Posted by
Nico Stuurman-3 on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/seeking-suggestions-on-new-sCMOS-camera-tp7579501p7579508.html
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy*****
John Oreoupolus did a nice comparison of EMCCDs and sCMOS cameras on spinning disk:
http://www.spectral.ca/_files/file.php?fileid=fileWFBaXTDIaW&filename=file_4_CSU_Camera_Comparison__sCMOSvsEMCCD.pdfB.t.w., to do a fair comparison, you will need to change the magnification to the camera. Hopefully, your current setup is optimized for the 16 micron pixels in your EMCCD. Swapping in the sCMOS without changing magnification will give you a lot of empty magnification that will adversely affect noise characteristics. Binning does not really help since in a CMOS all pixels are read out individually anyways (i.e. hardware and software binning does the same thing, unlike CCDs).
Best,
Nico
On Jan 15, 2013, at 8:45 PM, Zulin Yu wrote:
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy> *****
>
> Dear All,
> I am writing to ask your suggestions about sCMOS camera on spinning disk
> system. Recently, I got a demo (Hamamatsu Flash 4.0) camera on our spinning
> disk system (PerkinElmer Ultraview) and I am a little bit disappointed about its
> performance - it is a decent camera, but not as good as I expected.
> Based on the company's brochure, Flash 4.0 SNR exceeds that of EM-CCDs at
> about 6 photon/pixel
> (
http://sales.hamamatsu.com/assets/pdf/hpspdf/e_flash4.pdf); several research
> paper also claimed that the latest sCMOS is as good as EMCCD with more than 15
> photons (
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=EMCCD%20sCMOS).
> However, we still got a much higher SNR (double) on EMCCD even we have more
> than 50 photons/pixel. Did anybody have experience with the high end sCMOS
> camera and compared it with back-thinned EMCCD? I appreciate any input, Zulin