CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

January 1998

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]>
Subject:
From:
"Schibler, Matthew" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 20 Jan 1998 19:07:34 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (68 lines)
I have been running a 488/514 argon laser and a 543 Helium neon
combination for five years in one institution on a Zeiss LSM 410 and a
second set (same combination) for one year at another institution (on a
Zeiss LSM 310) after it was used for two years by another group.  So far
I have not had any problems.

I have not used a 633 nm laser.

My understanding about these lasers is that an argon laser can last from
2000-4000 hrs with proper care and that the helium-neon lasers (which
are comparatively low power) can last up to 10,000 hrs.

Hope this helps.

Matthew J. Schibler Ph.D.
UCLA Brain Research Institute
73-384 CHS 951761
Los Angeles, CA  90095-1761

(310) 825-9783
FAX (310) 206-5855
E-mail:  [log in to unmask]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anthony G Moss [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 1998 4:31 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: how long should a laser last?
>
> I remain mystified by the confocal manufacturer's approach to this.
> Would
> it not ALWAYS be better to have long laser life (don't answer
> obviously
> rhetorical) so isn't there a better way than having the short-lived
> Kr-Ar
> laser, even if it is nifty to use?  So much wasted time and effort
> with the KrAr combo ..... using 2 lasers seems better to me, the
> long-lived Ar ion for 488/512 and a second long-lived laser (HeNe ?)
> for
> the 543, 633 lines.  At least I'm given to believe they are both
> long-lived.
>
> Even though there could be some difficulty with getting the two lasers
> aligned, and perhaps with colocalization, it should be a reasonable
> and solvable problem for all confocal manufacturers, I would think.
> Zeiss did this with one of their scopes; I don't know the success
> situation with their scope; I noticed their name mentioned in the last
> discussion.  Any comment from Zeiss confocalists withthis combination?
>
> **********************************************************************
> ***
> *
> *
> *       Anthony Moss                    voice  (334)844-9257
> *
> *       101 Cary Hall                   fax    (334)844-4065
> *
> *       Zoology and Wildlife Science    email  [log in to unmask]
> *
> *       Auburn University
> *
> *       Auburn, AL 36849
> *
> *
> *
> **********************************************************************
> ***

ATOM RSS1 RSS2