Jon Daniels
@jsdaniel02.bsky.social
Scientific instrument developer, focused on #lightsheet and other #microscopy 🔬 at ASI
Smaller fan angles were better for our application. Because Laserline only had 1° and 5°, we had a special 2° one made (which we can sell if it's helpful to others).
I suggest using a slit for only modest adjustments in NA because of light efficiency.
I suggest using a slit for only modest adjustments in NA because of light efficiency.
November 5, 2025 at 11:26 PM
Smaller fan angles were better for our application. Because Laserline only had 1° and 5°, we had a special 2° one made (which we can sell if it's helpful to others).
I suggest using a slit for only modest adjustments in NA because of light efficiency.
I suggest using a slit for only modest adjustments in NA because of light efficiency.
BTW these objectives generally work for water/ExM though not specifically optimized for it. For instance the 54-12-8 -- NA 0.64 in water -- was used as the illumination objective for ASLM imaging of pan-ExM samples in www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...
Pan-ASLM: a high-resolution and large field-of-view light sheet microscope for Expansion Microscopy
Expansion microscopy, a super-resolution fluorescence microscopy technique in which samples are expanded up to ∼8,000 times (after 20-fold expansion) their original volume, places high demands on the ...
www.biorxiv.org
September 30, 2025 at 11:25 AM
BTW these objectives generally work for water/ExM though not specifically optimized for it. For instance the 54-12-8 -- NA 0.64 in water -- was used as the illumination objective for ASLM imaging of pan-ExM samples in www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...
In the past this (and the glycerol one) was available for purchase only with Olympus/Evident confocal systems, not to homebuilders. Not sure if they have changed their policy.
September 30, 2025 at 12:30 AM
In the past this (and the glycerol one) was available for purchase only with Olympus/Evident confocal systems, not to homebuilders. Not sure if they have changed their policy.
for cleared tissue see these four objectives with different NA/WD/FOV tradeoffs: asiimaging.com/docs/multi-i...
multi-immersion_objectives [Applied Scientific Instrumentation]
asiimaging.com
September 30, 2025 at 12:26 AM
for cleared tissue see these four objectives with different NA/WD/FOV tradeoffs: asiimaging.com/docs/multi-i...
Note this would be a dipping objective and basically a regular microscope objective lens, compared to the specialized ExaSPIM lenses which are awesome but unconventional optically.
September 30, 2025 at 12:21 AM
Note this would be a dipping objective and basically a regular microscope objective lens, compared to the specialized ExaSPIM lenses which are awesome but unconventional optically.
I have some thoughts in this direction... I'm thinking NA 0.75 or NA 0.8 with >10mm WD.
I'm hoping to talk with researchers at Seeing Is Believing and SfN (or by email/DM) and then start the detailed design.
Please reach out to me [email protected].
I'm hoping to talk with researchers at Seeing Is Believing and SfN (or by email/DM) and then start the detailed design.
Please reach out to me [email protected].
September 30, 2025 at 12:20 AM
I have some thoughts in this direction... I'm thinking NA 0.75 or NA 0.8 with >10mm WD.
I'm hoping to talk with researchers at Seeing Is Believing and SfN (or by email/DM) and then start the detailed design.
Please reach out to me [email protected].
I'm hoping to talk with researchers at Seeing Is Believing and SfN (or by email/DM) and then start the detailed design.
Please reach out to me [email protected].
Here is what it will look like:
September 19, 2025 at 4:44 PM
Here is what it will look like:
OK not sure why it's not posting as either png or jpg...
September 18, 2025 at 10:44 PM
OK not sure why it's not posting as either png or jpg...
I like Empress but I don't want to be the arbiter of nicknames.
Official PN is 57-14-7 and it will be colloquially "AMS-AGY v3" on our website.
It's 10mm shorter than v2. OD is flared near the threads: 30mm OD for most and 37mm OD near the threads, whereas v2 was 35mm OD all the way.
Official PN is 57-14-7 and it will be colloquially "AMS-AGY v3" on our website.
It's 10mm shorter than v2. OD is flared near the threads: 30mm OD for most and 37mm OD near the threads, whereas v2 was 35mm OD all the way.
September 18, 2025 at 10:37 PM
I like Empress but I don't want to be the arbiter of nicknames.
Official PN is 57-14-7 and it will be colloquially "AMS-AGY v3" on our website.
It's 10mm shorter than v2. OD is flared near the threads: 30mm OD for most and 37mm OD near the threads, whereas v2 was 35mm OD all the way.
Official PN is 57-14-7 and it will be colloquially "AMS-AGY v3" on our website.
It's 10mm shorter than v2. OD is flared near the threads: 30mm OD for most and 37mm OD near the threads, whereas v2 was 35mm OD all the way.
Details here: bsky.app/profile/jsda...
Production has started for a new #Snoutscope objective, AMS-AGY v3. It has significantly larger FOV and some other tweaks from v1 and v2. Currently accepting pre-orders. The price will need to increase modestly after deliveries start late October.
July 9, 2025 at 9:32 PM
Details here: bsky.app/profile/jsda...
Tagging @amsikking.bsky.social @andrewgyork.bsky.social @tanner-fadero.bsky.social @retof.bsky.social @loicaroyer.bsky.social and I'm sure I'm missing more but hopefully this will make the rounds...
July 9, 2025 at 8:02 PM
Tagging @amsikking.bsky.social @andrewgyork.bsky.social @tanner-fadero.bsky.social @retof.bsky.social @loicaroyer.bsky.social and I'm sure I'm missing more but hopefully this will make the rounds...
High-res cellular imaging uses O1 > 1.0 with O2 being 40x/0.95 02. Short O2 WD means the grind has to sacrifice FOV in the depth axis, but FOV in the other direction (parallel the coverslip) is still 600um.
For larger samples e.g. zebrafish the grind position is wider to capture the entire FOV.
For larger samples e.g. zebrafish the grind position is wider to capture the entire FOV.
July 9, 2025 at 8:00 PM
High-res cellular imaging uses O1 > 1.0 with O2 being 40x/0.95 02. Short O2 WD means the grind has to sacrifice FOV in the depth axis, but FOV in the other direction (parallel the coverslip) is still 600um.
For larger samples e.g. zebrafish the grind position is wider to capture the entire FOV.
For larger samples e.g. zebrafish the grind position is wider to capture the entire FOV.
4. 55° grind so compatible with any-immersion concept.
5. Two different options for grind position: one for situations where O2 is NA ~0.95 and another for NA ~0.8. This one requires a bit more explanation.
5. Two different options for grind position: one for situations where O2 is NA ~0.95 and another for NA ~0.8. This one requires a bit more explanation.
July 9, 2025 at 8:00 PM
4. 55° grind so compatible with any-immersion concept.
5. Two different options for grind position: one for situations where O2 is NA ~0.95 and another for NA ~0.8. This one requires a bit more explanation.
5. Two different options for grind position: one for situations where O2 is NA ~0.95 and another for NA ~0.8. This one requires a bit more explanation.
A few nerdy details:
1. Generally better imaging quality especially for those pushing the FOV. I can send plots to those interested.
2. The image plane is a few microns off the glass tip to mitigate problem with dust.
3. Improved capture of high-angle rays despite slightly reduced NA of 0.99.
1. Generally better imaging quality especially for those pushing the FOV. I can send plots to those interested.
2. The image plane is a few microns off the glass tip to mitigate problem with dust.
3. Improved capture of high-angle rays despite slightly reduced NA of 0.99.
July 9, 2025 at 8:00 PM
A few nerdy details:
1. Generally better imaging quality especially for those pushing the FOV. I can send plots to those interested.
2. The image plane is a few microns off the glass tip to mitigate problem with dust.
3. Improved capture of high-angle rays despite slightly reduced NA of 0.99.
1. Generally better imaging quality especially for those pushing the FOV. I can send plots to those interested.
2. The image plane is a few microns off the glass tip to mitigate problem with dust.
3. Improved capture of high-angle rays despite slightly reduced NA of 0.99.
OK, makes sense. There is a loss in perfect 3D focusing away from the native focal plane described in the Botcherby paper and seemingly there in practice. Can that also be derived from this analytic approach?
July 1, 2025 at 8:36 PM
OK, makes sense. There is a loss in perfect 3D focusing away from the native focal plane described in the Botcherby paper and seemingly there in practice. Can that also be derived from this analytic approach?
Really cool! Could this be extended to focal planes other than the "native" one?
July 1, 2025 at 8:06 PM
Really cool! Could this be extended to focal planes other than the "native" one?
The equation from the paper is equivalent to 4.676 pixels per "Rayleigh diffraction limit square" (i.e. change that one number and my calculation lines up)
Even if you don't use all the "pixels" in such an objective, there is speed/brightness benefit to having such a large NA over such a large FOV.
Even if you don't use all the "pixels" in such an objective, there is speed/brightness benefit to having such a large NA over such a large FOV.
May 19, 2025 at 11:48 PM
The equation from the paper is equivalent to 4.676 pixels per "Rayleigh diffraction limit square" (i.e. change that one number and my calculation lines up)
Even if you don't use all the "pixels" in such an objective, there is speed/brightness benefit to having such a large NA over such a large FOV.
Even if you don't use all the "pixels" in such an objective, there is speed/brightness benefit to having such a large NA over such a large FOV.
Can you explain a bit more how you calculate it? I'm probably missing a factor.
FOV is π/4*(7200^2) in units of μm^2
Rayleigh diffraction limit is 0.61*λ/NA in units of μm
Can support 4 pixels per (diffraction limit)^2 (is this right?)
At 500nm: π/4*(7200^2)/(0.61*0.5/0.5)^2*4 = 438 MPix
FOV is π/4*(7200^2) in units of μm^2
Rayleigh diffraction limit is 0.61*λ/NA in units of μm
Can support 4 pixels per (diffraction limit)^2 (is this right?)
At 500nm: π/4*(7200^2)/(0.61*0.5/0.5)^2*4 = 438 MPix
May 19, 2025 at 10:28 PM
Can you explain a bit more how you calculate it? I'm probably missing a factor.
FOV is π/4*(7200^2) in units of μm^2
Rayleigh diffraction limit is 0.61*λ/NA in units of μm
Can support 4 pixels per (diffraction limit)^2 (is this right?)
At 500nm: π/4*(7200^2)/(0.61*0.5/0.5)^2*4 = 438 MPix
FOV is π/4*(7200^2) in units of μm^2
Rayleigh diffraction limit is 0.61*λ/NA in units of μm
Can support 4 pixels per (diffraction limit)^2 (is this right?)
At 500nm: π/4*(7200^2)/(0.61*0.5/0.5)^2*4 = 438 MPix
We're about to start sending quotes, should be delivered late summer / early fall. Happy to discuss via email.
April 18, 2025 at 9:40 PM
We're about to start sending quotes, should be delivered late summer / early fall. Happy to discuss via email.