About a month ago one of my coworkers, Aaron Lum Ph.D and I, had a chance to compare various light sources and to measure the power they provide. Most importantly, we were able to compare LED engines against other conventional light sources. As a followup, Aaron was able to work with Logan Grosenick from Stanford (Thanks Logan!) , to compare the Spectra light engine against the Sutter Instruments DG-5. The results are graphed below. The vertical axis is in mW.
My conclusions to the data are fundamentally unchanged from the previous report: LED’s stink at producing short wave UV. The real market application for the DG-5 continues to be calcium ratio dyes like FURA. As of now, no LED source can compete at anywhere the power level needed for FURA imaging (at 340 & 380nm lines) like the DG-5 can. I expect, as with numerous other examples of disruptive technology, this will change over the next few years. LED powered systems should be considered for all other applications.
Data provided by Logan Grosenick, PhD.-Austin
Comments
2 responses to “More on LED Engines – Updated comparison against the Sutter DG-5”
Hi,
Thanks for comparing the instruments, but I’m confused. You say the DG5 (which according to the Sutter website is a Xenon lamp) is better than LEDs in the UV, but the graph shows considerably less power output (the y axis is mW,right?) by the DG5 compared to the Lumencor. What am I missing??
Thanks, -David Lenzi
Hi David,
The “UV” chart example is taken at typical DAPI excitation ranges of ~405nm. I should be more specific and say where the DG4/5/xenon systems are great is deep UV, so basically 340/380. There are LED’s on the market that go down to about 380, but they aren’t bright at that range, and they don’t go to 340.