I use the Micromass TofSpec 2E and find it to be an excellent machine.
Resolution and sensitivity are good and as you state the software is a big
advantage. We also have a DE STR in our lab, we tend to use the Micromass
for the bulk of the work and the PE for the manual acquisitions. As yet,
the PE software cannot touch the Micromass software, PE has a new version
due out that should pretty much close the gap from posters/advertising I
have seen, however, I'll reserve judgement until I see it. I'm afraid I
can't comment on the Bruker.
I see no fundamental differences between the machines in terms of
resolution or sensitivity. If you goal is to run a lot of samples then I
recommend the TofSpec 2E, it is very fast, reliable and the software makes
this kind of acquisition easy.
If you need any specific information just e-mail me direct. Hope this is of
some help.
Peter.
At 11:56 02/12/1999 +0000, Len Packman wrote:
>Dear ABRFers
>
> Micromass TofSpec2 now has specifications not dissimilar to Bruker
>Reflex III and PE Sciex DE STR. Does anyone have experiences to suggest (or
>not) that it now rivals the two market leaders in performance? Certainly
>the software can commend it (as it does the Qtof) but does the hardware
>come up to scratch?
I'm afraid I don't have a clever saying to put here.
Peter Hains (PhD) Ph. +61 2 9850 6216
Australian Proteome Analysis Facility Fax. +61 2 9850 6200
Level 4 Building F7B E-mail. phains@proteome.org.au
Macquarie University, Sydney 2109 Web. www.proteome.org.au