Storm vs Molecular Imager

Florence CABON cabon at infobiogen.fr
Tue Nov 26 08:26:12 EST 1996


I was in charge for organizing the demos and choice of a phosphorimager
for our institute. We tried the Bio rad, the Storm and the Fuji. We
finally bought the storm for the following reasons :
1- broad range 1-100000, usefull for CAT assays. The Storm IS more
sensitive than the Biorad (it used to be a year ago, maybe Biorad has
improved ?)
2- easy to use. One screen for all and large (usefull for sequences and
many gels scanned all together)
3- 200, 100 and 50 µm resolutions possible. At first we thought we will
never use 50 but we do when we want to have nice pictures
4- if you buy it for an institute, each lab has to buy the dark boxes
with a bio rad. It is really expensive
5- we change from chemiluminescence to fluorescence and
chemifluorescence and it is not really a problem.
6- I discussed a lot with Molecular dynamics but we had a good price.
We had as many soft as we needed for the institute

I do not understand the problems that some netters evoke with the
screens. The screens sold nowdays are not mounted on a heavy device, so
they are not dangerous for the glass plate. They are protected and as
solid as a the ones you use with films. When we use them with 32P we
protect the screen with Saran Wrap. 

I will recommend to use a PC and not a Mac with the Storm. We had a lot
of problems at the beginning with the Storm-Power mac association. MD
claims that the power version should come soon but soon is a duration
for informaticians and I will believe it when I see it!

By the way, we bought a NEC superscript color printer to get beautifull
sublimation pictures. This one is really not very expensive
(around 1500 $ in france)
Hope it helps

======================================================
Florence Cabon. CNRS Villejuif, France. cabon at infobiogen.fr
======================================================



More information about the Methods mailing list