Re: Inverted fluo for cell culture: Olympus, Zeiss or China ?
- From: "Kevin Cunningham" <smskjd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:45:36 GMT
"David" <sipka1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:tBq%e.82583$Sj1.37890@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> GTO wrote:
>> 15k$ for an inverted fluorescence microscope isn't enough when you intent
>> to buy new with a decent imaging device.
>
> Luckily, I got hold of the Spot RT 2.2.2 camera which with (albeit older
> version) Image Pro SW should be good enough for some time. So I can devote
> the whole budget on the scope, as I answered Kevin, e.g. the Axiovert 40
> fits in.
>
> I am surprised that
>> Nikon asked for more than Olympus for a comparable system. I found Nikon
>> to be cheaper in the US.
>
> I probably should compare apple to apple. Would you agree that the frame
> of Axiovert 40, Oly IX41 and Nikon 100 are in the same category ? Then the
> Oly IX51 is a step higher, so I should not be surprised that the whole
> setup costs more. Are the fluorite (probably semi-apo) objectives
> comparable between companies or does one has an edge ?
>
> David
David, There is no way to effectively use anything but the makers objectives
on the makers 'scope.
Kevin Cunningham
SMS
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Inverted fluo for cell culture: Olympus, Zeiss or China ?
- Next by Date: Siedentopf
- Previous by thread: Re: Inverted fluo for cell culture: Olympus, Zeiss or China ?
- Next by thread: Re: Inverted fluo for cell culture: Olympus, Zeiss or China ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|