Best Planetary Webcam/CCD Camera

[Robert_T]

Hi all - to pitch out a wide-open hopefully not too controversial question, what's the feel out there on the current best and best value planetary webcam or camera?

I've been using a Celstron Neximage (which I think uses same chip as Toucam pro) and an LPI, though this get's less use as it can't match the neximage's sensitivity. I'm been thinking of going to a more sensitive monochrone camera so I can do tri-band or narrow band filtered shots, but which to go for :confuse2: - Lumenera, ATK-1HS or (2HS), DMK firewire, Dragonfly express, or even Mead DSI pro.

Anyone have some personal experiences - and a view on their value for money - with any of these for planetary work that they'd like to share?

cheers,

Robert T

[iceman]

I chatted with Bird about this last Friday night, haven't got time to elaborate now but will soon. Sorry for the tease.

[xrekcor]

I used the LPI, for $240.00 it's a complete package ready to go, No mods needed no other software albeit free, and in my book as good as any planetary imager on the market. I see alot of folks using the webcams but I have never seen any images that are better or surpass any thing the LPI can do. Also I'm yet to see the DSI or DSI Pro pull off as good planetary images the the LPI or Webcams can. Not sure about the Neximage I see them advertised but really see people posting pic's

Basicly the DSI and DSI Pro dont cut it as planetary imagers, not saying this is impossible just the results are not up to the LPI. If you want to see the comparisons join Meade_DSI & Deep-Sky-Imager yahoo group and do a search
of the post list for the results.

regards,CS

[davidpretorius]

I have the toucam proII and love it. Mikes and Rumples images with tracking are great and i am very happy with what a few of us non tracking guys are getting as well with low powered barlows.

But on the weekend, watching bird and his dragonfly black/white and colour wheel, then I believe that this the more complete way to go for planetary

I know myself that i focus / adjust exposure etc all the colours at once, but bird gets to focus / adjust exposure on each colour separately - a big bonus

I am still yet to try the toucam modded in a tracked telescope for dso.

Also The toucam was great thru the conorado for sun images.

As an overall planet / dso at the amateur market ($300), I can recommend the toucam that has been modded.

For more serious stuff, dragonfly and colour wheels are the next step for planetary and i am unsure re dso's and long exposure times, but the canon cameras seem great (350d).

[33South]

I got the LPI 'free' with my LX90 cant beat that as value for money.

Havent had the oppurtunity to give it much of go yet but it seems to be able to deliver.
The image below was from my first attempt at Jupiter, can only get better when I know what Im doing. :P

[RB]

Oh wow Chris that's a top shot.
I think you've done very well, and not just because it's your first shot.

Good onya mate.

:)

[rumples riot]

This debate is not about LPI v Toucam. It is about the next step up. If you go to Cloudy Nights, most of the top imagers there are using monochrome cameras. The More expensive varieties. The reason being that the cameras are more suited to the job. I really don't know which is better and this is a question that I have been looking into as I have gone about as far as I can with the Toucam. I would recommend asking the same question on CN in the planetary imaging section.

As for LPI v Toucam. I used the LPI for a long time and then bought a toucam. The LPI strictly speaking does not compete with the Toucam. My images are way better with the Toucam than the LPI. It's a good starting point but not a very camera for the job. The Neximage cam is producing some good results and I believe as pointed out before that it is a tricked up Toucam.

I will follow this thread as I am interested in a new camera myself.

[33South]

Thanks Andrew, to be technically correct it wasnt my first shot, but from my first night. At first I didnt think I had anything worth keeping but I had saved all the individual images, one evening I decided to have a play so I removed all the obviously bad ones and restacked the rest with Registax.

[xrekcor]

Interesting any chance on seeing some dso images from the toucam? I'm sure
they're out there just never seen any


here's a couple dso and planetary images from the LPI, as for LPI v's Webcam
it's a personal thing, show me images form a webcam that are apparently
way better than the LPI. Maybe you just didn't know how to use it
properly :) in anycase each to his own. Just depends on your skill level. The
LPI comes complete with all you need. Webcam dont. Also if you decide to
move up the the DSI range you dont have to relearn software.


The jury is still out in my book on the LPI v's Webcam even though webcams
are meant to be more sensitive I dont see any "Way better" looking images to
prove this statement. LPI certainly hasn't stopped my images from being published :)

Yes this isn't a LPI v's Webcam debate, but my original point was dont buy a
DSI or DSI Pro for dedicated planetary imaging as you will prolly be disappointed
and go back to your Neximage

regards,CS

[rumples riot]

CS you should go and have a look at CN some time all sort of work is being done with the Toucam including long exposure work and hi quality planetary imaging. Not many LPI shots there. Wonder why?

[rumples riot]

As requested here is an image that I believe is better than anything the LPI can throw out.

[xrekcor]

Nothing more special than I haven't seen here. And nothing more special than I have seen the LPI can do. Saw one DSO which was even crappier than my M42 above. Aperture for Aperture no I cant say webcams surpass the LPI in any way. Unless you know of some better pic's?



Maybe that might change by the end of the day.

Yes there alot of webcam "planetary" images there didn't see an LPI stuff, but there is also quite alot of images without camera info too, maybe they're
closet LPI'ers. Give me a 10",11" 12" goto and I'll show you the same quality
planetary with the LPI.

regards,CS

[davidpretorius]

i can't find any dso's with a modded toucam on cn , i have left a post, so i will see what comes up.

there was a review on the lpi vs toucam on cn i read once. it ended up being a tie from memory. the planetary pics were better for the toucam, but the lpi was better on others. i will try and find it.

[xrekcor]

Apart from over processing, you haven't achieved much more than I did my previous post with an EQ5 mounted 8"

regards,CS

[xrekcor]

Actually I would even go as far to say the detail in mine is crisper, you just have more colour. My image btw, is a composite of 9 exposures @ .120 I killed it before the filter kicked in. The larger one is a composite of 30 exposures @ .144

regards,CS

[janoskiss]

Rob & Paul, you both have outstanding images of Jupiter there, but I'd have to say that though Paul's image may indeed look a tad overprocessed for some (it does for me), it does seem to have more detail than the LPI images. This is more obvious if one resizes either image to make the disks of Jupiter the same size.

[rumples riot]

How wrude.

You really should stop smoking that stuff. Pink images cool. Crisper Yeah what mag you running. Mate at low res mine looks the same. Get some focal length.

I dare you to say what you have just said on Cloudy nights. BTW if you look at all the images they usually have Toucam Pro 11 or which camera they used in the type on the photo itself or at the bottom of their sig.

Over processing? You really are going too far. Subtle.

There is a chap on CN with a modded Toucam that is doing great images. Try looking a little longer, before shootin your mouth off.

[rumples riot]

Here's another one for you to compare.

[davidpretorius]

what a bunch of happy chappys we all are!!!!!

[asimov]

Ummm....nice images!? (hehehe)

[janoskiss]

There is little point arguing about whose pics are best, because image quality is a very subjective thing. I personally think Asimov's avatar is the best of them all. :P LPI or Toucam, Asimov? Got a full size version to throw in? :D

[iceman]

I hardly think it's fair to compare a 1000mm FL 8" newt with a 2500mm FL 10" SCT in terms of image scale.

There's a lot more ToUcam imagers out there, no doubt about it, but that's not to say the LPI can't produce some nice stuff - Rob's Jupiters up there are some of the crispest I've seen anywhere, LPI or ToUcam.

Processing is a subjective thing - what looks nice to one person looks overprocessed to another. There's no pleasing everyone.

Oh and Paul, I don't really think it's fair to say that your ToUcam images are far better than your LPI images. You started with the LPI, then you bought the ToUcam not long after. Had you stuck with the LPI and went through the same learning curve you did with the ToUcam, your LPI images may be just as good.

Rob has obviously mastered his LPI and I've seen similar very good images from an LPI on CN and Astromart forums.

[rumples riot]

Up to the usual ehh Mike? Get you facts right, I was using the LPI before your site started. I used the LPI for many months, and was convinced by people such as Bird, GazerJim Tjenson and Wes that the Toucam was superior, they in fact proved it too me by their images and the technical data. In other words I did the research. The LPI does not have the dynamic range that the Toucam does. Nor is it pixels small enough. Also using the LPI on a 2500mm scope proved itself to be worthless, that's why they give them away. The grain structure of the final result inhibits fine detail at hi res.

Geez always siding with anyone but me.

Stuff it. I don't really care. Whackers!!!!!!!!

[asimov]

The LPI software sounds appealing to me I must say. I own neither a toucam or LPI so I have no opion. I'd be happy with either camera actually. I like a challenge, that's why I'm still using my kodak point & shoot. I have in my possession now an acuter digital imager....in the right hands, nearly as good as a toucam. (or so they claim)..

[rumples riot]

You know what why not ban me. Everyone else can make outrageous claims, say what ever they like, but not me. The whole thread was not about the god damn LPI V toucam anyway. Friggin whackers. The thread was about upper order cams. Once again someone is allowed to jump in and when I suggest as an aside that the LPI is not the preferred cam because it does not produce as good and image, it turns into s **** fight which you side with the perpetrator. Man what is your problem with me. Ban me go ban me. Thats what you want anyway.

[Exfso]

I am going to keep clear of this excreta-fight, but for what it is worth, I had the LPI before the toucam, and it just did not cut the mustard for me. I have tried it through both the SN10 and the Tak, same response, very much over rated in my opinion, it now sits and gathers dust. It might have been me, but I also found the software to be ordinary and glitchy.

:confuse3:

[Striker]

Wow this is better then "Days of our Lives"

I havn't used the LPI even though it was free when I purchased my 10"LX200...I would go for the Toucam....my opinion

[janoskiss]

Before Ving jumps in... Can I have your LPI, Exfso? :D

[slice of heaven]

But what are the 'upmarket' cams???? and which is better????




I do like Robs Jup though :)

[Starkler]

There are often differences in opinion. Most people accept that and move on rather than make a fight out of it.

Differences in opinion are one thing, but open fighting on the forum isnt going to be tolerated.

[janoskiss]

I'm all for a good debate without getting personal or nasty. We can't all have the same opinion. What a boring place the forums would be if we all agreed on everything. I think we can disagree and treat each other with respect at the same time. You may disagree on this point, but that's your opinion and I respect that. :lol: Uhm, I see there is a problem ... when a seemingly logical argument's conclusion is a contradiction. Still I hope I made my point (flawed logic and all).

[Robert_T]

Well, feel a bit like I've naively walked up to someone's campfire and tossed on a can of petrol with this question ... I don't want to be taking sides in this, no doubt there's a bit of history I'm unaware of here, but Paul's right about the substance of my original question - I already have both an LPI and a Neximage (Toucam equivalent) but I was interested in going to a more sensitive monochrome camera so that I could do tri-colour and narrow band near infra-red imaging as these appear (to my eye) to be producing the best images (esp near infra-red) that I've seen on sites such as Yahoo's Mars Observers - basic question was which of the monochrome camera's is the best way to go for planetary? The few I am aware of were the Lumenera, DMK firewire, ATK 1HS or 2HS, Dragonfly Express and the DSI cameras (though sounds like they may not be so great for planetary). From what I've picked up elsewhere the main advantage on monochromes (to varying degrees and not with all) are in sensitivity of the chip, the higher frame-rates which are possible and the number of bits that they use to represent colour or shading differences - for eg. most webcams spit out 8bit (256 colours/shades per pixel) whereas the Lumenera does 10bits (I think?) and so has potential to highlight finer detail - how much this is really worth in practice I have no idea.

Cheers,

Rob

[RB]

Well said Steve, my feelings excatly.

:)

[rumples riot]

Also Robert the Monochromes allow you to individually focus each colour rather than try to focus three colours at once. It you split out a colour image made by all the Web cams and LPI invariably one or more colours is out of focus. Most commonly the blue. The monochromes allow you to focus each in turn, providing you are fast enough or have a program to do it. Thereby give a much sharper image.

[asimov]

Just spotted what you said about my avatar pic. Steve. Thanks. It's very 'grainy' If you saw the full size version. Was 3 almost deleteable images I took with the 12.5" + kodak a couple of years ago. Glad I stacked them! I'll post the pic here for you.

BTW I was looking forward to meeting you at the camp (as well as the others) maybe next year if I'm still in ozz.

[iceman]

For the LPI vs ToUcam side-argument, in the past i've recommended the ToUcam over the LPI, not because I have personal experience with the LPI but simply because the ToUcam lets you control more of what you want to do, and because of the help and assistance you can get with the ToUcam. As I said above, there are far more people using the ToUcam, so people are able to get better images quicker simply because of the advice people give you about capture settings, processing etc.

Regarding the next step up after the ToUcam/neximage - I had that discussion with bird on Friday and will try to respond with my thoughts when I get a bit of time.

[xrekcor]

Robert_T

Have you tried switching the LPI to Monochrome mode and using colour filters, run it in .fits format 16b per channel instead of 8b.

regards,CS

[xrekcor]

Paul,

Sorry you took my subjective opinion of your image so badly. I know my Jup's have a slight pink flavour, but thats how I see it through the ep : )


regards,CS

[davidpretorius]

Bird/ Rob.

If i switch the toucam to b/w and then get a colour wheel, in general, will the results be better? I understand the focussing would be better ie blue!

[ballaratdragons]

I just spent about 15 minutes typing a reply in here about my shock at the bickering and fighting. I have deleted it all as it won't make a scrap of difference. Just please stop the personal put-downs.

[iceman]

Possibly, but not really because you're still using the same chip. You can replace the colour chip in the ToUcam with a monochrome chip that may give you some better sensitivity.

[rumples riot]

Thanks, Rob

I am sorry for letting this get out of hand too. Said some things that I should not have.

Paul

[rumples riot]

No not one big happy family again, I am even more cautious now.

[ballaratdragons]

My mounts the best coz it's mine!

I hope Robert T gets the answer he was originally seeking.

[Robert_T]

Good point Paul on the benefits of focussing colours individually, on reflection that's probably the key advantage of monochrome.

Rob, didn't think about the B&W mode on the LPI, but thanks I will give that a try though I suspect that I may have to drop exposure time using filters with the LPI to a point that seeing effects might erode the benefit gained (I'll post any results I get - assuming the cloud ever parts again) .

cheers,

Robert T

[xrekcor]

Not too sure, but to say by seperating the colour channels will allow you to
process them indenpendantly, and that must be a good thing. Personally I
really dont think it's going to make a whole lot of difference unless your using
high mag/high res in a large 16"+ scope. Most results I get from an 8" newt
are not really in that catagory the resulting image is small, really. So firing
away with a one shot colour camera works for me. Others are probably
different and are prepared to do the hours for a slight improvment in most cases.


Regards,CS

[bird]

Hi guys n gals.

The planetary imaging cameras come in 3 basic categories at the moment:

1. webcams (ToUCam, LPI, Atik etc) - good for the money, but they compromise a lot on image quality and features. Cost range < $500

2. medium-cost, good performing firewire cameras (DMK from theimaging source). If you use a monochrome camera + filter wheel you can get significant improvements over the webcams in many areas. Cost around $500 to $1k.

3. High cost, high performance firewire cameras (Point Grey Research Dragonfly Express or other cameras in the Dragonfly series). The DX is about the best you can find at the moment, but other Dragonfly cameras are also very good. Still requires a filter wheel and colour filters but that's the way to do planetary imaging anyway if you're serious :-) :-)

Cost betweek $1k and $2k.

I exclude the Lumenera cameras because they are USB2/MS Windows only and require you to purchase a ridiculously expensive software package to run them under Windows (cost another $1k). They have no support for Linux or Mac. I currently have a Lumenera camera sitting on the shelf that I cannot use because there's no way I'm going to pay that money for a copy of Streampix to use it, and anyway I image under Linux. I tried Windows a couple of times and didn't like it very much.

Here's an image taken a couple of days ago of Mars at opposition from Ballarat. Mars was only 31 degrees in altitude when this image was taken. The camera (Dragonfly Express) played a significant part in the result although the scope was also carefully collimated and cooled to ambient temperature to kill off any tube currents.

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=5832

regards, Bird

[xrekcor]

Bird,

Thats a top image there!!! well done like the camera!!!! can you shoot dso's with
it too? or is it strictly for planetary?

regards,CS

[bird]

Another comment about separate RGB imaging...

I've found in practise that the focus positions for R,G,B are all slightly different, probably due to the looong focal length and the various bits of glass in the way not being completely achromatic.

You can also use different camera settings for each colour, so for example on Mars which is dim in the Blue channel I increase the gain for blue as compared to red where it's bright.

And when processing, the channels can all be processed separately so I can optimise the wavelets etc for each one.

And of course you get full resolution in each colour (640x480 for my camera) as compared to colour cameras that are half green and quarter red/blue.

regards, Bird

[davidpretorius]

and that there my friends is the answer!!!

thanks bird.

[bird]

Umm, I've optimised everything for planetary at the moment. The camera could be used for long exposures but it's not cooled or anything so it might not be as good as a dedicated deep-sky camera. I'm more-or-less resigned to buying a separate deep-sky camera one day when I get tired of planets.

Bird

[Starkler]

Dont spam the equipment threads guys.
Three posts deleted.

[xrekcor]

Yes, I have seen formulas people use for exposure times for different colour
filters/channels. I'll see if I cant dig it up and post it here.

regards,CS

[xrekcor]

Bird,

Bummer, still I dont think it will be too long before uncooled CCD's reach the quality of
cooled. Chip technology and software I suspect will one day will see us through, it's just a
matter of time.

regards,CS

[bird]

Well it could be done right now, if one of the "deep sky" camera companies just added the few features needed to make their camera into a planetary camera as well.

I've talked to a few of them about it but they just don't "get it" as yet. Maybe one day...

Bird

[Robert_T]

Thanks Very Much Bird! That 3 point categorisation of the various options put's it nicely in perspective. Quick question, for the Firewire camera's is the main advantage the frame rate at which you can capture avis and does this have any any benefit other than shortening sequences to allow tri-bands to be recorded before rotation of the planet smears the image?

Now if that Lumenera on the shelf get's lonely and is seeking a new home...;)

cheers,

Robert

[bird]

Robert, the advantage is twofold - higher data rates allow for more fps to be captured, and also there is no data loss so that you store exactly what the ccd captured. Imaging and processing is really all about information - you want to capture and hold onto as much raw info as you can and only start throwing it away when you get to the end of the processing with wavelets and unsharp masks etc.

With normal ToUCams you are throwing info away right from the beginning, even if you use the raw mode so that the data is lossless at 5fps, you still have a color image that is 50% green , 25% red and 25% blue data.

The best thing to do with a ToUcam is replace the CCD with the monochrome version and then use the raw mode to receive the data. Then you need a filter wheel...

Bird

[Robert_T]

Thanks again Bird, I think my path is becoming clearer though probably dictated more by economics than the ideal solution. Can't really afford >$1K or more for a camera at this stage - my skill level just doesn't warrant it yet - so I'm thinking it will probably have to be the ATK-1HS MK2. Seems I can get this for just over $500AU and while it's chip is really only a monochrome version of the Toucam it is more sensitive. and the new mk 2 version does raw mode without any mods + I can do long fan cooled long-exposure if that mod takes me.

cheers,

Robert

[Robert_T]

but then again, I've just learned of a lower noise version of the DMK firewire camera (the DMK 21AF04 as opposed to the plain old DMK 21F04) that allows up to 30fps without info loss and would work out to around $650-700AU with software. Powered by the firewire port which I'm not sure will work with laptop so may need separate hub. Uses same chip as the ATIK 1HS.

link attached for anyone interested
http://www.1394imaging.com/en/products/cameras/firewire_mono/dmk21af04/overview/

cheers, Robert T (http://www.1394imaging.com/en/products/cameras/firewire_mono/dmk21af04/overview/)

[bird]

Yes, it's good to see someone making a camera with that CCD that's not a webcam :-)

The only caveat may be that you can't get a high enough framerate cause the 098BL is only a relatively low clockspeed ccd (hence the low cost). 30fps might be the max that you can get with that camera - not too shabby but there will be times when you want more like 50fps (e.g. on the moon or bright planets).

Bird

[Ambermile]

Interesting theory there. Where do you hear the 098 is a "low clockspeed" chip? Clocks are external to the ccd. We have the 098 running in a development cam at about 50 fps 16 bit uncompressed. OK, we are subframing to maybe 400x300 but it's not the chip that's the bottleneck, it's the transfer speed.

On bright planets you need a high shutter speed more than a high framerate - although the more frames you can get in the window of rotation the better.

Arthur

[Ambermile]

Hmm - you speaking to the right people there Mr Bird ;) ?

Arthur


PS http://www.pmdo.com/artdownloads/red.gif (http://www.pmdo.com/artdownloads/red.gif)

[davidpretorius]

Thats a nice one Arthur!!!! Any details on cost??? or availablility????

[Ambermile]

Well, no actually. That camera (there are five development models) is USb2.0 but has all the attributes of the Artemis but also as a high speed imaging system. There are no plans to make this particular model available as it was designed purely as a testbed for certain ideas and circuits intended for use on the Large Format camera.

Having said that, the camera exists and in it's current state would be capable of most things imagers are after - it will take an 098 and image saturn at 40 fps 16 bit uncompressed, exposure times from 0.001 sec. Or you can swap out the chip for a 285 and go widefield DSO and expose up to 24 hours. It would not be cheap - maybe AUS3500 but remember - it would be the only camera you need!

There's also only the beta software. This camera is a long way from being made available (if ever) but I only post details to let Bird know that there are some astronomers out here that build cameras!

Arthur

[Robert_T]

...and you got my hopes up too, what a tease ;)

seriously though, it's like someone just listed down every attribute I ever wanted in a planetary camera:prey2: if it could be done and marketed under AU $1000 I reckon it'd be a winner!

cheers.

[bird]

Well, it's not a theory...

From the spec sheet of the 098BL we see that the max horizontal drive frequency is 12Mhz. Compare this to the listed maximums for some other popular ccds:

ICX204AL: 20Mhz
ICX424AL: 24MHz
ICX285AL: 28Mhz
KAI-0340DM: 40Mhz

And you see that it is indeed a "low clockspeed ccd". These other ccd's are all used in the current popular crop of high-speed cameras.

I've read in a number of places that the s/n degrades as you get closer to the maximum rated frequency for the ccd, so I'd guess that somewhere around 10Mhz might be a good max clock for the 098.

Subframing can let you get a higher fps, but that's not a lot of use on the moon where you usually want the whole frame :-) It's ok on planets as long as your guiding is spot on, but I wouldn't like to try guiding on a planet at a huuuge focal length and a frame only a bit larger than the planet itself...I've tried it and I usually can't keep the planet still enough for it to work.

From a practical point of view - if I had subframed mars down to 400x300 last monday when I was imaging it would almost certainly have lost me some data as mars would have been near on impossible to keep on the screen at all times. My camera can do subframing but I don't like to risk it.

As to the preference for fast shutter instead of fast framerate - the problem with that theory is that your camera is not operating at full efficiency. i.e. there is a window between exposures where the camera is not recording anything, and you lose many potential "sharp frames". The ideal is to have the framerate as 1/exposure so that the camera is always recording and you don't waste any light.

The 098BL is a good CCD, don't read this the wrong way - I'm not saying any different - but you are not going to get a full frame speed of more than about 39fps, and more likely no more than 30fps with any decent s/n. Compare that to other cameras that can get full frame speeds up to 100fps, or even the Dragonfly Express that tops out at 240fps full-frame.

oops, this reply came out much longer than I wanted...hope I didn't put too many of you to sleep...

regards, Bird

[davidpretorius]

Thanks Bird,

That does make sense to me!

[bird]

G'day Arthur - thanks for the info. I've spoken to Steve several times by email about the artemis camera, it sounds good but it seemed a bit expensive and doesn't have a particularly high framerate. I'll be interested to see how it goes.

It was in the top few on my potential shopping list for cameras but I had to make a purchase before this mars opposition so I couldn't really hold out until it came available.

I was a little disappointed that the artemis was going to be another usb/usb2 camera, I've settled on firewire 400/800 as my personal choice for cameras, the DCAM 1.31 spec is a very nice thing to program against.

Bird

[Robert_T]

Bird/Arthur - hadn't much though about it before, but on reflection it seems obvious as you have both mentioned that higher frame-rates are possible when running sub-frame scales.

I use 320x240 for planetary imaging with the Neximage (Toucam chip) - does it follow I can then use corresponding higher frame rate without information loss? eg could I get away with 10fps instead of 5fps in Raw Mode?

thanks,

[bird]

G'day Robert, that sounds plausible to me - but on balance you might be better off with the extra spatial detail from 640x480 even though there is some compression loss.

Another way to look at it - if you're maxing out the bandwidth of the camera, then you're still getting as much information as you can, its just organised differently. i.e. 320x240 @ 20fps vs 640x480@5fps should use the same amount of bandwidth. I'd be curious to see which one gives the better result - it might depend on seeing conditions, if you have very steady seeing then the 5fps will be ok, but if the seeing is poor then the 20fps might be better.

Arthur - it was remiss of me not to say hello before we started discussing camera details - welcome to IceInSpace, I see you've got a few posts in already. We're a friendly bunch here, really we are :-) It's always good fun to talk details with someone else and get their views on things.

regards, Bird

[Robert_T]

Thanks Bird, I might do a bit of experimentation to try different frame rates at different scales under different conditions (assuming we ever get to experience the night sky beyond the ever present cloud sphere of the last month or so).

Just to clarify though, am I right in thinking that the detail recorded will be the same using 640 x 480 as with 320 x 240 so long as the image scale of the planet is the same :confuse3: - eg. projecting an image of Mars that's say 80 pixels across will be still be 8 pixels across regardless of which frame size is used?

cheers,

[Robert_T]

[QUOTE=Robert_T] projecting an image of Mars that's say 80 pixels across will be still be 8 pixels across regardless of which frame size is used?

QUOTE]

whoops :nerd: , I meant it should still be 80 pixels across, not 8....

[bird]

Nope, at 320x240 it would be 40 pixels across. The camera is combining 2x2 pixels into a single pixel in 320x240 mode. The ToUCam is downsampling, not just cropping the image.

Bird

[Robert_T]

Aahhh! I hadn't realised, just thought it was only using a quarter of the chip, but that makes sense - that means I've been missing out on some detail when the seeing's good. With this little nugget and only just now starting to use raw mode, seems I've still got a lot to squeeze out of the neximage before I exhaust it's potential after all.


Thanks Bird! :)

[Ambermile]

Big answer coming... Subframing Mars then with the red camera (which is not an Artemis!). So the subframe is possibly going to be predictive in the same way that Registax is predictive. It should hopefully make pointing at a moving target a bit easier...But this camera is *never* going to be AU$1000 I am afraid. You need to look at what you would be getting!

Clock speeds can be got around Bird (Oh, and hi to you too :) ) with a certain amount of hardware/firmware tomfoolery. The Artemis works in this way to minimise download noise and data clashes in the USB line.
320x240 against 640x480, I'd say that the camera is compressing at 640 - I don't think it's binning at 320 but if it is then not 2x2. It may be down from CIF... However, if you image at 640 and also the same image at 320, then resize the 640 you will get a sharper image. Go for biggest every time even if only because it's easier to focus!

[bird]

This would be a nice feature, sure beats doing the tracking *after* you've downloaded the frame to the PC...

Thanks Arthur, I'm looking forward to seeing some sample results from these cameras.

regards, Bird

[davidpretorius]

ok,

one of the mods that can be done to the toucam via a macro is raw colour, the other is black/white and the last if is an optimised colour.

How would i easily test the b/w raw mod to see if i am getting more definition, ie then i can buy a colour wheel!

[bird]

DP, the best way to switch to monochrome is to replace the 098BQ ccd with the 098BL. This isn't too hard as long as you have a steady hand with the soldering iron :-)

Then you'll need a filter wheel and filters, but you will see a nice step up in image quality.

Switching to monochrome mode with the colour ccd via firmware won't give you any more resolution, but it does let you transfer more data between the camera and the PC because the "convert to colour" is not done in the camera any more, but is done i the PC instead.

I can't remember if you have a tracking mount - you'll only see improvements when the scope is
tracking as you image, otherwise motion blurring is going to dominate.

regards, Bird

[davidpretorius]

thanks mate, no i do not have tracking.....yet!!!!

[Robert_T]

for those interested in what's on offer camera-wise and their specifications "the imaging source" sent me a link to their product catalog ....

http://www.1394imaging.com/en/resources/catalog/digital_image_processing_catalog.en .pdf