Olympus ZDC 2 vs. Nikon PFS

[Yuval Ebenstein]

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

Hello,
I found no mention of the newer ZDC 2 in the archives.
I'm wondering if anyone has experience with both systems and can point out some main differences between the ZDC and PFS.
How fast is the ZDC? will it maintain focus during large stage xy movements?
Thanks for you help
Yuval Ebenstein

[Adrian Smith-6]

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

Hi all,

I found this email in the archives but I can't see any replies.

I'm also interested in any comments on:-

- PFS (Nikon) vs
- ZDC (Olympus) vs
- ZDC 2 (Olympus) vs
- UltimateFocus (API (Deltavision))
- Adaptive Focus Control (Leica)
- Definite Focus (Zeiss)

Did I miss anyone? :)

Regards,

Adrian Smith
Centenary Institute, Sydney, Australia




On 17/05/2011, at 5:38 AM, Yuval Ebenstein wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> Hello,
> I found no mention of the newer ZDC 2 in the archives.
> I'm wondering if anyone has experience with both systems and can point out some main differences between the ZDC and PFS.
> How fast is the ZDC? will it maintain focus during large stage xy movements?
> Thanks for you help
> Yuval Ebenstein

[Axel Kurt Preuss]

Dear Adrian
AFC from Leica is a marvel
But it s control by metamorph is a wink wink insider approach by metamorph s engineers . ( the old game: programers make a little fun of users)
But once one has captured the spirit of how MM deals with AFC and how Molecular Imaging deals with logics or ergonomics it is a marvel
It is superfast and can overcome out of focus deviations (far?) above 500 um easily and in light speed. You can tip with an eppendorf against well bottom and no image disturbance. You can lift the well, same result
I havent tried a sledgehammer, but probably you wont see any disturbance on the screen when it hits

MM s control of AFC is typical MM, call or email me if you need further information. In particular multiwell vs slide mode has a typical programer's approach to the remote  world of science

Cannot  comment on the other systems as i ve not tested them elaborately enough, only some of them  a little.

Definitely no commercial interests.

Thanks
   Cheers

Axel
Sent from [phone]
—————
Axel K Preuss, PhD,
Central Imaging, IMCB, A*Star, 61 Biopolis Dr, 6-19B, Singapore 138673
[hidden email]


On Jul 7, 2011, at 1:55 PM, "Adrian Smith" <[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,
>
> I found this email in the archives but I can't see any replies.
>
> I'm also interested in any comments on:-
>
> - PFS (Nikon) vs
> - ZDC (Olympus) vs
> - ZDC 2 (Olympus) vs
> - UltimateFocus (API (Deltavision))
> - Adaptive Focus Control (Leica)
> - Definite Focus (Zeiss)
>
> Did I miss anyone? :)
>
> Regards,
>
> Adrian Smith
> Centenary Institute, Sydney, Australia
>
>
>
>
> On 17/05/2011, at 5:38 AM, Yuval Ebenstein wrote:
>
>> *****
>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
>> *****
>>
>> Hello,
>> I found no mention of the newer ZDC 2 in the archives.
>> I'm wondering if anyone has experience with both systems and can point out some main differences between the ZDC and PFS.
>> How fast is the ZDC? will it maintain focus during large stage xy movements?
>> Thanks for you help
>> Yuval Ebenstein

Note: This message may contain confidential information. If this Email/Fax has been sent to you by mistake, please notify the sender and delete it immediately. Thank you.

[lechristophe]

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

I use the Zeiss Definite Focus solution. It was retrofited on our
AxioObserver inverted stand, initially it was quite difficult to get
it installed (had to send the stand back to Germany), but I think this
was one of the first retrofited system they installed. Now they can
make it on the spot easily.

The system works really well, nicely integrated in Zeiss' Axiovision
software (can also be driven by MM, although I didn't test it yet
because I'm not willing to pay yet another MM upgrade). Sometimes I'm
just surprised how perfectly horizontal the coverslip is when
wandering around the coverslip looking for the next cell to image,
until I realized I left the focus on "constant update"! I have no
problem using it with high mag, high NA TIRF objectives.

I the end I think all these systems are quite mature now, so the
choice will depend more on choosing a brand for other reason (stand,
software etc.), given that all these system are proprietary and will
only work with a stand from the same brand. One exception is ASI's
CRIFF system which can be installed on any microscope, but as it is
placed on the camera port it requires to have filters that let the 780
nm laser through (as opposed to other systems which are place between
the BFP of the objective and the filter cubes).

Christophe

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 07:55, Adrian Smith
<[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,
>
> I found this email in the archives but I can't see any replies.
>
> I'm also interested in any comments on:-
>
> - PFS (Nikon) vs
> - ZDC (Olympus) vs
> - ZDC 2 (Olympus) vs
> - UltimateFocus (API (Deltavision))
> - Adaptive Focus Control (Leica)
> - Definite Focus (Zeiss)
>
> Did I miss anyone? :)
>
> Regards,
>
> Adrian Smith
> Centenary Institute, Sydney, Australia
>
>
>
>
> On 17/05/2011, at 5:38 AM, Yuval Ebenstein wrote:
>
>> *****
>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
>> *****
>>
>> Hello,
>> I found no mention of the newer ZDC 2 in the archives.
>> I'm wondering if anyone has experience with both systems and can point out some main differences between the ZDC and PFS.
>> How fast is the ZDC? will it maintain focus during large stage xy movements?
>> Thanks for you help
>> Yuval Ebenstein
>

[Jeremy Adler-4]

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

Has anyone every constructed a DIY air table by placing a bicycle  
inner tube under a baseplate. It seems like a very simple and cheap  
solution.

Would it be worthwhile to use a stack of two inner tubes and  
baseplates, with the inner tubes inflated to different pressures ?

Any advice and alternative suggestions would be appreciated.


Jeremy Adler
IGP
Rudbeckslaboratoriet
Daghammersköljdsväg 20
751 85 Uppsala
Sweden

0046 (0)18 471 4607

[Guy Cox-2]

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

I have indeed done this, with an AFM.  The baseplate was a thick slate slab.  Never tried the two inner tube trick, though.  It does work, though it did have additional damping above it (in the AFM enclosure) so it wasn't the sole source of isolation.  We were able to get atomic resolution on a good day.  This was quite a long time ago, with one of the old Park AFMs (a brilliant design for its time).

                                       Guy

Optical Imaging Techniques in Cell Biology
by Guy Cox    CRC Press / Taylor & Francis
     http://www.guycox.com/optical.htm
______________________________________________
Associate Professor Guy Cox, MA, DPhil(Oxon)
Australian Centre for Microscopy & Microanalysis,
Madsen Building F09, University of Sydney, NSW 2006

Phone [phone]     Fax [phone]
             Mobile [phone]
______________________________________________
      http://www.guycox.net
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jeremy Adler
Sent: Thursday, 7 July 2011 7:23 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Cheap Antivibration table

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

Has anyone every constructed a DIY air table by placing a bicycle  
inner tube under a baseplate. It seems like a very simple and cheap  
solution.

Would it be worthwhile to use a stack of two inner tubes and  
baseplates, with the inner tubes inflated to different pressures ?

Any advice and alternative suggestions would be appreciated.


Jeremy Adler
IGP
Rudbeckslaboratoriet
Daghammersköljdsväg 20
751 85 Uppsala
Sweden

0046 (0)18 471 4607

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1516/3748 - Release Date: 07/06/11

[Mario Faretta]

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

In our lab there are two Nikon System with PFS and one Olympus ZDC2 all
controlled by Metamorph.  They are also compatible with the Micromanager
(I tested the Olympus and it works fine) free software.
The PFS, once setted the interface position, applies a continuos
feedback to maintain the sample in focus with a minimal time delay being
the excursion limited. If you have to acquire Z stacks it has to be
disactivated and then reactivated. Control softwares allows to memorize
offset positions making it very useful in "Mark and find" timelapse. The
continuos focusing is also fantastic with mosaic acquisitions over large
areas making the procedure very fast and precise.  I think it's
extremely useful and efficient. We tested it on different magnifications
and numerical apertures with good results. The available objectives
working with the PFS cover a wide range of nees, maybe the only
limitation is that they usually have short working distance, but I am
not up to date on the list of available solutions, maybe better for you
to check if this is a strong limitation.
The Olympus ZDC works on the same principle but essentially do not work
continuously: everytime you move, the position of the interface (and
consequently of the focal plane according to the offset you set) has to
be recalculated moving over a range of microns (you can set it).
Essentially it works similarly to the software autofocus, with the
advantage of being quite fast (let's say you have a time delay of the
order of 1 second according to the range you set) and not dependent on
the presence of "features" in the image.
I heard that Olympus is going to release a new version working in a
continuous way,  but it's only a rumor for me no sure info about it.
Probably you already know,  remember that these systems works with a
defined list of objectives only and on glass (or similar optical
properties) substrates (someone told me years ago that in some
conditions also plastic can be tried but I have non experience on it).
Hope it helps
Mario

Il 7/7/2011 10:26 AM, Christophe Leterrier ha scritto:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> I use the Zeiss Definite Focus solution. It was retrofited on our
> AxioObserver inverted stand, initially it was quite difficult to get
> it installed (had to send the stand back to Germany), but I think this
> was one of the first retrofited system they installed. Now they can
> make it on the spot easily.
>
> The system works really well, nicely integrated in Zeiss' Axiovision
> software (can also be driven by MM, although I didn't test it yet
> because I'm not willing to pay yet another MM upgrade). Sometimes I'm
> just surprised how perfectly horizontal the coverslip is when
> wandering around the coverslip looking for the next cell to image,
> until I realized I left the focus on "constant update"! I have no
> problem using it with high mag, high NA TIRF objectives.
>
> I the end I think all these systems are quite mature now, so the
> choice will depend more on choosing a brand for other reason (stand,
> software etc.), given that all these system are proprietary and will
> only work with a stand from the same brand. One exception is ASI's
> CRIFF system which can be installed on any microscope, but as it is
> placed on the camera port it requires to have filters that let the 780
> nm laser through (as opposed to other systems which are place between
> the BFP of the objective and the filter cubes).
>
> Christophe
>
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 07:55, Adrian Smith
> <[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,
>>
>> I found this email in the archives but I can't see any replies.
>>
>> I'm also interested in any comments on:-
>>
>> - PFS (Nikon) vs
>> - ZDC (Olympus) vs
>> - ZDC 2 (Olympus) vs
>> - UltimateFocus (API (Deltavision))
>> - Adaptive Focus Control (Leica)
>> - Definite Focus (Zeiss)
>>
>> Did I miss anyone? :)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Adrian Smith
>> Centenary Institute, Sydney, Australia
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 17/05/2011, at 5:38 AM, Yuval Ebenstein wrote:
>>
>>> *****
>>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
>>> *****
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>> I found no mention of the newer ZDC 2 in the archives.
>>> I'm wondering if anyone has experience with both systems and can point out some main differences between the ZDC and PFS.
>>> How fast is the ZDC? will it maintain focus during large stage xy movements?
>>> Thanks for you help
>>> Yuval Ebenstein

--
---PLEASE Note the change in telephone number---

--
Mario Faretta
Department of Experimental Oncology
European Institute of Oncology
c/o IFOM-IEO Campus for Oncogenomics
via Adamello 16 20139 Milan Italy
Phone: ++39-0294375027
email: [hidden email]
http://www.ifom-ieo-campus.it

[Aryeh Weiss]

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

On 7/7/11 2:51 PM, Mario Faretta wrote:

> useful and efficient. We tested it on different magnifications and
> numerical apertures with good results. The available objectives working
> with the PFS cover a wide range of nees, maybe the only limitation is
> that they usually have short working distance, but I am not up to date
> on the list of available solutions, maybe better for you to check if
> this is a strong limitation.

I can add that we used the PFS with LWD air objectives and plastic
multiwell plates, and it works well. However, if you have been using it
with high NA short WD objectives, you will need to reset the offset to
get it to lock.

It is important that the plate not move too far out of focus when moving
between wells. However, this was only a problem for us when we had a bad
holder that seriously deformed the multiwell plate.

--aryeh
--
Aryeh Weiss
School of Engineering
Bar Ilan University
Ramat Gan 52900 Israel

Ph:  972-3-5317638
FAX: [phone]

[Sudipta Maiti]

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

We have done nice FCS experiments with a wide baseplate resting on a thick
piece of furniture foam. It works.
Sudipta
 On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 20:05:02 +1000, Guy Cox wrote

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> I have indeed done this, with an AFM.  The baseplate was a thick
> slate slab.  Never tried the two inner tube trick, though.  It does
> work, though it did have additional damping above it (in the AFM
> enclosure) so it wasn't the sole source of isolation.  We were able
> to get atomic resolution on a good day.  This was quite a long time
> ago, with one of the old Park AFMs (a brilliant design for its time).
>
>                                        Guy
>
> Optical Imaging Techniques in Cell Biology
> by Guy Cox    CRC Press / Taylor & Francis
>      http://www.guycox.com/optical.htm
> ______________________________________________
> Associate Professor Guy Cox, MA, DPhil(Oxon)
> Australian Centre for Microscopy & Microanalysis,
> Madsen Building F09, University of Sydney, NSW 2006
>
> Phone [phone]     Fax [phone]
>              Mobile [phone]
> ______________________________________________
>       http://www.guycox.net
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jeremy Adler
> Sent: Thursday, 7 July 2011 7:23 PM To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Cheap Antivibration table
>
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> Has anyone every constructed a DIY air table by placing a bicycle  
> inner tube under a baseplate. It seems like a very simple and cheap  
> solution.
>
> Would it be worthwhile to use a stack of two inner tubes and  
> baseplates, with the inner tubes inflated to different pressures ?
>
> Any advice and alternative suggestions would be appreciated.
>
> Jeremy Adler
> IGP
> Rudbeckslaboratoriet
> Daghammersköljdsväg 20
> 751 85 Uppsala
> Sweden
>
> 0046 (0)18 471 4607
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1516/3748 - Release Date: 07/06/11

Dr. Sudipta Maiti
Associate Professor
Dept. of Chemical Sciences
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research
Homi Bhabha Raod, Colaba, Mumbai 400005
Ph. 91-22-2278-2716 / 2539
Fax: [phone]
alternate e-mail: [hidden email]
url: biophotonics.wetpaint.com

[Straatman, Kees (Dr.)]

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

I agree with aryeh concerning PFS and can add that the ZDC also works on multiwall plates using LWD objectives.

Kees


Dr Ir K.R. Straatman
Senior Experimental Officer
Centre for Core Biotechnology Services
College of Medicine, Biological Sciences and Psychology
http://www.le.ac.uk/biochem/microscopy/home.html


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Aryeh Weiss
Sent: 07 July 2011 13:22
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Focus mechanisms... Re: Olympus ZDC 2 vs. Nikon PFS

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

On 7/7/11 2:51 PM, Mario Faretta wrote:

> useful and efficient. We tested it on different magnifications and
> numerical apertures with good results. The available objectives working
> with the PFS cover a wide range of nees, maybe the only limitation is
> that they usually have short working distance, but I am not up to date
> on the list of available solutions, maybe better for you to check if
> this is a strong limitation.

I can add that we used the PFS with LWD air objectives and plastic
multiwell plates, and it works well. However, if you have been using it
with high NA short WD objectives, you will need to reset the offset to
get it to lock.

It is important that the plate not move too far out of focus when moving
between wells. However, this was only a problem for us when we had a bad
holder that seriously deformed the multiwell plate.

--aryeh
--
Aryeh Weiss
School of Engineering
Bar Ilan University
Ramat Gan 52900 Israel

Ph:  972-3-5317638
FAX: [phone]

[Watkins, Simon C]

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

With all these devices you need to make sure that the blocking glass in the system does not confound your experiments.  for example if you work in the near IR (Cy5-7) or near UV (Fura) you should check the light transmission for the chosen device to ensure compatibility.
S

Simon C. Watkins Ph.D, FRC Path
Professor and Vice Chair Cell Biology and Physiology
Professor Immunology Director Center for Biologic Imaging
BSTS 225
University of Pittsburgh
3500 Terrace St
Pittsburgh PA 15261
412-352-2277
www.cbi.pitt.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Straatman, Kees R. (Dr.)
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 8:38 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Focus mechanisms... Re: Olympus ZDC 2 vs. Nikon PFS

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

I agree with aryeh concerning PFS and can add that the ZDC also works on multiwall plates using LWD objectives.

Kees


Dr Ir K.R. Straatman
Senior Experimental Officer
Centre for Core Biotechnology Services
College of Medicine, Biological Sciences and Psychology
http://www.le.ac.uk/biochem/microscopy/home.html


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Aryeh Weiss
Sent: 07 July 2011 13:22
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Focus mechanisms... Re: Olympus ZDC 2 vs. Nikon PFS

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

On 7/7/11 2:51 PM, Mario Faretta wrote:

> useful and efficient. We tested it on different magnifications and
> numerical apertures with good results. The available objectives working
> with the PFS cover a wide range of nees, maybe the only limitation is
> that they usually have short working distance, but I am not up to date
> on the list of available solutions, maybe better for you to check if
> this is a strong limitation.

I can add that we used the PFS with LWD air objectives and plastic
multiwell plates, and it works well. However, if you have been using it
with high NA short WD objectives, you will need to reset the offset to
get it to lock.

It is important that the plate not move too far out of focus when moving
between wells. However, this was only a problem for us when we had a bad
holder that seriously deformed the multiwell plate.

--aryeh
--
Aryeh Weiss
School of Engineering
Bar Ilan University
Ramat Gan 52900 Israel

Ph:  972-3-5317638
FAX: [phone]

[Massimiliano Garre']

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

Hi Jeremy,
as both imaging facilty technician and turntable fanatic I can say that air based
anti-vibration solutions are among ther best solutions in case of low budget DIY
projects.
As a suggestion I would use 3 small tubes (like those ones used in kids bikes)
rather than 1 large, so that it would be simpler to adjust the planarity of the
system
Moreover you could improve the result by placing everything on top of a
vibrations killing base that you could build yourself, like this one:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/sandblaster_e.html
both sand and talc powder are cheap and impressive in stopping unwanted
vibrations, but you will have to pay particular attention in protecting your
instrument from the contact with the material used.
My two cents
Max Garre'

[Keith Morris]

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

Back at UCL, we manufactured our own 'anti-vibration' microscope tables we
used Fabreeka anti-vibration rubber pads [square air indents in a thick
rubber sheet] rather than squash balls or a bicycle inner tube as others
have found when you get a puncture or a squash ball finally pops it’s a pain
diss-assembling it all - Fabcel pads never need pumping up and retain their
shape under load [a flat sheet]. I added a very heavily weighted slab on the
top of the pads - I was hoping for granite but the cost [from a kitchen
worktop supplier] was quite high including delivery in London so our
workshop made a large and very heavy [something like 21" x 18" x 1"] slab of
machined steel which they covered with black Fablon [sticky back plastic] to
make it look a bit less naff. The steel slab did ring like a bell when hit
with anything metal [not good] but it's shear mass, coupled with the Fabcel
pads, actually worked quite well [i.e. the vibrational energy couldn't
bounce a slab of that weight up and down much]. Quite importantly we had the
absolutely rubbish bench worktop underneath the microscopes re-inforced with
extra legs so that it no longer wobbled when you tapped on it.

Fabcel pads
http://docs-europe.electrocomponents.com/webdocs/0030/0900766b80030073.pdf
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/anti-vibration-mounts/3660150

The fabcel pads were a bit weird [ours were all coated with like a sticky
silicon - but at least no surface dust problems]. Fabreeka do mentioned
using Fabcel pads for 'microscopes' [Fabcel 25 recommended, although I think
we used the thicker Fabcel 50 variety as our metal slab was heavy - I can
check that]. We cut them into smaller squares as ours were the 18"x18" pads
[to about 4" square from memory, four near the outside corners, tucked in
out of view, and one in the middle] and we put 2 pads thickness under the
slab, which worked well. It all cost about £600 including workshop time and
the £80 reinforcement under-bench box-steel legs+feet [would have been twice
that with our granite supplier] - most of that cost was the machined mild
steel slab. We stuck a thin ribbed rubber mat material onto the top of
Fablon coated slab to give a tougher top surface for the microscope to rest
on.  From memory We used the lighter load Fabcel 50 pads and stuck the two
4"x 4"ish square pads together by double sided tape after trying to remove a
bit of the Fabcel's sticky 'silicon' coating. You might be able to get
machined granite/marble or black slate slabs cheaper than I could - and some
use cheap concrete slabs but I thought that bit tacky and dust prone.

Anyway it worked for us - tapping the worktop next to the microscope no
longer 'wobbled' the field in view and the door slamming in the corridor
outside no longer caused similar problems. Our two microscopes [Zeiss
Axiovert 100's with 10x air to 63x oil objectives] were on the 4th floor by
a busy London road. All our other microscopes came expensive with air tables
[confocals] or similar manufacturer supplied damping plates [Zeiss/PALM].

Regards

Keith

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Keith J. Morris,
Molecular Cytogenetics and Microscopy Core,
Laboratory 00/069 and 00/070,
The Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics,
Roosevelt Drive,
Oxford  OX3 7BN,
United Kingdom.

Telephone:  [phone]
Email:  [hidden email]
Web-pages: http://www.well.ox.ac.uk/molecular-cytogenetics-and-microscopy


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of Jeremy Adler
Sent: 07 July 2011 10:23
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Cheap Antivibration table

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

Has anyone every constructed a DIY air table by placing a bicycle  
inner tube under a baseplate. It seems like a very simple and cheap  
solution.

Would it be worthwhile to use a stack of two inner tubes and  
baseplates, with the inner tubes inflated to different pressures ?

Any advice and alternative suggestions would be appreciated.


Jeremy Adler
IGP
Rudbeckslaboratoriet
Daghammersköljdsväg 20
751 85 Uppsala
Sweden

0046 (0)18 471 4607

[R. Eric King]

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

Dear List,

There are some ideas in the Holography Handbook

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Holography-Handbook/Fred-Unterseher/e/9780894960161

Thank you for your time, and

Best Regards,



R. Eric King
OEM & International Sales Manager

[hidden email]

www.LaserInnovations.com



LASER

     INNOVATIONS

1150 East Main Street
Santa Paula, CA 93060
[phone]
[phone] fax



www.CoherentLaser.com

www.244nm.com

www.337nm.com

www.355nm.com

www.488nm.com

www.532nm.com

www.Solidimaging.com

 

Confidentiality Notice: This message and any documents attached hereto will be considered confidential and the actual receipt of this correspondence alone acknowledges acceptance of Non-Disclosure which in itself contains information copy righted and/or protected by Laser Innovations.  They are intended for the sole use of the intended recipient.  Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express written permission is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this transmission in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

 





----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Adler" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 2:22 AM
Subject: Cheap Antivibration table

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> Has anyone every constructed a DIY air table by placing a bicycle  
> inner tube under a baseplate. It seems like a very simple and cheap  
> solution.
>
> Would it be worthwhile to use a stack of two inner tubes and  
> baseplates, with the inner tubes inflated to different pressures ?
>
> Any advice and alternative suggestions would be appreciated.
>
>
> Jeremy Adler
> IGP
> Rudbeckslaboratoriet
> Daghammersköljdsväg 20
> 751 85 Uppsala
> Sweden
>
> 0046 (0)18 471 4607
>

[Guy Cox-2]

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

Slate makes a good top and you can often get a cheap slab by going to a billiard table manufacturer and getting a reject piece.  (A table has 3 pieces which are carefully matched, so if one gets chipped or broken the other two are going begging).  It has a beautifully smooth surface and needs no covering.  The slow-combustion wood stove which heats the room where I'm writing this stands on just such a piece.  (No, I'm not in the university right now!)

                                     Guy

Optical Imaging Techniques in Cell Biology
by Guy Cox    CRC Press / Taylor & Francis
     http://www.guycox.com/optical.htm
______________________________________________
Associate Professor Guy Cox, MA, DPhil(Oxon)
Australian Centre for Microscopy & Microanalysis,
Madsen Building F09, University of Sydney, NSW 2006

Phone [phone]     Fax [phone]
             Mobile [phone]
______________________________________________
      http://www.guycox.net
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Keith Morris
Sent: Thursday, 7 July 2011 11:48 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Cheap Antivibration table

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

Back at UCL, we manufactured our own 'anti-vibration' microscope tables we
used Fabreeka anti-vibration rubber pads [square air indents in a thick
rubber sheet] rather than squash balls or a bicycle inner tube as others
have found when you get a puncture or a squash ball finally pops it's a pain
diss-assembling it all - Fabcel pads never need pumping up and retain their
shape under load [a flat sheet]. I added a very heavily weighted slab on the
top of the pads - I was hoping for granite but the cost [from a kitchen
worktop supplier] was quite high including delivery in London so our
workshop made a large and very heavy [something like 21" x 18" x 1"] slab of
machined steel which they covered with black Fablon [sticky back plastic] to
make it look a bit less naff. The steel slab did ring like a bell when hit
with anything metal [not good] but it's shear mass, coupled with the Fabcel
pads, actually worked quite well [i.e. the vibrational energy couldn't
bounce a slab of that weight up and down much]. Quite importantly we had the
absolutely rubbish bench worktop underneath the microscopes re-inforced with
extra legs so that it no longer wobbled when you tapped on it.

Fabcel pads
http://docs-europe.electrocomponents.com/webdocs/0030/0900766b80030073.pdf
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/anti-vibration-mounts/3660150

The fabcel pads were a bit weird [ours were all coated with like a sticky
silicon - but at least no surface dust problems]. Fabreeka do mentioned
using Fabcel pads for 'microscopes' [Fabcel 25 recommended, although I think
we used the thicker Fabcel 50 variety as our metal slab was heavy - I can
check that]. We cut them into smaller squares as ours were the 18"x18" pads
[to about 4" square from memory, four near the outside corners, tucked in
out of view, and one in the middle] and we put 2 pads thickness under the
slab, which worked well. It all cost about £600 including workshop time and
the £80 reinforcement under-bench box-steel legs+feet [would have been twice
that with our granite supplier] - most of that cost was the machined mild
steel slab. We stuck a thin ribbed rubber mat material onto the top of
Fablon coated slab to give a tougher top surface for the microscope to rest
on.  From memory We used the lighter load Fabcel 50 pads and stuck the two
4"x 4"ish square pads together by double sided tape after trying to remove a
bit of the Fabcel's sticky 'silicon' coating. You might be able to get
machined granite/marble or black slate slabs cheaper than I could - and some
use cheap concrete slabs but I thought that bit tacky and dust prone.

Anyway it worked for us - tapping the worktop next to the microscope no
longer 'wobbled' the field in view and the door slamming in the corridor
outside no longer caused similar problems. Our two microscopes [Zeiss
Axiovert 100's with 10x air to 63x oil objectives] were on the 4th floor by
a busy London road. All our other microscopes came expensive with air tables
[confocals] or similar manufacturer supplied damping plates [Zeiss/PALM].

Regards

Keith

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Keith J. Morris,
Molecular Cytogenetics and Microscopy Core,
Laboratory 00/069 and 00/070,
The Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics,
Roosevelt Drive,
Oxford  OX3 7BN,
United Kingdom.

Telephone:  [phone]
Email:  [hidden email]
Web-pages: http://www.well.ox.ac.uk/molecular-cytogenetics-and-microscopy


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of Jeremy Adler
Sent: 07 July 2011 10:23
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Cheap Antivibration table

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

Has anyone every constructed a DIY air table by placing a bicycle  
inner tube under a baseplate. It seems like a very simple and cheap  
solution.

Would it be worthwhile to use a stack of two inner tubes and  
baseplates, with the inner tubes inflated to different pressures ?

Any advice and alternative suggestions would be appreciated.


Jeremy Adler
IGP
Rudbeckslaboratoriet
Daghammersköljdsväg 20
751 85 Uppsala
Sweden

0046 (0)18 471 4607

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1516/3748 - Release Date: 07/06/11

[Gareth Howell]

Hi, on a related note: We are currently planning to put together a live cell imaging station controlled through Metamorph software. We were thinking of utilising the MM autofocus capability (of which I have no experience) so I was wondering what you guys thought of it compared to say splashing out a little more and getting something along the lines of PFS and ZDC on a new stand?
Thanks
Gareth

[Axel Kurt Preuss]

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

Dear Gareth
The Metamorph software AF is OK but not perfect crisp. It helps if you want to image thicker plastic plates. Leica continuous focus needs glass or  very thin plastic well bottoms.

Leica s continuous focus is much faster than Olympus. I haven't looked at Nikon s PFS but my users normally tend to switch it off.  Olympus AF needs also to be within a relatively narrow range

Hope that helps
Axel


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Gareth Howell
Sent: Friday, 8 July, 2011 6:26 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Olympus ZDC 2 vs. Nikon PFS

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

Hi, on a related note: We are currently planning to put together a live cell imaging station controlled through Metamorph software. We were thinking of utilising the MM autofocus capability (of which I have no experience) so I was wondering what you guys thought of it compared to say splashing out a little more and getting something along the lines of PFS and ZDC on a new stand?
Thanks
Gareth

--
View this message in context: http://confocal-microscopy-list.588098.n2.nabble.com/Olympus-ZDC-2-vs-Nikon-PFS-tp6370076p6562023.html
Sent from the Confocal Microscopy List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Note: This message may contain confidential information. If this Email/Fax has been sent to you by mistake, please notify the sender and delete it immediately. Thank you.

[robert.dunakin]

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

 


----- Original Message -----
From: Axel Kurt Preuss [[hidden email]]
Sent: 07/08/2011 06:58 PM ZE8
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Olympus ZDC 2 vs. Nikon PFS



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

Dear Gareth
The Metamorph software AF is OK but not perfect crisp. It helps if you want to image thicker plastic plates. Leica continuous focus needs glass or  very thin plastic well bottoms.

Leica s continuous focus is much faster than Olympus. I haven't looked at Nikon s PFS but my users normally tend to switch it off.  Olympus AF needs also to be within a relatively narrow range

Hope that helps
Axel


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Gareth Howell
Sent: Friday, 8 July, 2011 6:26 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Olympus ZDC 2 vs. Nikon PFS

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

Hi, on a related note: We are currently planning to put together a live cell imaging station controlled through Metamorph software. We were thinking of utilising the MM autofocus capability (of which I have no experience) so I was wondering what you guys thought of it compared to say splashing out a little more and getting something along the lines of PFS and ZDC on a new stand?
Thanks
Gareth

--
View this message in context: http://confocal-microscopy-list.588098.n2.nabble.com/Olympus-ZDC-2-vs-Nikon-PFS-tp6370076p6562023.html
Sent from the Confocal Microscopy List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Note: This message may contain confidential information. If this Email/Fax has been sent to you by mistake, please notify the sender and delete it immediately. Thank you.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________

[robert.dunakin]

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

Eé


----- Original Message -----
From: Axel Kurt Preuss [[hidden email]]
Sent: 07/08/2011 06:58 PM ZE8
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Olympus ZDC 2 vs. Nikon PFS



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

Dear Gareth
The Metamorph software AF is OK but not perfect crisp. It helps if you want to image thicker plastic plates. Leica continuous focus needs glass or  very thin plastic well bottoms.

Leica s continuous focus is much faster than Olympus. I haven't looked at Nikon s PFS but my users normally tend to switch it off.  Olympus AF needs also to be within a relatively narrow range

Hope that helps
Axel


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Gareth Howell
Sent: Friday, 8 July, 2011 6:26 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Olympus ZDC 2 vs. Nikon PFS

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

Hi, on a related note: We are currently planning to put together a live cell imaging station controlled through Metamorph software. We were thinking of utilising the MM autofocus capability (of which I have no experience) so I was wondering what you guys thought of it compared to say splashing out a little more and getting something along the lines of PFS and ZDC on a new stand?
Thanks
Gareth

--
View this message in context: http://confocal-microscopy-list.588098.n2.nabble.com/Olympus-ZDC-2-vs-Nikon-PFS-tp6370076p6562023.html
Sent from the Confocal Microscopy List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Note: This message may contain confidential information. If this Email/Fax has been sent to you by mistake, please notify the sender and delete it immediately. Thank you.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________

[Cameron Nowell]

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

Howdy,
 
We use the MetaMorph autofocus quite often. If you tweak it right (binning, range fr searching etc.) it can be quite fast. Also the advantage of any image based atofocus system is that it will compensate for your sample moving up or down, or flattening out, over time. Systems like the Olympus ZDC (which we use on our confocal system), Nikon PF etc all find the coverslip again. If you sample doesn't move in the same way as the cover slip you may have issues with the focus drifting anyway.
 
Of the three laser based focus systems i think Nions is the fastests, Olypus the slowest and Leica in between. All can be a bit of a pain to set up though.
 
 
Cheers
 
Cam
 
 
Cameron J. Nowell
Microscpy Manager
Central Resource for Advanced Microscopy
Ludwig Insttue for Cancer Research
PO Box 2008
Royal Melbourne Hospital
Victoria, 3050
AUSTRALIA
 
Office: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
 
http://www.ludwig.edu.au/branch/research/platform/microscopy.htm
 

________________________________

From: Confocal Microscopy List on behalf of Axel Kurt Preuss
Sent: Fri 7/8/2011 8:58 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Olympus ZDC 2 vs. Nikon PFS



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

Dear Gareth
The Metamorph software AF is OK but not perfect crisp. It helps if you want to image thicker plastic plates. Leica continuous focus needs glass or  very thin plastic well bottoms.

Leica s continuous focus is much faster than Olympus. I haven't looked at Nikon s PFS but my users normally tend to switch it off.  Olympus AF needs also to be within a relatively narrow range

Hope that helps
Axel


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Gareth Howell
Sent: Friday, 8 July, 2011 6:26 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Olympus ZDC 2 vs. Nikon PFS

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

Hi, on a related note: We are currently planning to put together a live cell imaging station controlled through Metamorph software. We were thinking of utilising the MM autofocus capability (of which I have no experience) so I was wondering what you guys thought of it compared to say splashing out a little more and getting something along the lines of PFS and ZDC on a new stand?
Thanks
Gareth

--
View this message in context: http://confocal-microscopy-list.588098.n2.nabble.com/Olympus-ZDC-2-vs-Nikon-PFS-tp6370076p6562023.html
Sent from the Confocal Microscopy List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Note: This message may contain confidential information. If this Email/Fax has been sent to you by mistake, please notify the sender and delete it immediately. Thank you.