You are right, there is no reason for artificial creation of SEM subspecies. You may find articles which stated using "Field Emission Environmental SEM", even if all work was done at low magnifications and environmental ability was not utilized. When you see such a paper you understand that authors are just bragging (see what I got!) and do not really have understanding of electron microscopy.

Of course, if environmental mode was used, it is useful to mention that a microscope was an Environmental SEM. And when work was done at really high magnifications or at low voltages, mentioning of FE SEM is fully justified.

You are right, there is no reason for artificial creation of SEM subspecies. You may find articles which stated using "Field Emission Environmental SEM", even if all work was done at low magnifications and environmental ability was not utilized. When you see such a paper you understand that authors are just bragging (see what I got!) and do not really have understanding of electron microscopy.

Of course, if environmental mode was used, it is useful to mention that a microscope was an Environmental SEM. And when work was done at really high magnifications or at low voltages, mentioning of FE SEM is fully justified.

There are some resolution differences. I recommend you to read the answers of this question : https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_difference_between_sem_and_fesem

Regards, Carolina

Hi dear,

There are some miner differences such as electron gun, resolution, magnification etc, but the concept is same for both the cases because of electron matter interaction.