Confocal Microscopy List

Zeiss LSM 880

Classic

List

Threaded

7 messages Options

weber

Zeiss LSM 880

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

Is there some one who know the new Zeiss confocal LSM 880.
It's seem to be a rapid mono point scan with a new line 32 detectors.
It is possible to use it in 2P mode with OPO.
These ones are two time more sensible than LSM780.

Regards

Michelle Peckham

Re: Zeiss LSM 880

> On 17 Jul 2014, at 08:47, "Pascal Weber" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> Is there some one who know the new Zeiss confocal LSM 880.
> It's seem to be a rapid mono point scan with a new line 32 detectors.
> It is possible to use it in 2P mode with OPO.
> These ones are two time more sensible than LSM780.
>
> Regards

lechristophe

Re: Zeiss LSM 880

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

Dear Pascal,

The Zeiss LSM 880 page is now live on Zeiss website:
http://www.zeiss.com/microscopy/en_de/products/confocal-microscopes/lsm-880.html

It uses the previously discussed Airy scan method, that is said to improve
S/N and/or spatial resolution.

Christophe

2014-07-17 10:11 GMT+02:00 Michelle Peckham <[hidden email]>:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> I think Zeiss are announcing at end of month
>
> Michelle
>
> > On 17 Jul 2014, at 08:47, "Pascal Weber" <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > *****
> > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your
> posting.
> > *****
> >
> > Is there some one who know the new Zeiss confocal LSM 880.
> > It's seem to be a rapid mono point scan with a new line 32 detectors.
> > It is possible to use it in 2P mode with OPO.
> > These ones are two time more sensible than LSM780.
> >
> > Regards
>

Andrew York

Re: Zeiss LSM 880

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

Happy to see more details about the system. It looks almost exactly like
Enderlein's ISM with a much faster detector and different postprocessing.
This is impressive, and quite different from instant SIM/OPRA/rescan
confocal.

The big difference is how many pixels are read out per voxel measured.
Airyscanning (and ISM and MSIM) reads out 30+ pixels per voxel measured,
and require postprocessing to see an image. Instant SIM/OPRA/rescan
confocal read out one pixel per voxel, and display a sqrt(2) resolution
improvement before any processing - you could view the superresolution
image through eyepieces!

Digital vs. analog processing is an interesting tradeoff:

*Digital processing means bigger data files
it was quite a relief when we switched from MSIM to instant SIM and our
images got ~200x smaller on disk. I assume Airyscan image data is ~32x
bigger than standard images.

*Digital processing is more flexible
We can't dynamically adjust our instant SIM pinhole after acquisition like
we could with MSIM, but in practice we seldom did this.

*Digital processing means more noise
Measuring >30x more pixels per voxel means >30x more doses of read noise.
This doesn't mean SNR is 30x worse, but there's a nontrivial difference.

*Digital processing algorithms can be more sophisticated
As Zeiss points out, the method Enderlein used to process ISM data doesn't
give 3D superresolution, and I agree that deconvolution is the right way to
process this kind of data. However, Maria did some 2D simulations that
suggest joint deconvolution of ISM data gives results that are hard to
distinguish from Enderlein's trick followed by simple Richardson-Lucy
deconvolution ( http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cphc.201300831 , Figure 4). I
think it's an open, interesting question if the analog processing in
instant SIM discards information compared to digital processing, especially
in 3D.

Does anyone know if these 32-channel GaAsP detectors are available without
buying a whole microscope? Do we know anything about their noise
characteristics? If they managed to make the detector fast without
sacrificing too much noise, that's very exciting.

On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Christophe Leterrier <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> Dear Pascal,
>
> The Zeiss LSM 880 page is now live on Zeiss website:
>
> http://www.zeiss.com/microscopy/en_de/products/confocal-microscopes/lsm-880.html
>
> It uses the previously discussed Airy scan method, that is said to improve
> S/N and/or spatial resolution.
>
> Christophe
>
>
> 2014-07-17 10:11 GMT+02:00 Michelle Peckham <[hidden email]>:
>
> > *****
> > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your
> posting.
> > *****
> >
> > I think Zeiss are announcing at end of month
> >
> > Michelle
> >
> > > On 17 Jul 2014, at 08:47, "Pascal Weber" <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > *****
> > > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> > > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> > > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your
> > posting.
> > > *****
> > >
> > > Is there some one who know the new Zeiss confocal LSM 880.
> > > It's seem to be a rapid mono point scan with a new line 32 detectors.
> > > It is possible to use it in 2P mode with OPO.
> > > These ones are two time more sensible than LSM780.
> > >
> > > Regards
> >
>

Steffen Dietzel

Re: Zeiss LSM 880

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

Am 31.07.2014 18:54, schrieb Andrew York:

> *Digital processing means bigger data files
> it was quite a relief when we switched from MSIM to instant SIM and our
> images got ~200x smaller on disk. I assume Airyscan image data is ~32x
> bigger than standard images.

Yes, it is. Plus the processed image, multiplied with what you hope to
gain in resolution, according to Nyquist. If resolution is supposed to
be 1.7x better, with the smaller pixel size in x and y required that
would be 1.7x1.7 x 33 = 95 times more data than standard.

Or is it sufficient to record with normal pixel size and the smaller
pixel size results from the reconstruction only?

Steffen

--
------------------------------------------------------------
Steffen Dietzel, PD Dr. rer. nat
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Walter-Brendel-Zentrum für experimentelle Medizin (WBex)
Head of light microscopy

Mail room:
Marchioninistr. 15, D-81377 München

Building location:
Marchioninistr. 27, München-Großhadern

Andrew York

Re: Zeiss LSM 880

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

This is an interesting question. With MSIM, we recorded with "normal" size
camera pixels, and "normal" size scan steps, and resampled to smaller image
pixels during our postprocessing. Our thinking was, our camera only had to
satisfy Nyquist for the emission PSF, and the scan had to satisfy Nyquist
for the excitation PSF. I'm less sure about Z, and how important it is to
take smaller z-steps.

We didn't do an especially detailed study of this, though. It's possible
you're much better off with smaller pixels or smaller steps.

On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 6:09 AM, Steffen Dietzel <[hidden email]> wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> Am 31.07.2014 18:54, schrieb Andrew York:
>
> > *Digital processing means bigger data files
> > it was quite a relief when we switched from MSIM to instant SIM and our
> > images got ~200x smaller on disk. I assume Airyscan image data is ~32x
> > bigger than standard images.
>
> Yes, it is. Plus the processed image, multiplied with what you hope to
> gain in resolution, according to Nyquist. If resolution is supposed to
> be 1.7x better, with the smaller pixel size in x and y required that
> would be 1.7x1.7 x 33 = 95 times more data than standard.
>
> Or is it sufficient to record with normal pixel size and the smaller
> pixel size results from the reconstruction only?
>
> Steffen
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Steffen Dietzel, PD Dr. rer. nat
> Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
> Walter-Brendel-Zentrum für experimentelle Medizin (WBex)
> Head of light microscopy
>
> Mail room:
> Marchioninistr. 15, D-81377 München
>
> Building location:
> Marchioninistr. 27, München-Großhadern
>

Zac Arrac Atelaz

Re: Zeiss LSM 880

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

Andrew:

You can select your own PMT GaAsP detector, just the same brand that is inside that system here:

http://www.hamamatsu.com/resources/pdf/etd/p-dev_2013_TOTH0021E01.pdf

I hope you enjoy

Gabriel OH

> Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 10:47:10 -0400
> From: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: Zeiss LSM 880
> To: [hidden email]
>
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> This is an interesting question. With MSIM, we recorded with "normal" size
> camera pixels, and "normal" size scan steps, and resampled to smaller image
> pixels during our postprocessing. Our thinking was, our camera only had to
> satisfy Nyquist for the emission PSF, and the scan had to satisfy Nyquist
> for the excitation PSF. I'm less sure about Z, and how important it is to
> take smaller z-steps.
>
> We didn't do an especially detailed study of this, though. It's possible
> you're much better off with smaller pixels or smaller steps.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 6:09 AM, Steffen Dietzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > *****
> > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> > http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> > Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> > *****
> >
> > Am 31.07.2014 18:54, schrieb Andrew York:
> >
> > > *Digital processing means bigger data files
> > > it was quite a relief when we switched from MSIM to instant SIM and our
> > > images got ~200x smaller on disk. I assume Airyscan image data is ~32x
> > > bigger than standard images.
> >
> > Yes, it is. Plus the processed image, multiplied with what you hope to
> > gain in resolution, according to Nyquist. If resolution is supposed to
> > be 1.7x better, with the smaller pixel size in x and y required that
> > would be 1.7x1.7 x 33 = 95 times more data than standard.
> >
> > Or is it sufficient to record with normal pixel size and the smaller
> > pixel size results from the reconstruction only?
> >
> > Steffen
> >
> >
> > --
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > Steffen Dietzel, PD Dr. rer. nat
> > Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
> > Walter-Brendel-Zentrum für experimentelle Medizin (WBex)
> > Head of light microscopy
> >
> > Mail room:
> > Marchioninistr. 15, D-81377 München
> >
> > Building location:
> > Marchioninistr. 27, München-Großhadern
> >