*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

I see far-red single-photon confocal as potentially more economical than
2-photon for 'somewhat thick' samples. If you are doing thick brain slices,
perhaps on the order of 200-400um, then a far-red confocal might get the
job done with a laser that costs a fraction of a Ti:Saph. If you are trying
to do imaging into whole organs or live animals though then you probably
want 2-photon.

Craig

On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Michael Giacomelli <[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
> Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> I think its hard to give one answer to this question.  The main
> advantage of multiphoton is the ability to image thick samples with
> less scattering and very little out of plane excitation.  For an
> application like imaging 3D samples (tissue, 3d culture, etc),
> multiphoton will likely work better because there is no out of plane
> excitation.  For cell monolayer samples, that really does not matter,
> and one photon excitation will have the advantage that you do not
> damage the sample via higher order nonlinear processes.
>
> Mike
>