Re: Zeiss 40X N.A. 1.4 Plan APo as replacement for 63X?

Posted by simon walker (BI)-2 on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Zeiss-40X-N-A-1-4-Plan-APo-as-replacement-for-63X-tp7582324p7582325.html

*****
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.
*****

Hello,
We have this objective on our new 780 and initial impressions are very good. I haven't quantitatively compared the performance with the 63x 1.4, but there's no obvious drop in performance for high resolution imaging and the signal is excellent. I'm trying to push confocal users on to this as their default lens, which can be difficult ...'but I need higher magnification to see my small cells!' etc.  The only downside I've noticed so far is that the lens barrel and top surface area are considerably larger than the 63x 1.4, so imaging samples mounted at the edge of a slide can be problematic (one user has already scratched the top edge of the lens by impacting on the stage insert whilst trying to focus on a coverslip mounted at the edge of a slide).  As we have both lenses I'm happy to try any tests people would like to see to compare performance.
Simon

> On 11 Jul 2014, at 16:47, "Cammer, Michael" <[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.
> *****
>
> Does anyone have experience with the new Zeiss 40X N.A. 1.4 PlanApo?  This is something I've wanted for a long time, the ability to take large fields of view (2k X 2k pixels) at high resolution instead of having to do tiling.  Also, with the new cameras that have oodles of small pixels...
>
> I'm considering replacing our 63X with this new 40X.  Any experience with this, other than the battle of having to explain to other scope users why this is not really lower magnification?
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael
>
> ===========================================================================
> Michael Cammer, Microscopy Core & Dustin Lab , Skirball Institute, NYU Langone Medical Center
> Cell:  914-309-3270   Lab: 212-263-3208
> http://ocs.med.nyu.edu/microscopy & http://www.med.nyu.edu/skirball-lab/dustinlab/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is proprietary, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender by return email and delete the original message. Please note, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The organization accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
> =================================

The Babraham Institute, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge CB22 3AT Registered Charity No. 1053902.
The information transmitted in this email is directed only to the addressee. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete this email from your system. The contents of this e-mail are the views of the sender and do not necessarily represent the views of the Babraham Institute. Full conditions at: www.babraham.ac.uk<http://www.babraham.ac.uk/terms>