts such as the one found here should be a good guide regarding relative power:

http://lumencor.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SpectraX-LE-User-Manual1.pdf


Julio Vazquez, PhD
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
Seattle, WA 98109

http://www.fhcrc.org/en.html




On Nov 5, 2013, at 1:50 PM, Kurt Thorn wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
> 
> My sense is also that the new LED sources are brighter than Hg lamps, except possibly at the very brightest mercury peaks (365, 546 nm).  For GFP, they are for sure brighter.  True LEDs have been somewhat dim in the 560 nm range, which is why Lumencor uses an LED-pumped phosphor for those wavelengths.  This gives very bright 560 emission.
> 
> Kurt
> 
> On 11/5/2013 10:21 AM, Armstrong, Brian wrote:
>> *****
>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
>> *****
>> 
>> Hi Phil I would say that the new LED sources and Light Engines will be brighter than mercury sources. For example I compared an Exfo to a SOLA light engine and the light engine is brighter. The new Lumen Dynamics XLED should provide much better illumination than a mercury source.
>> Hopefully, mercury sources will soon be a thing of the past.
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Brian D Armstrong PhD
>> Associate Research Professor
>> Director, Light Microscopy Core
>> Beckman Research Institute
>> City of Hope
>> Dept of Neuroscience
>> 1450 E Duarte Rd
>> Duarte, CA 91010
>> 626-256-4673 x62872
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Philip Oshel
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 9:57 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Brightness difference Hg vs LED
>> 
>> *****
>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
>> *****
>> 
>> All,
>> 
>> I had this question put to me by a new faculty member, and don't have a
>> ready answer:
>> "Is there a ballpark percentage for how much less bright an LED vs a
>> standard mercury lamp light?"
>> This is for regular epifluorescence, not confocal.
>> 
>> This is in the realm of arm-waving over a picture of beer (a good, dark
>> stout), ignoring brands, how old the Hg bulb is, ex/em cubes, which part
>> of the spectrum is used, and all that. Personally, I'd think the answer
>> is more like, "Doesn't matter, the dimmer system is still too bright to
>> use all the available light and not damage the specimen." But ... ?
>> 
>> Phil