LEDs
Locked
123
123
|
Hi,
I was wondering if anybody has some experience with using LEDs as excitation sources for fluorescence microscopy and could recommend me some companies and/or specific models. We are interested in equipping a Nikon Ti with LEDs instead of the conventional mercury lamp (e.g. Nikon's Intensilight). The main application of the microscope would be quantitative high-throughput time-lapse microscopy. Thanks a lot. Dirk |
|
|
>Hi,
> >I was wondering if anybody has some experience with using LEDs as >excitation sources for fluorescence microscopy and could recommend >me some companies and/or specific models. > >We are interested in equipping a Nikon Ti with LEDs instead of the >conventional mercury lamp (e.g. Nikon's Intensilight). The main >application of the microscope would be quantitative high-throughput >time-lapse microscopy. > >Thanks a lot. Dirk A good place to start might be Chapter 6 of The Handbook of Biological Confocal Microscopy. Cheers, Jim P. -- ********************************************** Prof. James B. Pawley, Ph. 608-263-3147 Room 223, Zoology Research Building, FAX 608-265-5315 1117 Johnson Ave., Madison, WI, 53706 [hidden email] 3D Microscopy of Living Cells Course, June 12-24, 2010, UBC, Vancouver Canada Info: http://www.3dcourse.ubc.ca/ Applications due by March 15, 2010 "If it ain't diffraction, it must be statistics." Anon. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dirk
I bought a high-powered LED meant for architectural lighting (normally
put in a spotlight outside a building) and duct-taped it (literally) onto the side of an old microscope we found in a junk heap with no lamp. I put a cheap condenser lens in front of the LED array to collimate it with pretty decent results. The LED is actually an array of RGBA elements (red, green, blue, amber) so I have four wavelengths to choose from. Control is provided by a USB connection to a PC. It works well enough for our cell culture work, where we just want a quick check of whether or not a given cell stained properly. We use epi-fluorescene using the LEDs. The one drawback of them is the blue LED is centered more at 460nm, so it is not so great for some dyes like CFP, but it works well for other dyes. In particular, the Amber LED is 590, which works well for m-cherry (I believe it is what they were using). Craig On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 8:20 PM, James Pawley <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I was wondering if anybody has some experience with using LEDs as >> excitation sources for fluorescence microscopy and could recommend me some >> companies and/or specific models. >> >> We are interested in equipping a Nikon Ti with LEDs instead of the >> conventional mercury lamp (e.g. Nikon's Intensilight). The main application >> of the microscope would be quantitative high-throughput time-lapse >> microscopy. >> >> Thanks a lot. Dirk > > > A good place to start might be Chapter 6 of The Handbook of Biological > Confocal Microscopy. > > Cheers, > > Jim P. > > -- > ********************************************** > Prof. James B. Pawley, Ph. > 608-263-3147 Room 223, Zoology Research Building, FAX > 608-265-5315 > 1117 Johnson Ave., Madison, WI, 53706 [hidden email] > 3D Microscopy of Living Cells Course, June 12-24, 2010, UBC, Vancouver > Canada > Info: http://www.3dcourse.ubc.ca/ Applications due by March 15, > 2010 > "If it ain't diffraction, it must be statistics." Anon. > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dirk
Dear Dirk,
it is a while I do not screen the market, but the ones I used up to 3 years ago were Luxeon LEDs from Philips Lumileds or LEDs by Nichia. We used them also for fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy. You could have a look also to this page http://www.plantsci.cam.ac.uk/Haseloff/imaging/cheaposcope/cheaposcope.ht m edited by Jim Haseloff. Kind regards, Alessandro --- Dr Alessandro Esposito Senior Investigator Scientist MRC Cancer Cell Unit Hutchison/MRC Research Centre http://www.quantitative-microscopy.org http://www.wikiscope.org --- The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you receive this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete it immediately. Opinions expressed are those of the individual and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Hutchison/MRC Research Centre. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dirk
Dear Dirk,
Here in Leicester we have a Nikon Ti with COOLLED PrecisExcite High Power LED Fluorescent Excitation System, using 400, 490 and 565 nm LEDs and EM-CCD. The LED system was bought with the microscope via Nikon. The system is mostly used for yeast imaging and gives very good results, due to reduced photo bleaching, as compared to our Leica SP5 confocal. Best wishes Kees -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Dirk Landgraf Sent: 11 January 2010 00:22 To: [hidden email] Subject: LEDs Hi, I was wondering if anybody has some experience with using LEDs as excitation sources for fluorescence microscopy and could recommend me some companies and/or specific models. We are interested in equipping a Nikon Ti with LEDs instead of the conventional mercury lamp (e.g. Nikon's Intensilight). The main application of the microscope would be quantitative high-throughput time-lapse microscopy. Thanks a lot. Dirk |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dirk
Dear Dirk,
We have on several of our systems a LED source from CoolLed (http://www.coolled.com/). They work nicely. Greetings Gabor No commercial interest! |
|
|
I have been using Thorlabs LED's for a while. They come individually in a cheap version with driver and collimation optics and mountings for different microscopes, or an integrated 4 wavelength unit with controller. I have built a two channel unit for my teaching lab with Micro-Manager control. Another new company with a multiwavelength unit is Prizmatix and Zeiss makes the Colibri. These are in rough order of cost. Dave
On Jan 11, 2010, at 5:49 AM, Gabor Csucs wrote:
Dr. David Knecht Department of Molecular and Cell Biology Co-head Flow Cytometry and Confocal Microscopy Facility U-3125 91 N. Eagleville Rd. University of Connecticut Storrs, CT 06269 860-486-2200 860-486-4331 (fax) |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dirk
Hi Dirk,
We have equipped 2 wide-field systems (a Zeiss Axiovert200M and an Olympus IX70) running with Metamorph and 2 LSM510 (just for quick visualization of the samples) with CoolLED PrecisExcite lights. They just work great. Best, Laurent. ___________________________ Laurent Gelman, PhD Friedrich Miescher Institut Facility for Advanced Imaging and Microscopy WRO 1066.2.16 Maulbeerstrasse 66 CH-4058 Basel +41 (0)79 618 73 69 -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Dirk Landgraf Sent: lundi, 11. janvier 2010 01:22 To: [hidden email] Subject: LEDs Hi, I was wondering if anybody has some experience with using LEDs as excitation sources for fluorescence microscopy and could recommend me some companies and/or specific models. We are interested in equipping a Nikon Ti with LEDs instead of the conventional mercury lamp (e.g. Nikon's Intensilight). The main application of the microscope would be quantitative high-throughput time-lapse microscopy. Thanks a lot. Dirk |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dirk
***Commercial Response***
Hi Dirk, The range of choices for LED fluorescence illumination is growing daily. As already mentioned, there are DIY projects as well as 3rd-party LED illumination accessories to add to your existing microscope. These can be integrated with software control using appropriate drivers and software packages, for excellent benefits as previously described. My company manufactures an all-in-one LED fluorescence microscope that goes a step further to provide full integration of the LED illumination system with the optics and software control. It's designed around LED "light cubes" located near the objectives, with a very short, efficient light path. Eliminating the traditional epifluorescence and lamphousing attachments allows it to be very compact; it also has a built-in computer to further reduce the footprint. This represents the opposite end of the spectrum of LED fluorescence choices, compared to the nice DIY projects mentioned by Dave, Craig and Allessandro. If you prefer an "out of the box" solution, this is a possibility you might want to explore. Cheers, -- Mark ********************** Mark Rand, Ph.D. Product Manager and Senior Applications Scientist Advanced Microscopy Group (EVOS) www.amgmicro.com |
|
|
I got a few queries about the LED I used, so here's the scoop:
The LED is an Enfis Uno Plus: The LED 'kit' sold at Digikey: http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=722-1033-ND The LED manufacturer: http://www.enfis.com/products/unoplusseries/default.htm Enfis sells a kit (first link is the kit retailed by Digikey) which runs via USB and comes with basic control software. Basically there are four slider controls that allows you to adjust the power of each of the four colors (or turn any or all of them on or off). As for mounting, take the LED, put a condenser lens in front of it about an inch or two away (play with this to get a good beam) and attach it all to the lamp port on any microscope. I used Thorlabs 60mm cage parts to hold the lens (a cheap condenser lens, also from thor labs cost about $10) and the LED array, and they also sell an adapter to allow the cage to couple to the lamp ports on most major brands of microscopes. I also put a fine grit diffuser in the beam to even out the light distribution somewhat. The mounting holes on the LED array will mate with two of the four holes on a standard Thor 60mm cage plate. Craig |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dirk
Hi all,
two years later, and a quite similar question. I use a Zeiss epifluorescence microscope, and I'm thinking to replace my HBO housing by a LED multicolor source. Of course, Zeiss sells the colibri setup, but the choice on the market is growing day after day, and for example, Thorlabs also sells something with 4 colors and a control unit, with the Zeiss mounting system. I'm sure many other manufacturers do the same. Do anybody compared the HBO to a LED system for classical epifluorescence ? What should be the LED power to have something similar to a 100W at common wavelenghts (dapi, gfp, rhodamine, etc) ? Even after checking this page : http://www.olympusfluoview.com/theory/noncoherentsources.html It is still difficult to know which valeus and units should be considered... Thanks for the help J. Jacques FATTACCIOLI Département de Chimie Ecole Normale Supérieure 24 rue Lhomond 75231 Paris Cedex 05 Email : jacques.fattaccioli@ens.fr Web : http://jacquesfattaccioli.wordpress.com |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Jacques, Be careful what you buy. Some LED lights have out of band leaks that cause other colors to be seen by your detector and the watts provided are a bit different in color correction. This might not be true for your application, but food for thought Gregg Jarvis Senior Spectroscopist Omega Optical Inc. Brattleboro, VT. 05301 [hidden email] On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 5:07 AM, jacques <[hidden email]> wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Hi all, > > two years later, and a quite similar question. > > I use a Zeiss epifluorescence microscope, and I'm thinking to replace my > HBO > housing by a LED multicolor source. > Of course, Zeiss sells the colibri setup, but the choice on the market is > growing day after day, and for example, Thorlabs also sells something with > 4 > colors and a control unit, with the Zeiss mounting system. > I'm sure many other manufacturers do the same. > > Do anybody compared the HBO to a LED system for classical epifluorescence ? > What should be the LED power to have something similar to a 100W at common > wavelenghts (dapi, gfp, rhodamine, etc) ? Even after checking this page : > http://www.olympusfluoview.com/theory/noncoherentsources.html > It is still difficult to know which valeus and units should be > considered... > > Thanks for the help > > J. > > > ----- > > Jacques FATTACCIOLI > > Département de Chimie > Ecole Normale Supérieure > 24 rue Lhomond 75231 Paris Cedex 05 > Email : [hidden email] > Web : http://jacquesfattaccioli.wordpress.com > -- > View this message in context: > http://confocal-microscopy-list.588098.n2.nabble.com/LEDs-tp4283200p7307846.html > Sent from the Confocal Microscopy List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > |
|
|
In reply to this post by jacques
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** The Sola from Lumencor is a great epifluor source from what I hear. Spectrum output is similar to that of typical metal halide systems like the x-cite, and you don't have to worry about modules or any of that stuff. It puts out continuous white light from 380-680nm, and lasts 15k hours. Check it out here http://www.lumencor.com/products/sola_product_sheet.html Hugh Newman Graduate Researcher Dept. Physics and Physical Oceanography Memorial University St. Johns, Newfoundland, Canada > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 02:07:47 -0800 > From: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: LEDs > To: [hidden email] > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Hi all, > > two years later, and a quite similar question. > > I use a Zeiss epifluorescence microscope, and I'm thinking to replace my HBO > housing by a LED multicolor source. > Of course, Zeiss sells the colibri setup, but the choice on the market is > growing day after day, and for example, Thorlabs also sells something with 4 > colors and a control unit, with the Zeiss mounting system. > I'm sure many other manufacturers do the same. > > Do anybody compared the HBO to a LED system for classical epifluorescence ? > What should be the LED power to have something similar to a 100W at common > wavelenghts (dapi, gfp, rhodamine, etc) ? Even after checking this page : > http://www.olympusfluoview.com/theory/noncoherentsources.html > It is still difficult to know which valeus and units should be considered... > > Thanks for the help > > J. > > > ----- > > Jacques FATTACCIOLI > > Département de Chimie > Ecole Normale Supérieure > 24 rue Lhomond 75231 Paris Cedex 05 > Email : [hidden email] > Web : http://jacquesfattaccioli.wordpress.com > -- > View this message in context: http://confocal-microscopy-list.588098.n2.nabble.com/LEDs-tp4283200p7307846.html > Sent from the Confocal Microscopy List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hello X-Cite also has a new LED system that is close to the price of the Sola but brighter for DAPI and GFP. You are able to control individual LEDs which I don't know whether you can do with the Sola. X-Cite also has some useful ways to program very fast sequential pulsing of the LEDs and they guarantee 20k hours. Check it out here http://www.ldgi-xcite.com/products-xcite-xled1.php Dr. Ammasi Periasamy Professor & Center Director Keck Center for Cellular Imaging (KCCI) Biology, Gilmer Hall (064), 485 McCormick Rd University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22904 (Campus Mail - P.O. Box 400328) Voice: 434-243-7602 (Office); 982-4869 (lab) Fax:434-982-5210; Email:[hidden email] http://www.kcci.virginia.edu/contact/peri.php ************************ 11th Annual Workshop on FRET Microscopy, March 5-10, 2012 http://www.kcci.virginia.edu/workshop/workshop2012/ ************************* -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Hugh Newman Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 9:35 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: LEDs ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** The Sola from Lumencor is a great epifluor source from what I hear. Spectrum output is similar to that of typical metal halide systems like the x-cite, and you don't have to worry about modules or any of that stuff. It puts out continuous white light from 380-680nm, and lasts 15k hours. Check it out here http://www.lumencor.com/products/sola_product_sheet.html Hugh Newman Graduate Researcher Dept. Physics and Physical Oceanography Memorial University St. Johns, Newfoundland, Canada > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 02:07:47 -0800 > From: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: LEDs > To: [hidden email] > > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Hi all, > > two years later, and a quite similar question. > > I use a Zeiss epifluorescence microscope, and I'm thinking to replace > my HBO housing by a LED multicolor source. > Of course, Zeiss sells the colibri setup, but the choice on the market > is growing day after day, and for example, Thorlabs also sells > something with 4 colors and a control unit, with the Zeiss mounting system. > I'm sure many other manufacturers do the same. > > Do anybody compared the HBO to a LED system for classical epifluorescence ? > What should be the LED power to have something similar to a 100W at > common wavelenghts (dapi, gfp, rhodamine, etc) ? Even after checking this page : > http://www.olympusfluoview.com/theory/noncoherentsources.html > It is still difficult to know which valeus and units should be considered... > > Thanks for the help > > J. > > > ----- > > Jacques FATTACCIOLI > > Département de Chimie > Ecole Normale Supérieure > 24 rue Lhomond 75231 Paris Cedex 05 > Email : [hidden email] > Web : http://jacquesfattaccioli.wordpress.com > -- > View this message in context: > http://confocal-microscopy-list.588098.n2.nabble.com/LEDs-tp4283200p73 > 07846.html Sent from the Confocal Microscopy List mailing list archive > at Nabble.com. |
|
|
In reply to this post by jacques
Thanks for your help and comments !
Jacques Jacques FATTACCIOLI Département de Chimie Ecole Normale Supérieure 24 rue Lhomond 75231 Paris Cedex 05 Email : jacques.fattaccioli@ens.fr Web : http://jacquesfattaccioli.wordpress.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by jacques
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hello Jacques, How much power you get at the sample will depend to some degree on the light path and light delivery system of your specific microscope, in addition to the light source itself. The only LED system we have is the Insight SSI (solid state illuminator) on our DeltaVision system. It has LEDs rated from 22 mW (505-515 nm) to 89 mW (563-588 nm). I am assuming these are nominal LED output power levels, although the brochure does not specify. For our lines, we measured 20 to 50 mW at the sample, or about 35-50% of the rated power for any given line, which would be really good delivery efficiency (our laser scanning confocal is about 10%). This is several times the power levels we were getting with a conventional mercury bulb and excitation filters on a comparable (but not identical) system (about 6 to 20 mW depending on excitation filter used, if I remember correctly). For most wavelengths, this is as bright or brighter than our Exfo or Xenon illuminators, which are typically brighter (at the sample) than our older Hg bulb illuminators. However, these illumination systems are also installed on newer microscopes with possibly improved light delivery. We haven't had the system for long enough to encounter any potential issues, but we like the brightness and the speed of wavelength switching. Also, we do not have to worry about burned out excitation filters or UV leaking, and we do not have to worry about replacing bulbs, heat, or keeping track of when lamps are turned on and off. Also, no worries about anyone forgetting to turn off the lamp on Friday night. I can't think of any downside at this time. My second choice in terms of convenience would be the Exfo or similar systems (long life and easy to replace bulbs, combined with good brightness). For reference, the InsightSSI specs can be found here: http://www.api.com/downloads/pdfs/lifescience/InsightSSI.pdf Julio Vazquez Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle, WA http://www.fhcrc.org == On Feb 22, 2012, at 2:07 AM, jacques wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Hi all, > > two years later, and a quite similar question. > > I use a Zeiss epifluorescence microscope, and I'm thinking to replace my HBO > housing by a LED multicolor source. > Of course, Zeiss sells the colibri setup, but the choice on the market is > growing day after day, and for example, Thorlabs also sells something with 4 > colors and a control unit, with the Zeiss mounting system. > I'm sure many other manufacturers do the same. > > Do anybody compared the HBO to a LED system for classical epifluorescence ? > What should be the LED power to have something similar to a 100W at common > wavelenghts (dapi, gfp, rhodamine, etc) ? Even after checking this page : > http://www.olympusfluoview.com/theory/noncoherentsources.html > It is still difficult to know which valeus and units should be considered... > > Thanks for the help > > J. > > > ----- > > Jacques FATTACCIOLI > > Département de Chimie > Ecole Normale Supérieure > 24 rue Lhomond 75231 Paris Cedex 05 > Email : [hidden email] > Web : http://jacquesfattaccioli.wordpress.com > -- > View this message in context: http://confocal-microscopy-list.588098.n2.nabble.com/LEDs-tp4283200p7307846.html > Sent from the Confocal Microscopy List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
|
|
In reply to this post by jacques
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hello all, Applied Precision just told me that the InsightSSI illuminator is actually not LED based, so please ignore my previous posting, as far as LEDs are concerned. Julio. == On Feb 23, 2012, at 2:06 AM, jacques wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Thanks for your help and comments ! > > Jacques |
|
|
In reply to this post by Julio Vazquez
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** >***** >To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >***** > >Hello Jacques, > >How much power you get at the sample will depend >to some degree on the light path and light >delivery system of your specific microscope, in >addition to the light source itself. > >The only LED system we have is the Insight SSI >(solid state illuminator) on our DeltaVision >system. It has LEDs rated from 22 mW (505-515 >nm) to 89 mW (563-588 nm). I am assuming these >are nominal LED output power levels, although >the brochure does not specify. For our lines, we >measured 20 to 50 mW at the sample, or about >35-50% of the rated power for any given line, >which would be really good delivery efficiency >(our laser scanning confocal is about 10%). This >is several times the power levels we were >getting with a conventional mercury bulb and >excitation filters on a comparable (but not >identical) system (about 6 to 20 mW depending on >excitation filter used, if I remember >correctly). For most wavelengths, this is as >bright or brighter than our Exfo or Xenon >illuminators, which are typically brighter (at >the sample) than our older Hg bulb illuminators. >However, these illumination systems are also >installed on newer microscopes with possibly >improved light delivery. We haven't had the >system for long enough to encounter any >potential issues, but we like the brightness and >the speed of wavelength switching. Also, we do >not have to worry about burned out excitation >filters or UV leaking, and we do not have to >worry about replacing bulbs, heat, or keeping >track of when lamps are turned on and off. >Also, no worries about anyone forgetting to turn >off the lamp on Friday night. I can't think of >any downside at this time. My second choice in >terms of convenience would be the Exfo or >similar systems (long life and easy to replace >bulbs, combined with good brightness). > >For reference, the InsightSSI specs can be found here: > >http://www.api.com/downloads/pdfs/lifescience/InsightSSI.pdf > > >Julio Vazquez >Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center >Seattle, WA > >http://www.fhcrc.org > >== Dear Julio, Thank you so much for putting some actual measurements into this important discussion. Could I ask you for a few more details? I assume that you did these tests with the same objective, or at least with an objective with the same NA and mag (and hence the same size and location of the BFP. Light that hits the metal will not pass through the objective). Assuming that you measured light coming out of the objective with some sort of photometer, the other big variable is how you set the size of the field diaphragm (referred to the image plane: For instance, you might set it to be the same as the field of view of a particular objective, or maybe to some known and repeatable fraction thereof.) Also, with respect to your comment on confocal performance, I am assuming that the 10% efficiency refers to the fraction of the light leaving the laser that arrives at the focus plane. Ten percent seems low and seems to suggest to me that either the optics used to launch the laser light into the fiber are not well aligned or that the optics are set up to over-fill the BFP of the particular objective used for the test. Otherwise it is hard to see where so much power would be lost: objective transmissions are now usually quoted in the 80-90% range, and a properly chosen dichroic should be about the same while beam-steering mirrors and galvo mirrors should be about 99%. In any case, thank you for the numbers. Regards, Jim Pawley *************************************************************************** Prof. James B. Pawley, Ph. 608-238-3953 21. N. Prospect Ave. Madison, WI 53726 USA [hidden email] 3D Microscopy of Living Cells Course, June 9-21, 2012, UBC, Vancouver Canada Info: http://www.3dcourse.ubc.ca/ Application deadline 3/16/2012 "If it ain't diffraction, it must be statistics." Anon. 11/16/12 > > >On Feb 22, 2012, at 2:07 AM, jacques wrote: > >> ***** >> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: >> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy >> ***** >> >> Hi all, >> >> two years later, and a quite similar question. >> >> I use a Zeiss epifluorescence microscope, and I'm thinking to replace my HBO >> housing by a LED multicolor source. >> Of course, Zeiss sells the colibri setup, but the choice on the market is >> growing day after day, and for example, Thorlabs also sells something with 4 >> colors and a control unit, with the Zeiss mounting system. >> I'm sure many other manufacturers do the same. >> >> Do anybody compared the HBO to a LED system for classical epifluorescence ? >> What should be the LED power to have something similar to a 100W at common >> wavelenghts (dapi, gfp, rhodamine, etc) ? Even after checking this page : >> http://www.olympusfluoview.com/theory/noncoherentsources.html >> It is still difficult to know which valeus and units should be considered... >> >> Thanks for the help >> >> J. >> >> >> ----- >> >> Jacques FATTACCIOLI >> >> Département de Chimie >> Ecole Normale Supérieure >> 24 rue Lhomond 75231 Paris Cedex 05 >> Email : [hidden email] >> Web : http://jacquesfattaccioli.wordpress.com >> -- >> View this message in context: >>http://confocal-microscopy-list.588098.n2.nabble.com/LEDs-tp4283200p7307846.html >> Sent from the Confocal Microscopy List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- *************************************************************************** Prof. James B. Pawley, Ph. 608-238-3953 21. N. Prospect Ave. Madison, WI 53726 USA [hidden email] 3D Microscopy of Living Cells Course, June 9-21, 2012, UBC, Vancouver Canada Info: http://www.3dcourse.ubc.ca/ Application deadline 3/16/2012 "If it ain't diffraction, it must be statistics." Anon. 11/16/12 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Julio Vazquez
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hi, We previously had the Xe lamps and changed to the SSI illumination on our Deltavision Core. The exposure times were reduced by a factor of 5 to 10. The SSI is actually made by Lumencor (no commercial interest). From my experience it works really well without the downsides of a lamp of heat generation or having to align and change bulbs. If you do decide to use LEDs, I strongly suggest still using bandpass excitation filter (as suggested previously) because with some LEDs there upto 5% light emission at wavelengths upto 50 nm higher than the peak which will generally add a lot of background to your images. If you have a spectrometer available I suggest scanning the emission to get the real emission spectrum of the LED. Regards, Justin. -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Julio Vazquez Sent: Friday, 24 February 2012 4:14 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: LEDs ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hello all, Applied Precision just told me that the InsightSSI illuminator is actually not LED based, so please ignore my previous posting, as far as LEDs are concerned. Julio. == On Feb 23, 2012, at 2:06 AM, jacques wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Thanks for your help and comments ! > > Jacques |
|
|
"If you have a spectrometer available I suggest scanning the emission to get the real emission spectrum of the LED."
It would be of more general use if the manufacturer supplied a standardized, trustworthy spectral output of these devices. Then everyone could determine for themselves what would work best for their systems and samples without the need for additional instrumentation. C Carl A. Boswell 520-742-6131 -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Justin Ross Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 6:14 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: LEDs ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hi, We previously had the Xe lamps and changed to the SSI illumination on our Deltavision Core. The exposure times were reduced by a factor of 5 to 10. The SSI is actually made by Lumencor (no commercial interest). From my experience it works really well without the downsides of a lamp of heat generation or having to align and change bulbs. If you do decide to use LEDs, I strongly suggest still using bandpass excitation filter (as suggested previously) because with some LEDs there upto 5% light emission at wavelengths upto 50 nm higher than the peak which will generally add a lot of background to your images. If you have a spectrometer available I suggest scanning the emission to get the real emission spectrum of the LED. Regards, Justin. -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Julio Vazquez Sent: Friday, 24 February 2012 4:14 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: LEDs ***** To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy ***** Hello all, Applied Precision just told me that the InsightSSI illuminator is actually not LED based, so please ignore my previous posting, as far as LEDs are concerned. Julio. == On Feb 23, 2012, at 2:06 AM, jacques wrote: > ***** > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to: > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > ***** > > Thanks for your help and comments ! > > Jacques |
«
Return to Confocal Microscopy List
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |