Posted by
Roshma Azeem on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Olympus-FV1000-vs-Nikon-A1-tp4567055p4643864.html
Hello Danielle,
Leica SP5 is slightly outdated when compare to LSM 710 and A1. In addition, it is a prism based system. However, both LSM710 and A1 are diffraction grating based systems.
SP5 has certain unique features like - FOV 21, 8X8K resolution and AOBS. AOBS is optional. One need to pay extra for this that adds up the price too high. However, Nikon's low angle incidence dichroic mirror gives almost the same effect (but without extra cost).
A1 gives 4X4K image size, whereas LSM 710 gives 6X6K. SP5's 8X8K image ends up in photo bleaching. A1 has continuously variable zoom up to 1000X but LSM 710 is limited to 50X.
LSM 710 uses conventional rectangular pinhole but A1 has it's unique hexagonal pinhole resulting better images. The spectral detector of LSM 710 has 34 channels with simultaneously acquisition unlike the previous model LSM 510 that was with 4x8=32. However, the spectral step size is 3nm (3x34=102nm wavelength resolution) and it is not flexible like A1 that has 2.5nm, 6nm and 32nm (resulting 2.5x32=80nm, 6x32=192nm and 10x32= 320nm wavelength resolution). A1 has surprisingly effective unmixing efficiency even in the close range.
In LSM710 high wavelength range up to 1100 nm is possible for optimized transmission. I am not sure if the A1 has the same capability. In our experience, 710 gives wonderful sensitivity. Their software Zen 2009 is compatible with Vista/Windows 7. Even anisotropy imaging is possible with LSM 710 (do not know about A1). Nikon software has almost all of the regular modules. However, for Zen we need to pay extra for the add on modules.
For simultaneous photo activation and imaging, one need to incorporate Duo system (two heads) into LSM 710 that adds up the cost. However, A1R scan head serves this purpose without any cumbersome modifications and the speed and performance is relatively incomparable.
If you are regularly going for live cell imaging/long time multipoint imaging, I feel A1 has so many features and it is not bleaching the dyes or induce unexpected phototoxicity. Though, we found 710 has slightly better sensitivity, we often face bleaching and laser induced toxicity problems for the same set of experiments.
No commercial interest.
Roshma.
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:41 AM, Danielle Crippen
<[hidden email]> wrote:
After reading this entire thread, I'm wondering if anyone has experience comparing the A1R (which is receiving great reviews here) directly to the Zeiss 710 and the Leica SP5??
We are planning to purchase one of these instruments specifically for slice and intravital imaging and I'd greatly appreciate any feedback on these systems this list has to offer!!
Many thanks and kind regards!
danielle
Danielle Crippen
Morphology and Imaging Core Manager
Buck Institute for Age Research
-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Amol Karwa
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 1:43 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Olympus FV1000 vs Nikon A1
Hello everyone,
Well right now I don't have anything substantial to add to the discussion except that we were in similar situation and we are going with Nikon A1. The decision was simply based on our imaging needs and the superiority of Nikon A1. The instrument is being installed as we speak and I'm really excited to use it. It will be pretty big jump from Leica SP2 to this A1
However I do have a question and this comes from the inexperience. What advantage that A1r scanhead provides vis a vis A1? I know it has high speed imaging capabilities but would you say A1 can do most of the job for live cell imaging?
Thanks,
Amol
--
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Olympus-FV1000-vs-Nikon-A1-tp4567055p4635601.html
Sent from the Confocal Microscopy List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.