Considering a DBK21 as a guide camera to replace the SPC900NC in the hope that it will be much more sensitive and less noisy. Correct? Should see a big improvement? I certainly saw an improvement when comparing the SPC900NC vs the DSI II Pro, but the DSI II Pro doesn't work with the guiding software I'm considering - they need a webcam type camera.
Also thinking that it can be a decent beginner's planetary camera too. Simpler than the DMK21 for a noob and still ok results? Probably will use it on a C8 with 4x Powermate.
(I realise the DMK, being mono, will be more sensitive than the colour DBK)
Hi Troy. Been down that road also. The Philips cam just doesn't seem to have the sensitivity to pick up a guide star unless it is pretty bright and the DSI seems terribly prone to dust mites on the sensor. I gave up and bought a QHY5. But on another scope, I have just fitted a new device that is marketed as an electronic eyepiece and a 3 Meg resolution and it seems to be promising. It is a web cam style of device, like the ToUCam and therefore will work with programs like MetaGuide. But I have yet to give it a bit of sky. The moon is still too bright but I'm hoping that there will be enough time before it rises to give it a proper test. The device is made by a Chinese (surprise, surprise) call Jicheng or some such and has a serial number MD300.
I have had PHD recognise it as well and the picture is sharp and well-defined so I'm fairly confident it will work pretty well.
Peter
Looks a hell of a lot like the Orion Solar System Imager II, but has (or says it has) more resolution. Are you sure it is really 3Mp, as a lot of Chinese cameras say they are bigger resolution than normal, but it ends up being by use of interpolation.
Ok. So back to my question - DBK is a good way to go for a sensitive webcam type guider that can be used as a decent planetary imager? Would it be better than the SSI II or similar? Looks like the SSI II is a couple of hundred bucks cheaper, the clone probably more.
I use a GstarEX into a USB Winfast TV thingo as a guidecam. The really good thing is you can dial in sensitivity by setting the frame integration rate. I can always find a guidestar even with a 90mm MAK at 1250mm FL. It has a decent sized sensor and its sensitivity is second to none. With the 150mm achro as a GScope there is never a lack of stars.
Hi Troy. Been down that road also. The Philips cam just doesn't seem to have the sensitivity to pick up a guide star unless it is pretty bright and the DSI seems terribly prone to dust mites on the sensor. I gave up and bought a QHY5. But on another scope, I have just fitted a new device that is marketed as an electronic eyepiece and a 3 Meg resolution and it seems to be promising. It is a web cam style of device, like the ToUCam and therefore will work with programs like MetaGuide. But I have yet to give it a bit of sky. The moon is still too bright but I'm hoping that there will be enough time before it rises to give it a proper test. The device is made by a Chinese (surprise, surprise) call Jicheng or some such and has a serial number MD300.
I have had PHD recognise it as well and the picture is sharp and well-defined so I'm fairly confident it will work pretty well.
Peter
Just did a quick google on the MD300, it's actually made by a company called Zhejiang Jincheng Digital Photo Express Chain Co., Ltd.
I use a GstarEX into a USB Winfast TV thingo as a guidecam. The really good thing is you can dial in sensitivity by setting the frame integration rate. I can always find a guidestar even with a 90mm MAK at 1250mm FL. It has a decent sized sensor and its sensitivity is second to none. With the 150mm achro as a GScope there is never a lack of stars.
The QHY5/orion SS autoguider do a good job. Thats what they are built for. Also have the advantage of the ST-4 type port which allows you to plug directly into the guide port of many mounts.
The attached pic is a bit confusing, as it shows a front and a back view. The front view shows what appears to be a 1.25 eyepiece tube.
The tube you see is not 1 1/4 inch. It's small but it comes with an adapter and a parafocal thingy that doesn't seem to fit anything. I bought mine last year from a distributor in Canada for somewere near A$300 but can't now find any details.
Can't use a QHY5 with the guiding software I intend to use. Needs a webcam.
Don't think anyone has directly answered my questions yet. I'm thinking of going ahead and getting the DBK21 regardless unless someone talks me out of it soon...
I use a GstarEX into a USB Winfast TV thingo as a guidecam. The really good thing is you can dial in sensitivity by setting the frame integration rate. I can always find a guidestar even with a 90mm MAK at 1250mm FL. It has a decent sized sensor and its sensitivity is second to none. With the 150mm achro as a GScope there is never a lack of stars.
With Guidemaster have never had any problems.
Bert
I'm beginning to think the Gstar is well suited to my levels of experience, enthusiasm and finances.
A bit of guiding for my still camera obs stuff, plus a nice tool for astonomical viewing inside with the family. The only minor drawback I can see is the need for a hardware video capture gadget to store PAL images as AVIs.
The Video-to-USB cable approach seems the most elegant to me, as I could use one of the two existing USB cables I have from my pier to the obs laptop. I would also use a USB to serial cable to control the Gstar. Hopefully eventually all from the comfort of the house. Anyone got any experience / recommendations with this approach?
Thanks Mike. I should have asked you directly first up. The thread above went off on tangents all over the place Someone throws up a "new" alternative camera and everyone's like kids in a candy store
Thanks Mike. I should have asked you directly first up. The thread above went off on tangents all over the place Someone throws up a "new" alternative camera and everyone's like kids in a candy store
Sorry if my inputs were of annoyance to you.
For penance, whenever possible, I'll restrain myself from contributing further to the forum comments.
Thanks Mike. I should have asked you directly first up. The thread above went off on tangents all over the place Someone throws up a "new" alternative camera and everyone's like kids in a candy store
I am prostrate with grief that I have upset you by offering you an alternative. Perhaps if you hadn't posted the link to the camera I mentioned, the discussion might not have drifted that way.
Peter
Me thinks I was taken too seriously. There were smileys in there.
Peter, I appreciated your alternative suggestion. In fact I was interested in pursuing it, that's why I posted the link and asked about costs and where you got it etc.
If you guys re-read the thread, you'll note that it was not until Mike (iceman) posted above that any of my original questions were answered. In fact when I re-read the thread, only Peter and Mike (iceman) seem to even acknowledge reading my questions/posts.
As a noob, I value the advice of you guys more experienced than I. But it's frustrating when questions don't get directly answered. I don't learn anything by having different camera names thrown at me without reasons why one is better than the other, why my suggestions are or are not recommended, or quoting some product data verbatim from a website that I had already quoted in post #3 above.
Now I've upset a couple of you... hopefully this explains why I said what I said and you'll still attempt to help me in the future. Is there a pathetic, puppy-dog eyed smiley emoticon here somewhere?
It's a beaut little camera eh Bert.
