Posted by
Roshma Azeem on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Comparison-Zeiss-710-vs-Nikon-A1-tp4885623p4886822.html
Hi Pedro,
Seems you have short listed A1 and 710. Both the systems are released almost the same time. We have little experience in handling the 710 system but sufficiently exposed with A1. I have mentioned my opinion and observation about these two systems earlier that is given below.
A1 gives 4X4K image size, whereas 710 gives 6X6K. But do we really need 6KX6K? When we tried taking 6K images, we have experienced photo bleaching in some attempts.
A1 has continuously variable zoom up to
1000X but LSM 710 is limited to 50X. However, we were not given proper training about how to use variable zoom up to 1000X. In my view, the 1000X variable zoom is not that important factor.
Fortunately, in 710 there is a master pinhole unlike the earlier 510 that takes time for alignment. However, 710 uses conventional
rectangular pinhole but A1 has unique hexagonal pinhole resulting
better images. We have checked the same sample in both the systems.
The spectral detector of LSM 710 has 34 channels with
simultaneously acquisition unlike the previous model 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 (little) 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). But you need to purchase this module (extra cost).
Nikon software is robust has almost
all of the regular modules. However, for Zen we need to pay extra for
the add on modules. Some of the regular functions are "optional" with Zen.
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. Though there are some annoying "noise" is generated while we use the resonant scanner the speed and performance is still impressive.
If you are regularly going for live cell imaging and Ca++ 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.
Eager to know the inputs of other users.
No commercial interest.
Roshma.
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Pedro J Camello
<[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,
has anybody in the list compared Nikon A1 vs Zeiss 710. We´re purchasing a
spectral micro with a TIRF module and motorization. Any input will be
really wellcome (off list if you prefer)
A second question, what is the most close to "live cell" sample to make
real tests in confocal? I´m going to travel to test a couple of micros,
and to carry or prepapre real living cells is rather complicated for us.
We´re especially interested in ion (Ca2+) experiments.
Thanks
--
Dr Pedro J Camello
Dpt Physiology
Faculty of Veterinary Sciences
University of Extremadura
10071 Caceres
Spain
Ph: 927257000 Extension 51321/51290
Fax:927257110