Re: camera for fluorescence <$4000

Posted by Michael Giacomelli on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/camera-for-fluorescence-4000-tp7585340p7585352.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.
*****

>I also heard off-list from Q-Imaging, who suggested their R1 (1.4MP CCD,
cooled).

For what it's worth, the read noise on that camera is worse than many of
the inexpensive machine vision cameras Edmunds or Thorlabs sell.  Unless
you must have cooling, it may not be a great choice.

>Is anybody using DSLR cameras for fluorescence imaging?  I know they are
color and probably less sensitive, but I still wonder...

I've seen these used a lot in medical labs for taking pictures of slides.
The main problem with a dSLR (besides the software interface) is that the
sensor form factor is usually very large.  For example, that R1 you linked
above uses a Sony CCD sensor with an 11 mm diagonal, whereas a typical dSLR
sensor format is 25-30 mm diagonal.  To maintain the same field of view you
would either have to change the tube lens or get a ~3:1 expansion
telescope.  For comparable performance it usually makes more sense to just
buy a camera with the right sensor size.

(My apologies for sending this message twice)

Mike

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 1:07 AM, Aryeh Weiss <[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.
> *****
>
> Many thanks to the many people who already responded to my inquiry.
>
> On 16/06/2016 11:51 PM, Armstrong, Brian wrote:
>
>> Hi Aryeh, I think that you can get a good scientific camera for that much
>> from Q Imaging. Thor Labs also has CCD cameras around this price point.
>> I inherited 4 astronomy cameras and was very disappointed with them and
>> ended up just giving them away
>>
> I also heard off-list from Q-Imaging, who suggested their R1 (1.4MP CCD,
> cooled). I suspect that in Israel it will too expensive, but we are
> checking that.
> Thanks for the comment on the astronomy cameras.
>
> On 17/06/2016 12:35 AM, Pedro Almada wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Aryeh, have you had a look at the Hamamatsu flash 2.8?
>>
>> This is an attractive option, but I am pretty sure it will be too
> expensive (we will check). I know that the Flash 4.o costs around $9k in
> Israel. What does it cost in your area?
>
> On 17/06/2016 12:56 AM, Michael Giacomelli wrote:
>
>> Point Grey periodically updates their evaluation of cost-effective
>> sensors:
>>
>> https://www.ptgrey.com/camera-sensor-review
>>
>> The newly added IMX264/IMX265 series sensors obtain a read noise of about
>> 2.3 electrons and an absolute sensitivity of about 4 photons.  sCMOS will
>> do better (read noise of about 1 electron on the newest models).  From the
>> brightness of your specimen you can get a rough idea how well that will
>> work for you.
>>
>
> I have a Pt Grey Chamelian, but I found that I cannot easily use it with
> Micromanager. It claims to run with IIDC (DC1394), and it does, sort of.
> However, at least in my hands, it was difficult, and not all of the modes
> worked in micromanager (although it worked ok with coriander , which is a
> program used for testing such things).
>
> On 17/06/2016 2:01 AM, Ochoa, Lorenzo F. wrote:
>
>> Hello Aryeh,
>>
>> I've had good results from the Thorlabs High Sensitivity USB 3.0 CMOS
>> Cameras. They are relatively cheap ($1.5K) and are compatible with
>> Micro-Manager:
>> https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=4024
>>
> This looks interesting. The price is right, at the cost of being uncooled
> (but cooling for exposures under a second may not be critical). It is
> supposed to work with micromanager.
>
> Is anybody using DSLR cameras for fluorescence imaging?  I know they are
> color and probably less sensitive, but I still wonder...
>
> Again thanks to the many people who replied.
>
> --aryeh
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 16/06/2016 10:26 PM, Aryeh Weiss wrote:
>
>> I was asked if I can recommend a camera for fluorescence microscopy for
>> under $4k.
>> It is not single molecule, but if they can see it, they would like the
>> camera to see it.
>>
>> I found a similar question on the list from 2014
>>
>> https://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1403&L=confocalmicroscopy&P=R18770&1=confocalmicroscopy&9=A&J=on&d=No+Match%3BMatch%3BMatches&z=4
>>
>> but this is a moving target, and my price constraint is higher, so I am
>> wondering what else is out there.
>>
>> Are there any sCMOS  cameras that qualify? Does anyone have experience
>> with the less known brands (eg cameras geared toward amateur astronomy)?
>> I have a strong preference for cameras that will work with micro-manager.
>> I would appreciate finding out what solutions people on the list have
>> found.
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>> --aryeh
>>
>>
>
> --
> Aryeh Weiss
> Faculty of Engineering
> Bar Ilan University
> Ramat Gan 52900 Israel
>
> Ph:  972-3-5317638
> FAX: 972-3-7384051
>