rapidly with an increasing wavelength. Moreover, the 
development of a system is much easier if the 
wavelength is visible.  
In order to have the system components available 
for very low price at good performance we have 
chosen a 660 nm LED from OSRAM (GH 
CSSRM2.24). It is an important wavelength for 
horticulture and is therefore readily available. In 
order to be able to alter the driving current and to have 
low noise at the same time, we used a Keithley 
Sourcemeter as a current source for the laboratory 
setup.  
The beam shaping was done with a single 25 mm 
diameter plastic aspheric lenses from Edmund Optics. 
Depending on the desired beam characteristics, the 
focal length was chosen at a range between 25 mm 
and 75 mm (e.g. f40 #66-024). In order to avoid a 
wavelength shift, a custom made 2 nm FWHM filter 
from Chroma was used. The polarization was 
controlled with a 1:9000 polarizer from Edmund 
Optics (#85-919).  
The prism is made of Schott F2 glass and has P4 
polished surfaces to provide best performance. 
By altering the position and the focal length of the 
collimation lens, the divergence of the light can be 
altered. If the SPR system is built with a light source 
with low or no divergence a camera can be used even 
without objective lenses.  
The suitable camera should be chosen depending 
on the demands, concerning refractive index unit 
(RIU) resolution, system price and volume. The 
ximea MU9PM-MH with its APTINA 
MT9P031sensor is offering a 12 bit resolution at a 
low price and very low volume (15 x 15 x 8 mm) 
while the PCO Edge 4.2 is offering an outstanding 
resolution of 16 bit. The PCO Edge with its 16 bit is 
providing a high RIU resolution and the large chip 
size is enabling an acquisition of a large SPR-Image 
without the use of a lens. Between these two cameras, 
there are many different cameras, which could be 
used. Currently, a good compromise between costs, 
size and bit resolution are cameras with a Sony 
IMX178 sensor like the ISG Allegro.  
4 RESULTS 
Figure 2 shows the comparison of an LED light 
source (left) and a laser light source (right). Both are 
providing a “TopHat like” beam profile. In case of the 
laser, a very small area at the centre of the Gaussian 
beam profile was cut out. This Process is generating 
diffraction pattern at the edge of the lenses which 
were used to cut out the centre part. Furthermore, the 
edges of the prism and microfluidics as well as air 
bubbles and dust are generating diffraction patterns. 
The result is a very noisy illumination which could be 
sufficient for single or multi-channel measurement 
with very large regions of interest (ROI) but it is 
totally insufficient for high resolution SPR imaging.  
 
 
Figure 4: False colour SPR image made with a laser based 
light source and a Ximea CMV4000 10 bit camera; left: 
diffraction patterns originating from edges, dust particles 
and air bubbles are visible; right: cross-section along the 
black line from the left side, the noise which is originating 
from diffraction is clear to see  
Figure 4 shows a SPR image which was recorded 
with a laser based light source. The cross-section, 
which was taken along the direction of the black line 
shows that there is tremendous noise which is 
lowering the RIU resolution of the SPR imaging 
system. To avoid this kind of noise a LED based light 
source was developed. LED’s do not have spatial 
coherence, therefore they do not generate diffraction 
patterns.  
 
 
Figure 5: False colour SPR image, made with a LED light 
source and a ISG allegro 14 bit camera; left: the SPR active 
area is illuminated homogeneous, red areas are the sealing 
and a air bubble; right: cross section along the the direction 
of the black line, the cross section shows the SPR curve 
which is originating from the divergent illumination. 
Figure 5 shows a SPR image, which was recorded 
with a LED based light source. The cross-section,