http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/widefield-getting-better-images-than-spinning-disk-tp7585177p7585217.html
Except in the excitation path where it throws out loads of lift which don't make it through the pinholes.
The excitation might be 10x or even 100x less than the widefield case. You really need to measure the light intensity at the sample.
> On 22 May 2016, at 07:17, Guy Cox <
[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.
> *****
>
> Repeat 100 times:
>
> CONFOCAL ONLY THROWS OUT
> OUT OF FOCUS LIGHT!
>
> The reason spinning disk systems lose light is to attain speed, and has nothing to do with the confocal principle.
>
> Guy
>
> Guy Cox, Honorary Associate Professor
> School of Medical Sciences
>
> Australian Centre for Microscopy and Microanalysis,
> Madsen, F09, University of Sydney, NSW 2006
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:
[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Sam Lord
> Sent: Sunday, 22 May 2016 10:45 AM
> To:
[hidden email]
> Subject: Re: widefield getting better images than spinning disk
>
> *****
> 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 would recommmend setting the exposure time to 100 ms or however long an exposure it takes to get a good image. If the image gets bright but the contrast still looks worse than wide field, then maybe there's an alignment issue. But I suspect your sample is just too dim to image with confocal at 10 ms per frame. Not many samples are bright enough for that.
> Remember that confocal is designed to throw out light in order to improve optical slicing.