FW: Deconvolve 1.42 (Components Setup now OK)
Locked
12
12
|
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
To All,
- Setup did not
register components correctly - fixed
Deconvolve is a windowsXP/2000/2003 program
that performs batch
restorations of 3D/2D confocal and widefield fluorescence images using Huygens2
from ©<A title="blocked::http://www.svi.nl/ http://www.svi.nl/"
href="blocked::http://www.svi.nl/" target=_blank>SVI on a remote computer.
The program supports 1 or
3 channels 2D/3D ICS (version1) and 1 or 3 channels 2D/3D TIFF files both
in 8 or 16 bits per channel.
Remote operation is done with
a SSH or Telnet connecting. File
transfer can be SFTP, FTP or
SMB/Samba.
At my lab,
this progam is already been
used for years, we use Hugens2 for more then 10
years.
You can download it
from:
<A
title="blocked::http://software.ronhoebe.net/ http://software.ronhoebe.net/"
href="blocked::http://software.ronhoebe.net/">http://software.ronhoebe.net
Look for the program
"Deconvolve". Huygens2 from SVI can be obtained from:
<A
title="blocked::http://www.svi.nl/ http://www.svi.nl/"
href="blocked::http://www.svi.nl/">http://www.svi.nl
Please mail me with, suggestions and when reporting bugs.
Ron Hoebe
P.S. This program is
Public domain (see
comments on the website).
OpenSSH (Includes SSH and SFTP) for
windows
<A
title="blocked::http://www.itefix.no/phpws/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=12&MMN_position=149:149 http://www.itefix.no/phpws/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=12&MMN_position=149:149"
href="blocked::http://www.itefix.no/phpws/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=12&MMN_position=149:149">http://www.itefix.no/phpws/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=12&MMN_position=149:149
<A title="blocked::http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=69227&package_id=127780 http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=69227&package_id=127780" href="blocked::http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=69227&package_id=127780">http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=69227&package_id=127780 |
|
|
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Has anyone replaced the mercury illuminator on an Olympus IX-81 with a non-arc source such as metal-halogen or LED? I'm looking for experiences regarding reliability, operational cost and performance on a laser scanning confocal installation. Off-line commercial responses are welcome. Thanks, Glen Glen MacDonald Core for Communication Research Virginia Merrill Bloedel Hearing Research Center Box 357923 University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-7923 USA (206) 616-4156 [hidden email] ************************************************************************ ****** The box said "Requires WindowsXP or better", so I bought a Macintosh. ************************************************************************ ****** |
|
|
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal We looked somewhat into using LEDs as general purpose fluorescence and illumination lamps a while back. It basically boils down to the wavelengths you need to access with your lamp. A white LED will get much of the visible spectrum, for instance, but if you are imaging something with a UV-responsive dye you will need a different LED. Craig On 11/5/07, Glen MacDonald <[hidden email]> wrote: > Search the CONFOCAL archive at > http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal > > Has anyone replaced the mercury illuminator on an Olympus IX-81 with > a non-arc source such as metal-halogen or LED? I'm looking for > experiences regarding reliability, operational cost and performance > on a laser scanning confocal installation. > > Off-line commercial responses are welcome. > Thanks, > Glen > > > > Glen MacDonald > Core for Communication Research > Virginia Merrill Bloedel Hearing Research Center > Box 357923 > University of Washington > Seattle, WA 98195-7923 USA > (206) 616-4156 > [hidden email] > > ************************************************************************ > ****** > The box said "Requires WindowsXP or better", so I bought a Macintosh. > ************************************************************************ > ****** > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Glen MacDonald-2
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
=
Hi Glen, Not an Olympus IX-81, but we have an EXFO 120W high-pressure mercury halide lamp for viewing fluorescence on a Zeiss LSM (Axiovert 200 stand). We like this lamp for several reasons: 1,000-1,5000 lifetime (typically, one lamp lasts 8-12 months; power starts to decline after ~ 1,000 hours, but lamp remains useable until about 1,500 hours), easy to install and does not require alignment, quite bright, built-in aperture that allows to control illumination intensity, removes heat source away from microscope (lamp is located inside power supply module and channeled through a fiber into the microscope), built-in safety device prevents turning lamp ON while still hot. We have not used this lamp for imaging, so I don't know if it is as bright or stable as a conventional mercury lamp, but it does look quite bright to me. We normally set the lamp aperture to 1-2 (out of five, with five being the brightest setting) for viewing samples. In terms of stability, it does show a decline over time, especially past 1,000 hours. The system is maybe ~ $ 2,000 more than conventional mercury lamp system at purchase. Lamps cost about $ 650.00, that is about $ 0.50 / hour... in the same ballpark as mercury lamps Also, I should mention that Applied Precision now report using a 250 W Xenon lamp on their DeltaVision system. Don't know any specifics, but I suppose they saw advantages compared to the HBO lamp. Julio. -- Julio Vazquez Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle, WA 98109-1024 On Nov 5, 2007, at 11:02 AM, Glen MacDonald wrote:
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Glen MacDonald-2
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Hi Glen, My thesis project involves modification of a fluorescence microscope for a specialized type of measurement, and as such I'm usually ordering optical prototyping equipment from Thorlabs. I noticed recently they've introduced full LED microscope illumination attachments which can fit to the back epi-illumination port of microscopes made by all of the major microscope manufacturers. I've never had the chance to try them, so I can't comment on how well they light up a sample. They might be worth checking out though. Here's the link: http://www.thorlabs.com/NewGroupPage9.cfm? ObjectGroup_ID=2615&visNavID=223 John Oreopoulos, BSc, PhD Candidate University of Toronto Institute For Biomaterials and Biomedical Engineering Centre For Studies in Molecular Imaging Tel: W:416-946-5022 On 5-Nov-07, at 2:02 PM, Glen MacDonald wrote: > Search the CONFOCAL archive at > http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal > > Has anyone replaced the mercury illuminator on an Olympus IX-81 > with a non-arc source such as metal-halogen or LED? I'm looking > for experiences regarding reliability, operational cost and > performance on a laser scanning confocal installation. > > Off-line commercial responses are welcome. > Thanks, > Glen > > > > Glen MacDonald > Core for Communication Research > Virginia Merrill Bloedel Hearing Research Center > Box 357923 > University of Washington > Seattle, WA 98195-7923 USA > (206) 616-4156 > [hidden email] > > ********************************************************************** > ******** > The box said "Requires WindowsXP or better", so I bought a Macintosh. > ********************************************************************** > ******** |
 
|
Gary Laevsky-2 |
Re: Non-arc source for IX-81 COMMERCIAL RESPONSE
|
|
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Hello All, Andor Technology sells the Cairn LEDs (http://www.cairnweb.com/newsletter/optoled.html). They provide the following wavelengths as indicated on the attached 370nm - ultraviolet 400nm - ultraviolet/blue 455nm - royal blue 470nm - blue 505nm - cyan 530nm - green 590nm - amber 617nm - red/orange 627nm - red Our cameras and acquisition/processing software have the ability to modulate the wavelengths. Please feel free to contact me with any additional questions. Best, Gary Laevsky, Ph.D. Imaging Application Specialist Andor Technology discover new ways of seeing [hidden email] Cell (774) 291 - 9992 Office (860) 290 - 9211 x219 Fax (860) 290 - 9566 Web: www.andor.com -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of John Oreopoulos Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 3:32 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Non-arc source for IX-81 Search the CONFOCAL archive at http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Hi Glen, My thesis project involves modification of a fluorescence microscope for a specialized type of measurement, and as such I'm usually ordering optical prototyping equipment from Thorlabs. I noticed recently they've introduced full LED microscope illumination attachments which can fit to the back epi-illumination port of microscopes made by all of the major microscope manufacturers. I've never had the chance to try them, so I can't comment on how well they light up a sample. They might be worth checking out though. Here's the link: http://www.thorlabs.com/NewGroupPage9.cfm? ObjectGroup_ID=2615&visNavID=223 John Oreopoulos, BSc, PhD Candidate University of Toronto Institute For Biomaterials and Biomedical Engineering Centre For Studies in Molecular Imaging Tel: W:416-946-5022 On 5-Nov-07, at 2:02 PM, Glen MacDonald wrote: > Search the CONFOCAL archive at > http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal > > Has anyone replaced the mercury illuminator on an Olympus IX-81 > with a non-arc source such as metal-halogen or LED? I'm looking > for experiences regarding reliability, operational cost and > performance on a laser scanning confocal installation. > > Off-line commercial responses are welcome. > Thanks, > Glen > > > > Glen MacDonald > Core for Communication Research > Virginia Merrill Bloedel Hearing Research Center > Box 357923 > University of Washington > Seattle, WA 98195-7923 USA > (206) 616-4156 > [hidden email] > > ********************************************************************** > ******** > The box said "Requires WindowsXP or better", so I bought a Macintosh. > ********************************************************************** > ******** |
|
|
Gerard Whoriskey-3 |
Re: Non-arc source for IX-81
|
|
In reply to this post by Glen MacDonald-2
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Hi Glen, The argument for LED systems is very strong on reliability and operational costs and is continually improving with regard to performance, measured in choice of wavelengths and intensity. I assume that in your confocal set-up you are only using the mercury based bulb system to check and align samples and that you only need excitation regions that match the laser lines you are using. An LED system that you can switch on and off as you please is ideal for such applications and a very cost effective replacement to bulbs. Commercial bit: We have only recently included 445nm and 505nm options to our range. Now users can choose from 7 options of 400nm, 445nm, 465nm, 505nm, 525nm, 595nm, and 635nm. I will contact you directly with more commercial information. Best Regards, Gerry Gerard Whoriskey Development Engineer CoolLED Ltd CIL House Charlton Road Andover Hampshire SP10 3JL Mob: 07789535762 Tel: +44 (0) 1264 321321 Dir: +44 (0)1264 320984 web site: www.coolled.com |
|
|
F Javier Díez Guerra |
Re: Non-arc source for IX-81
|
|
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Hi, I find LED-based illumination an important advance for fluorescence microscopy. For in vivo work, I guess that LED-based systems will be more popular when existing "LED lines" more precisely match excitation maxima of currently used fluorescent proteins, especially CyanFP. best regards, At 15:02 06/11/2007, you wrote: >Search the CONFOCAL archive at >http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal > >Hi Glen, >The argument for LED systems is very strong on reliability and operational >costs and is continually improving with regard to performance, measured in >choice of wavelengths and intensity. >I assume that in your confocal set-up you are only using the mercury based >bulb system to check and align samples and that you only need excitation >regions that match the laser lines you are using. An LED system that you >can switch on and off as you please is ideal for such applications and a >very cost effective replacement to bulbs. >Commercial bit: >We have only recently included 445nm and 505nm options to our range. Now >users can choose from 7 options of 400nm, 445nm, 465nm, 505nm, 525nm, >595nm, and 635nm. >I will contact you directly with more commercial information. > >Best Regards, > >Gerry > >Gerard Whoriskey >Development Engineer >CoolLED Ltd >CIL House >Charlton Road >Andover >Hampshire >SP10 3JL > >Mob: 07789535762 >Tel: +44 (0) 1264 321321 >Dir: +44 (0)1264 320984 >web site: www.coolled.com F Javier Diez-Guerra, PhD Profesor Titular Centro de Biologia Molecular Severo Ochoa Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Autónoma Ctra Colmenar Viejo Km 15 Cantoblanco, 28049 Madrid SPAIN phone: +34 91 196 4612 e-mail: [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Glen MacDonald-2
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Hi Glen, We have replaced the arc-lamps on 2 of our facilities Zeiss confocals now 6 month ago by the CoolLED Ltd solution. We use 400nm, 465nm, and 525nm, and it works well (no complaints from users so far). We modified the filtercubes to have max ex efficiency. I understood CoolLEDs are also sold with Olympus adapters. cheers, jens --- Dr. Jens Rietdorf Head Microscopy Novartis Research Foundation Friedrich-Miescher-Institute, wro1066.2.32 Maulbeerstr.66, CH-4058 Basel, Switzerland phone +41(61)69-75172 mobil +41 798284737 Email:rietdorf(at)fmi.ch -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Glen MacDonald Sent: Montag, 5. November 2007 20:02 To: [hidden email] Subject: Non-arc source for IX-81 Search the CONFOCAL archive at http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Has anyone replaced the mercury illuminator on an Olympus IX-81 with a non-arc source such as metal-halogen or LED? I'm looking for experiences regarding reliability, operational cost and performance on a laser scanning confocal installation. Off-line commercial responses are welcome. Thanks, Glen Glen MacDonald Core for Communication Research Virginia Merrill Bloedel Hearing Research Center Box 357923 University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-7923 USA (206) 616-4156 [hidden email] ************************************************************************ ****** The box said "Requires WindowsXP or better", so I bought a Macintosh. ************************************************************************ ****** |
|
|
Barbara Foster |
Re: Non-arc source for IX-81 - semi commercial
|
|
In reply to this post by Gerard Whoriskey-3
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
Dear Glen
As a strategic consultant in microscopy, I get to see the latest technology and there is, indeed, a great deal of flurry about LED technology. In the summer of 2006, I had a chance to evaluate the AFTER/FluoLED from Fraen and was very impressed with the design, ease of use, and flexibility. I have been working on assignment with Fraen more recently and was surprised to see how much both LED technology and this product line had evolved. So here are observations on both LED technology in general, and the Fraen system in particular. Fraen's FluoLEDs are now available in UV (354nm), Royal blue (450nm), Blue (480nm), Cyan (505 nm), Green (535nm) Yellow (590nm) and red (630nm). While Fraen is a new name in the microscopy arena, most of you already know them: they are the world's largest manufacturer of the LEDs used for the pointers/indicators for the speedometers, gas gauges, etc., on the dashboard of your cars. Until recently Fraen's AFTER/FluoLEDs were only available in transmitted light version for upright microscopes, currently, over 17 different models from all the major manufacturers and several of the smaller ones. For us "old timers", transmitted light has typically been seen as less efficient, but the superb images from FluoLED tell a very different story: Bright features against wonderfully velvet black background. In other words: great S/N. Fraen will be releasing the first systems for inverted stands next month and have begun work on an epi version as well. As with any technology, there is up side/down side to LEDs The good news is the consistency, lack of fuss, and economy of LEDs. When they are on, they are on. When they are off and you need them on, you can turn them on immediately - no cycle time. Also, they exhibit much less drop off over time than HBOs. That time factor is critical. Life expectancy of an HBO is on the order of 200-300 hrs; for Fraen's LED's (I don't have figures on the others) 30,000 hrs. No error in decimal points here: you can run them 8 hrs a day, 5 days a week, for 5 years without changing a lamp. If you plot drop-off versus time, a 100 fold increase in time is significant, especially for those of us doing long term experiments. When it comes time to switch out the lamp, there is no alignment, no disposal issue. The economy issue is also an interesting. Fraen's European office did the following calculations (Euros) for the LED cassette for a standard Blue excitation kit vs. an HBO arc lamp: Cost of LED cassette: Eu720 Lifetime LED casette: 30,000hrs Eu/hr LED cassette: EU 0.024 Assumption: if you run both systems for 2000 hrs/year Cost of LED cassette/yr: Eu48 Savings, using LEDs: Eu1012 One more bit of good news: LEDs are also a much cooler source so there is dramatically less photobleaching. The down side really isn't very down, just something to be aware of. Because of the state of LED technology, green and yellow LEDs generate less power so the resulting images will be somewhat less bright than with HBO. This is not much of an issue when the fluorescence is viewed at magnifications up to about 60x but if you routinely use 100x objectives, you should run the test to see if it is a problem with your particular samples. The good news is (a) for green LEDs, research is powering ahead. Fraen expects to have new, brighter LEDs in Feb 08. (b) For Yellow (Texas red, etc.), research is slower. However, they also have a good news side: they exhibit better S/N ratio, even at the lower power, than HBO. The FluoLED family has a number of things to recommend it: a. They have engineered a clever "multi-cube" device so that you can have 1 LED, 2 LEDs, or 3 LEDs and can switch conveniently from one to another b. For multi-user labs, the LED cassettes can be switched quickly and easily. This feature reminded me of the old Reichert Polyvars, one of my favorite microscopes, especially for teaching. The fluorescence (and reflected light DIC and Darkfield) cubes came on "lolly pop" sticks so that you could just slide in what you needed. FluoLED has mimicked that flexibility with their cassette approach. A lab can have a set of cassettes sitting in a drawer next to the microscope or each group can have what they need in their own area, so they can have whatever excitation/emission they need by just plugging in their cassette and tightening the locking screw. Immediate change out... no alignment! c. Fraen has engineered intelligent electronics into their controllers. Different wavelength LEDs require different amperages to drive them. With Fraen's system, when a cassette is plugged into position, the controller intelligently senses which LED is in the cassette and provides the appropriate amperage, even with the 3 cassette system. d. The controller also allows the user to change intensity so that you can balance different channels for optimum imaging. e. Finally, and as a past high school teacher, I loved this one... Fraen has engineered less expensive "baby" systems in Blue and Royal blue, so that we can finally get fluorescence into teaching labs. That's the story. I hope it was helpful. I am at Neuroscience this week and LEDs are, indeed,grabbing a lot of interest. Best regards, Barbara Foster, President We've moved! Microscopy/Microscopy Education 7101 Royal Glen Trail, Suite A McKinney TX 75070 P: (972)924-5310 Skype: fostermme W: www.MicroscopyEducation.com MME is now scheduling customized, on-site courses through December. Call us today for details. P. S. Need a good general reference or light microscopy text for next semester? Call us today to learn more about "Optimizing LIght Microscopy". Copies still available through MME... even for class-room lots ... and we give quantity discounts. Just call us here in the MME office for details. At 07:21 AM 11/6/2007, Gerard Whoriskey wrote: Search the CONFOCAL archive at |
|
|
Armstrong, Brian |
Re: Non-arc source for IX-81
|
|
In reply to this post by Julio Vazquez
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
Hello, you should also check out the new
illuminator from Chroma. It is just like the Exfo only twice as powerful! Brian D Armstrong PhD Light Microscopy Core Manager Beckman Research Institute City of 626-359-8111 x62872 From: = Hi Glen, Not an Olympus IX-81, but we have an EXFO 120W high-pressure mercury
halide lamp for viewing fluorescence on a Zeiss LSM (Axiovert 200 stand). We
like this lamp for several reasons: 1,000-1,5000 lifetime (typically, one lamp lasts 8-12 months; power
starts to decline after ~ 1,000 hours, but lamp remains useable until about
1,500 hours), easy to install and does not require alignment, quite bright,
built-in aperture that allows to control illumination intensity, removes heat
source away from microscope (lamp is located inside power supply module and
channeled through a fiber into the microscope), built-in safety device prevents
turning lamp ON while still hot. We have not used this lamp for imaging, so I don't know if it is as
bright or stable as a conventional mercury lamp, but it does look quite bright
to me. We normally set the lamp aperture to 1-2 (out of five, with five being
the brightest setting) for viewing samples. In terms of stability, it does show
a decline over time, especially past 1,000 hours. The system is maybe ~ $ 2,000 more than conventional mercury lamp
system at purchase. Lamps cost about $ 650.00, that is about $ 0.50 /
hour... in the same ballpark as mercury lamps Also, I should mention that Applied Precision now report using a 250 W
Xenon lamp on their DeltaVision system. Don't know any specifics, but I
suppose they saw advantages compared to the HBO lamp. Julio. -- Julio Vazquez On Nov 5, 2007, at 11:02 AM, Glen MacDonald wrote:
Search the CONFOCAL archive at Has anyone replaced the mercury illuminator on an Olympus IX-81 with a
non-arc source such as metal-halogen or LED?
I'm looking for experiences regarding reliability, operational cost and
performance on a laser scanning confocal installation. Off-line commercial responses are welcome. Thanks, Glen Glen MacDonald Core for Communication Research (206) 616-4156 ****************************************************************************** The box said "Requires WindowsXP or better", so I bought a
Macintosh. ****************************************************************************** mms1.coh.org made the following annotations --------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
|
Glen MacDonald-2 |
Re: Non-arc source for IX-81
|
|
In reply to this post by Rietdorf, Jens
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Dear Jens, How well do red fluorescing dyes respond to the 525, or do you routinely use those wavelengths? Did you use their API to incorporate wavelength switching with the LSM software? Regards, Glen On Nov 6, 2007, at 7:09 AM, Rietdorf, Jens wrote: > Search the CONFOCAL archive at > http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal > > Hi Glen, > > We have replaced the arc-lamps on 2 of our facilities Zeiss confocals > now 6 month ago by the CoolLED Ltd solution. We use 400nm, 465nm, > and > 525nm, and it works well (no complaints from users so far). We > modified > the filtercubes to have max ex efficiency. I understood CoolLEDs are > also sold with Olympus adapters. > > cheers, jens > > --- > Dr. Jens Rietdorf > Head Microscopy > Novartis Research Foundation > Friedrich-Miescher-Institute, wro1066.2.32 > Maulbeerstr.66, CH-4058 Basel, Switzerland > phone +41(61)69-75172 mobil +41 798284737 > Email:rietdorf(at)fmi.ch > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List > [mailto:[hidden email]] On > Behalf Of Glen MacDonald > Sent: Montag, 5. November 2007 20:02 > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Non-arc source for IX-81 > > Search the CONFOCAL archive at > http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal > > Has anyone replaced the mercury illuminator on an Olympus IX-81 with a > non-arc source such as metal-halogen or LED? I'm looking for > experiences regarding reliability, operational cost and performance > on a > laser scanning confocal installation. > > Off-line commercial responses are welcome. > Thanks, > Glen > > > > Glen MacDonald > Core for Communication Research > Virginia Merrill Bloedel Hearing Research Center Box 357923 University > of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-7923 USA > (206) 616-4156 > [hidden email] > > ********************************************************************** > ** > ****** > The box said "Requires WindowsXP or better", so I bought a Macintosh. > ********************************************************************** > ** > ****** |
|
|
In reply to this post by Barbara Foster
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal re the informative posting on LEDs by Barbara Foster catalogue prices for LEDs seem to be very low, so how come Cost of LED cassette: Eu720 ? which seems to be a couple of orders of magnitude greater. In addition you would need to purchase several LEDs Jeremy Adler Cell Biology The Wenner-Gren Inst. Arrhenius Laboratories E5 Stockholm University Stockholm 106 91 Sweden -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List on behalf of Barbara Foster Sent: Tue 06/11/2007 17:27 To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Non-arc source for IX-81 - semi commercial Search the CONFOCAL archive at http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Dear Glen As a strategic consultant in microscopy, I get to see the latest technology and there is, indeed, a great deal of flurry about LED technology. In the summer of 2006, I had a chance to evaluate the AFTER/FluoLED from Fraen and was very impressed with the design, ease of use, and flexibility. I have been working on assignment with Fraen more recently and was surprised to see how much both LED technology and this product line had evolved. So here are observations on both LED technology in general, and the Fraen system in particular. Fraen's FluoLEDs are now available in UV (354nm), Royal blue (450nm), Blue (480nm), Cyan (505 nm), Green (535nm) Yellow (590nm) and red (630nm). While Fraen is a new name in the microscopy arena, most of you already know them: they are the world's largest manufacturer of the LEDs used for the pointers/indicators for the speedometers, gas gauges, etc., on the dashboard of your cars. Until recently Fraen's AFTER/FluoLEDs were only available in transmitted light version for upright microscopes, currently, over 17 different models from all the major manufacturers and several of the smaller ones. For us "old timers", transmitted light has typically been seen as less efficient, but the superb images from FluoLED tell a very different story: Bright features against wonderfully velvet black background. In other words: great S/N. Fraen will be releasing the first systems for inverted stands next month and have begun work on an epi version as well. As with any technology, there is up side/down side to LEDs The good news is the consistency, lack of fuss, and economy of LEDs. When they are on, they are on. When they are off and you need them on, you can turn them on immediately - no cycle time. Also, they exhibit much less drop off over time than HBOs. That time factor is critical. Life expectancy of an HBO is on the order of 200-300 hrs; for Fraen's LED's (I don't have figures on the others) 30,000 hrs. No error in decimal points here: you can run them 8 hrs a day, 5 days a week, for 5 years without changing a lamp. If you plot drop-off versus time, a 100 fold increase in time is significant, especially for those of us doing long term experiments. When it comes time to switch out the lamp, there is no alignment, no disposal issue. The economy issue is also an interesting. Fraen's European office did the following calculations (Euros) for the LED cassette for a standard Blue excitation kit vs. an HBO arc lamp: Cost of LED cassette: Eu720 Cost of HBO lamp: 160 Lifetime LED casette: 30,000hrs Lifetime HBO lamp: 300 hrs Eu/hr LED cassette: EU 0.024 Eu/hr HBO lamp: Eu 0.53 Assumption: if you run both systems for 2000 hrs/year Cost of LED cassette/yr: Eu48 Cost of HBOs/year: Eu1060. Savings, using LEDs: Eu1012 One more bit of good news: LEDs are also a much cooler source so there is dramatically less photobleaching. The down side really isn't very down, just something to be aware of. Because of the state of LED technology, green and yellow LEDs generate less power so the resulting images will be somewhat less bright than with HBO. This is not much of an issue when the fluorescence is viewed at magnifications up to about 60x but if you routinely use 100x objectives, you should run the test to see if it is a problem with your particular samples. The good news is (a) for green LEDs, research is powering ahead. Fraen expects to have new, brighter LEDs in Feb 08. (b) For Yellow (Texas red, etc.), research is slower. However, they also have a good news side: they exhibit better S/N ratio, even at the lower power, than HBO. The FluoLED family has a number of things to recommend it: a. They have engineered a clever "multi-cube" device so that you can have 1 LED, 2 LEDs, or 3 LEDs and can switch conveniently from one to another b. For multi-user labs, the LED cassettes can be switched quickly and easily. This feature reminded me of the old Reichert Polyvars, one of my favorite microscopes, especially for teaching. The fluorescence (and reflected light DIC and Darkfield) cubes came on "lolly pop" sticks so that you could just slide in what you needed. FluoLED has mimicked that flexibility with their cassette approach. A lab can have a set of cassettes sitting in a drawer next to the microscope or each group can have what they need in their own area, so they can have whatever excitation/emission they need by just plugging in their cassette and tightening the locking screw. Immediate change out... no alignment! c. Fraen has engineered intelligent electronics into their controllers. Different wavelength LEDs require different amperages to drive them. With Fraen's system, when a cassette is plugged into position, the controller intelligently senses which LED is in the cassette and provides the appropriate amperage, even with the 3 cassette system. d. The controller also allows the user to change intensity so that you can balance different channels for optimum imaging. e. Finally, and as a past high school teacher, I loved this one... Fraen has engineered less expensive "baby" systems in Blue and Royal blue, so that we can finally get fluorescence into teaching labs. That's the story. I hope it was helpful. I am at Neuroscience this week and LEDs are, indeed,grabbing a lot of interest. Best regards, Barbara Foster, President We've moved! Microscopy/Microscopy Education 7101 Royal Glen Trail, Suite A McKinney TX 75070 P: (972)924-5310 Skype: fostermme W: www.MicroscopyEducation.com MME is now scheduling customized, on-site courses through December. Call us today for details. P. S. Need a good general reference or light microscopy text for next semester? Call us today to learn more about "Optimizing LIght Microscopy". Copies still available through MME... even for class-room lots ... and we give quantity discounts. Just call us here in the MME office for details. At 07:21 AM 11/6/2007, Gerard Whoriskey wrote: >Search the CONFOCAL archive at >http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal > >Hi Glen, >The argument for LED systems is very strong on reliability and operational >costs and is continually improving with regard to performance, measured in >choice of wavelengths and intensity. >I assume that in your confocal set-up you are only using the mercury based >bulb system to check and align samples and that you only need excitation >regions that match the laser lines you are using. An LED system that you >can switch on and off as you please is ideal for such applications and a >very cost effective replacement to bulbs. >Commercial bit: >We have only recently included 445nm and 505nm options to our range. Now >users can choose from 7 options of 400nm, 445nm, 465nm, 505nm, 525nm, >595nm, and 635nm. >I will contact you directly with more commercial information. > >Best Regards, > >Gerry > >Gerard Whoriskey >Development Engineer >CoolLED Ltd >CIL House >Charlton Road >Andover >Hampshire >SP10 3JL > >Mob: 07789535762 >Tel: +44 (0) 1264 321321 >Dir: +44 (0)1264 320984 >web site: www.coolled.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Glen MacDonald-2
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Dear Glen, The FWHM of the 525nm LED is about 50nm, its working for Alexa546, Alexa568, Cy3, Cy3.5 etc. We don't control it from the LSM software. regards, jens -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Glen MacDonald Sent: Dienstag, 6. November 2007 17:59 To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Non-arc source for IX-81 Search the CONFOCAL archive at http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Dear Jens, How well do red fluorescing dyes respond to the 525, or do you routinely use those wavelengths? Did you use their API to incorporate wavelength switching with the LSM software? Regards, Glen On Nov 6, 2007, at 7:09 AM, Rietdorf, Jens wrote: > Search the CONFOCAL archive at > http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal > > Hi Glen, > > We have replaced the arc-lamps on 2 of our facilities Zeiss confocals > now 6 month ago by the CoolLED Ltd solution. We use 400nm, 465nm, > and > 525nm, and it works well (no complaints from users so far). We > modified the filtercubes to have max ex efficiency. I understood > CoolLEDs are also sold with Olympus adapters. > > cheers, jens > > --- > Dr. Jens Rietdorf > Head Microscopy > Novartis Research Foundation > Friedrich-Miescher-Institute, wro1066.2.32 Maulbeerstr.66, CH-4058 > Basel, Switzerland phone +41(61)69-75172 mobil +41 798284737 > Email:rietdorf(at)fmi.ch > > -----Original Message----- > From: Confocal Microscopy List > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Glen MacDonald > Sent: Montag, 5. November 2007 20:02 > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Non-arc source for IX-81 > > Search the CONFOCAL archive at > http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal > > Has anyone replaced the mercury illuminator on an Olympus IX-81 with a > non-arc source such as metal-halogen or LED? I'm looking for > experiences regarding reliability, operational cost and performance on > a laser scanning confocal installation. > > Off-line commercial responses are welcome. > Thanks, > Glen > > > > Glen MacDonald > Core for Communication Research > Virginia Merrill Bloedel Hearing Research Center Box 357923 University > of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-7923 USA > (206) 616-4156 > [hidden email] > > ********************************************************************** > ** > ****** > The box said "Requires WindowsXP or better", so I bought a Macintosh. > ********************************************************************** > ** > ****** |
|
|
Chris Wood-5 |
Re: Non-arc source for IX-81 - semi commercial
|
|
In reply to this post by Barbara Foster
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal We've been using LEDs in place of mercury lamps for around 4 years now, and I can't see us ever going back to mercury lamps. They were absolutely essential for what we were trying to do, which is measure Ca2+ fluctuations in the beating flagella of motile sperm - picking up a signal from a sub-micron structure flailing around at 40-50 cycles per second was no mean feat. Our only hope was stroboscopic epifluorescence, and LEDs offered the perfect solution. Using them in pulsed mode we overdrove the current 10x to maximise excitation, then set a illumination pulse duration of 1 - 2 ms and streamed as fast as we could. The frame rate limitation therefore boils down to how fast the camera empties its chip. We've published a few articles with frame rates around 40 per s using a Quantix 57, but a while ago we upgraded to an iXon 887 and now we're routinely collecting full frame epifluorescence images at around 200-400 fps. Apart from the stroboscopic aspect allowing us to freeze flagellar motility, another big advantage for us has been minimising photobleaching and phototoxicity (to which sperm are extremely sensitive). Because the illumination lasts 1-2 ms and the LED is switched off during the chip read- out, the sperm are illuminated for only a small fraction of the duty cycle. Even at extremely high frame rates, 250 fps say, we reduce overall illumination times during an experiment by 75% compared to an HBO lamp. At slower frame rates (40fps) the reduction was around 96%. Shuttering an HBO lamp at these sort of frame rates is not a viable alternative believe me. We published a technical note last year outlining these benefits (Nishigaki et al, Biotechniques 41:191-7), I recommend a look at the movies comparing the phototoxicty of the two techniques, it's an impressive difference. The system we built ourselves as there was no commercial option four years ago, but it's essentially the same implementation as the OptoLED from Cairn Research. Another group in our Institute has one of these on order so I'll be nosing around once it arrives. Zeiss have implemented their own LED illumination module, called the Colibri, but when I heard the price I must confess my jaw hit the floor. To sum up, we now use LED illumination on all our 'scopes, not just for the sperm motility work but for all our routine epifluorescence. As I said I can't see why we would ever go back to the arc lamps. LEDs will very soon become the routine choice, and the technology is advancing fast. Saludos Chris Dr Chris Wood Instituto de Biotecnología Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Av. Universidad 2001 Col. Chamilpa Cuernavaca 62150 Morelos México On Tue, 6 Nov 2007 10:27:39 -0600, Barbara Foster <[hidden email]> wrote: >Search the CONFOCAL archive at >http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal > >Dear Glen > >As a strategic consultant in microscopy, I get to see the latest >technology and there is, indeed, a great deal of flurry about LED >technology. In the summer of 2006, I had a chance to evaluate the >AFTER/FluoLED from Fraen and was very impressed with the design, ease >of use, and flexibility. I have been working on assignment with >Fraen more recently and was surprised to see how much both LED >technology and this product line had evolved. So here are >observations on both LED technology in general, and the Fraen system >in particular. > >Fraen's FluoLEDs are now available in UV (354nm), Royal blue (450nm), >Blue (480nm), Cyan (505 nm), Green (535nm) Yellow (590nm) and red >(630nm). While Fraen is a new name in the microscopy arena, most of >you already know them: they are the world's largest manufacturer of >the LEDs used for the pointers/indicators for the speedometers, gas >gauges, etc., on the dashboard of your cars. > >Until recently Fraen's AFTER/FluoLEDs were only available in >transmitted light version for upright microscopes, currently, over 17 >different models from all the major manufacturers and several of the >smaller ones. For us "old timers", transmitted light has typically >been seen as less efficient, but the superb images from FluoLED tell >a very different story: Bright features against wonderfully velvet >black background. In other words: great S/N. Fraen will be >releasing the first systems for inverted stands next month and have >begun work on an epi version as well. > >As with any technology, there is up side/down side to LEDs >The good news is the consistency, lack of fuss, and economy of >LEDs. When they are on, they are on. When they are off and you need >them on, you can turn them on immediately - no cycle time. >Also, they exhibit much less drop off over time than HBOs. That time >factor is critical. Life expectancy of an HBO is on the order of >200-300 hrs; for Fraen's LED's (I don't have figures on the others) >30,000 hrs. No error in decimal points here: you can run them 8 hrs >a day, 5 days a week, for 5 years without changing a lamp. If you >plot drop-off versus time, a 100 fold increase in time is >significant, especially for those of us doing long term experiments. >When it comes time to switch out the lamp, there is no alignment, no >disposal issue. >The economy issue is also an interesting. Fraen's European office >did the following calculations (Euros) for the LED cassette for a >standard Blue excitation kit vs. an HBO arc lamp: >Cost of LED cassette: Eu720 Cost of HBO lamp: 160 >Lifetime LED casette: 30,000hrs Lifetime HBO lamp: 300 hrs >Eu/hr LED cassette: EU 0.024 Eu/hr HBO lamp: Eu 0.53 >Assumption: if you run both systems for 2000 hrs/year >Cost of LED cassette/yr: Eu48 Cost of HBOs/year: Eu1060. >Savings, using LEDs: Eu1012 > >One more bit of good news: LEDs are also a much cooler source so >there is dramatically less photobleaching. > >The down side really isn't very down, just something to be aware of. >Because of the state of LED technology, green and yellow LEDs >generate less power so the resulting images will be somewhat less >bright than with HBO. This is not much of an issue when the >fluorescence is viewed at magnifications up to about 60x but if you >routinely use 100x objectives, you should run the test to see if it >is a problem with your particular samples. The good news is (a) for >green LEDs, research is powering ahead. Fraen expects to have new, >brighter LEDs in Feb 08. (b) For Yellow (Texas red, etc.), research >is slower. However, they also have a good news side: they exhibit >better S/N ratio, even at the lower power, than HBO. > >The FluoLED family has a number of things to recommend it: >a. They have engineered a clever "multi-cube" device so that you can >have 1 LED, 2 LEDs, or 3 LEDs and can switch conveniently from one to >b. For multi-user labs, the LED cassettes can be switched quickly and >easily. This feature reminded me of the old Reichert Polyvars, one >of my favorite microscopes, especially for teaching. The >fluorescence (and reflected light DIC and Darkfield) cubes came on >"lolly pop" sticks so that you could just slide in what you >needed. FluoLED has mimicked that flexibility with their cassette >approach. A lab can have a set of cassettes sitting in a drawer next >to the microscope or each group can have what they need in their own >area, so they can have whatever excitation/emission they need by just >plugging in their cassette and tightening the locking >screw. Immediate change out... no alignment! >c. Fraen has engineered intelligent electronics into their >controllers. Different wavelength LEDs require different amperages >to drive them. With Fraen's system, when a cassette is plugged into >position, the controller intelligently senses which LED is in the >cassette and provides the appropriate amperage, even with the 3 >cassette system. >d. The controller also allows the user to change intensity so that >you can balance different channels for optimum imaging. >e. Finally, and as a past high school teacher, I loved this one... >Fraen has engineered less expensive "baby" systems in Blue and Royal >blue, so that we can finally get fluorescence into teaching labs. > >That's the story. I hope it was helpful. I am at Neuroscience this >week and LEDs are, indeed,grabbing a lot of interest. > >Best regards, >Barbara Foster, President > >We've moved! >Microscopy/Microscopy Education >7101 Royal Glen Trail, Suite A >McKinney TX 75070 >P: (972)924-5310 >Skype: fostermme >W: www.MicroscopyEducation.com > > >MME is now scheduling customized, on-site courses through >December. Call us today for details. > >P. S. >Need a good general reference or light microscopy text for next >semester? Call us today to learn more about "Optimizing LIght >Microscopy". Copies still available through MME... even for >class-room lots ... and we give quantity discounts. Just call us here >in the MME office for details. > > > > > > > > > > >At 07:21 AM 11/6/2007, Gerard Whoriskey wrote: >>Search the CONFOCAL archive at >>http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal >> >>Hi Glen, >>The argument for LED systems is very strong on reliability and >>costs and is continually improving with regard to performance, measured in >>choice of wavelengths and intensity. >>I assume that in your confocal set-up you are only using the mercury based >>bulb system to check and align samples and that you only need excitation >>regions that match the laser lines you are using. An LED system that you >>can switch on and off as you please is ideal for such applications and a >>very cost effective replacement to bulbs. >>Commercial bit: >>We have only recently included 445nm and 505nm options to our range. Now >>users can choose from 7 options of 400nm, 445nm, 465nm, 505nm, 525nm, >>595nm, and 635nm. >>I will contact you directly with more commercial information. >> >>Best Regards, >> >>Gerry >> >>Gerard Whoriskey >>Development Engineer >>CoolLED Ltd >>CIL House >>Charlton Road >>Andover >>Hampshire >>SP10 3JL >> >>Mob: 07789535762 >>Tel: +44 (0) 1264 321321 >>Dir: +44 (0)1264 320984 >>web site: www.coolled.com > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jeremy Adler
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
Hi, Jeremy
The price is for an LED cassette, which includes intelligent electronics. Since each LED requires a specific voltage to drive it, the ability for the system to sense which LED cassette has been inserted is critical, especially for 2-channel or 3-channel imaging. And yes, you would have to buy several LED cassettes. However, when you consider that the lifetime is in excess of 30,000 hrs (I spoke to a diagnostic company yesterday who OEMs this system and they told me that, in practice, it was often in excess of 50,000 hrs) and there is often a better S/N ratio, it's not a very big investment compared to a mercury arc. Hope this was helpful, Barbara Foster, President We've moved! Microscopy/Microscopy Education 7101 Royal Glen Trail, Suite A McKinney TX 75070 P: (972)924-5310 Skype: fostermme W: www.MicroscopyEducation.com MME is now scheduling customized, on-site courses through December. Call us today for details. P. S. Need a good general reference or light microscopy text for next semester? Call us today to learn more about "Optimizing LIght Microscopy". Copies still available through MME... even for class-room lots ... and we give quantity discounts. Just call us here in the MME office for details. At 05:06 AM 11/7/2007, you wrote: Search the CONFOCAL archive at |
|
|
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
While different color LEDs usually require different voltages, they tend to have similar current requirements. Why doesn't somebody just throw together a constant current source? Then it wouldn't matter what LED you plug into it as such a source intrinsically adjusts its voltage.
Craig On Nov 7, 2007 11:11 AM, Barbara Foster <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Barbara Foster
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
Hi Barbara,
is there a broader choice of the excitation wavelength, e.g. is there 430
nm (440 nm), 570 nm (or 580 nm) LEDs? Let say matching the 89006 ET set from
Chroma?
Vitaly
NCI-Frederick,
301-846-6575
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Barbara Foster
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Another vendor to consider in the LED technology is Zeiss. They have introduced the Colibri system with ten LEDs being currently available. A mercury halide lamp can be coupled the Colibri. http://www.zeiss.de/micro Louie Kerr >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Confocal Microscopy List on behalf of Barbara Foster >> Sent: Tue 06/11/2007 17:27 >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: Non-arc source for IX-81 - semi commercial >> >> Search the CONFOCAL archive at >> http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal >> >> Dear Glen >> >> As a strategic consultant in microscopy, I get to see the latest >> technology and there is, indeed, a great deal of flurry about LED >> technology. In the summer of 2006, I had a chance to evaluate the >> AFTER/FluoLED from Fraen and was very impressed with the design, ease >> of use, and flexibility. I have been working on assignment with >> Fraen more recently and was surprised to see how much both LED >> technology and this product line had evolved. So here are >> observations on both LED technology in general, and the Fraen system >> in particular. >> >> Fraen's FluoLEDs are now available in UV (354nm), Royal blue (450nm), >> Blue (480nm), Cyan (505 nm), Green (535nm) Yellow (590nm) and red >> (630nm). While Fraen is a new name in the microscopy arena, most of >> you already know them: they are the world's largest manufacturer of >> the LEDs used for the pointers/indicators for the speedometers, gas >> gauges, etc., on the dashboard of your cars. >> >> Until recently Fraen's AFTER/FluoLEDs were only available in >> transmitted light version for upright microscopes, currently, over 17 >> different models from all the major manufacturers and several of the >> smaller ones. For us "old timers", transmitted light has typically >> been seen as less efficient, but the superb images from FluoLED tell >> a very different story: Bright features against wonderfully velvet >> black background. In other words: great S/N. Fraen will be >> releasing the first systems for inverted stands next month and have >> begun work on an epi version as well. >> >> As with any technology, there is up side/down side to LEDs >> The good news is the consistency, lack of fuss, and economy of >> LEDs. When they are on, they are on. When they are off and you need >> them on, you can turn them on immediately - no cycle time. >> Also, they exhibit much less drop off over time than HBOs. That time >> factor is critical. Life expectancy of an HBO is on the order of >> 200-300 hrs; for Fraen's LED's (I don't have figures on the others) >> 30,000 hrs. No error in decimal points here: you can run them 8 hrs >> a day, 5 days a week, for 5 years without changing a lamp. If you >> plot drop-off versus time, a 100 fold increase in time is >> significant, especially for those of us doing long term experiments. >> When it comes time to switch out the lamp, there is no alignment, no >> disposal issue. >> The economy issue is also an interesting. Fraen's European office >> did the following calculations (Euros) for the LED cassette for a >> standard Blue excitation kit vs. an HBO arc lamp: >> Cost of LED cassette: Eu720 Cost of HBO lamp: 160 >> Lifetime LED casette: 30,000hrs Lifetime HBO lamp: 300 hrs >> Eu/hr LED cassette: EU 0.024 Eu/hr HBO lamp: Eu 0.53 >> Assumption: if you run both systems for 2000 hrs/year >> Cost of LED cassette/yr: Eu48 Cost of HBOs/year: Eu1060. >> Savings, using LEDs: Eu1012 >> >> One more bit of good news: LEDs are also a much cooler source so >> there is dramatically less photobleaching. >> >> The down side really isn't very down, just something to be aware of. >> Because of the state of LED technology, green and yellow LEDs >> generate less power so the resulting images will be somewhat less >> bright than with HBO. This is not much of an issue when the >> fluorescence is viewed at magnifications up to about 60x but if you >> routinely use 100x objectives, you should run the test to see if it >> is a problem with your particular samples. The good news is (a) for >> green LEDs, research is powering ahead. Fraen expects to have new, >> brighter LEDs in Feb 08. (b) For Yellow (Texas red, etc.), research >> is slower. However, they also have a good news side: they exhibit >> better S/N ratio, even at the lower power, than HBO. >> >> The FluoLED family has a number of things to recommend it: >> a. They have engineered a clever "multi-cube" device so that you can >> have 1 LED, 2 LEDs, or 3 LEDs and can switch conveniently from one to >> another >> b. For multi-user labs, the LED cassettes can be switched quickly and >> easily. This feature reminded me of the old Reichert Polyvars, one >> of my favorite microscopes, especially for teaching. The >> fluorescence (and reflected light DIC and Darkfield) cubes came on >> "lolly pop" sticks so that you could just slide in what you >> needed. FluoLED has mimicked that flexibility with their cassette >> approach. A lab can have a set of cassettes sitting in a drawer next >> to the microscope or each group can have what they need in their own >> area, so they can have whatever excitation/emission they need by just >> plugging in their cassette and tightening the locking >> screw. Immediate change out... no alignment! >> c. Fraen has engineered intelligent electronics into their >> controllers. Different wavelength LEDs require different amperages >> to drive them. With Fraen's system, when a cassette is plugged into >> position, the controller intelligently senses which LED is in the >> cassette and provides the appropriate amperage, even with the 3 >> cassette system. >> d. The controller also allows the user to change intensity so that >> you can balance different channels for optimum imaging. >> e. Finally, and as a past high school teacher, I loved this one... >> Fraen has engineered less expensive "baby" systems in Blue and Royal >> blue, so that we can finally get fluorescence into teaching labs. >> >> That's the story. I hope it was helpful. I am at Neuroscience this >> week and LEDs are, indeed,grabbing a lot of interest. >> >> Best regards, >> Barbara Foster, President >> >> We've moved! >> Microscopy/Microscopy Education >> 7101 Royal Glen Trail, Suite A >> McKinney TX 75070 >> P: (972)924-5310 >> Skype: fostermme >> W: www.MicroscopyEducation.com <http://www.microscopyeducation.com/> >> >> >> MME is now scheduling customized, on-site courses through >> December. Call us today for details. >> >> P. S. >> Need a good general reference or light microscopy text for next >> semester? Call us today to learn more about "Optimizing LIght >> Microscopy". Copies still available through MME... even for >> class-room lots ... and we give quantity discounts. Just call us here >> in the MME office for details. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> At 07:21 AM 11/6/2007, Gerard Whoriskey wrote: >> >Search the CONFOCAL archive at >> > http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal >> > >> >Hi Glen, >> >The argument for LED systems is very strong on reliability and >> operational >> >costs and is continually improving with regard to performance, >> measured in >> >choice of wavelengths and intensity. >> >I assume that in your confocal set-up you are only using the mercury >> based >> >bulb system to check and align samples and that you only need excitation >> >regions that match the laser lines you are using. An LED system that you >> >can switch on and off as you please is ideal for such applications and a >> >very cost effective replacement to bulbs. >> >Commercial bit: >> >We have only recently included 445nm and 505nm options to our range. Now >> >users can choose from 7 options of 400nm, 445nm, 465nm, 505nm, 525nm, >> >595nm, and 635nm. >> >I will contact you directly with more commercial information. >> > >> >Best Regards, >> > >> >Gerry >> > >> >Gerard Whoriskey >> >Development Engineer >> >CoolLED Ltd >> >CIL House >> >Charlton Road >> >Andover >> >Hampshire >> >SP10 3JL >> > >> >Mob: 07789535762 >> >Tel: +44 (0) 1264 321321 >> >Dir: +44 (0)1264 320984 >> >web site: www.coolled.com <http://www.coolled.com/> -- Louie Kerr Research and Education Support Coordinator Marine Biological Laboratory 7 MBL Street Woods Hole, MA 02543 508-289-7273 508-540-6902 (FAX) 508-292-0289 (Cell phone) VISIT OUR WEB SITES: http://www.mbl.edu/ http://www.courses.mbl.edu/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by vb-2
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
yes, there are all kinds of led,different wavelength, 375nm,405nm,460nm,585nm,....and the optical power is high, maybe up to 100mw. I have ever bought different leds, for a 5w blue led(460nm),the optical power is about 20mw(it is easy to adjust the power by changing the current or voltage ),the price is about 14 RMB in china (about 2 dollar).Compare with laser, the biggest problem is led's big emission angle.So it is hard to couple light to fiber or focus into one point.I tried to do it, but most of the energy lost. I think the led will replace the arc lamp in future, even the laser for confocal or laser scanning microscopy.
|
«
Return to Confocal Microscopy List
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |