Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Astrophotography and Imaging Equipment and Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 24-03-2013, 09:38 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
What do you planetary guru's think of this camera?

Do you reckon this would be any good on an ED 120?

http://www.bintel.com.au/Astrophotog...oductview.aspx
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 24-03-2013, 10:33 PM
Paul Haese's Avatar
Paul Haese
Registered User

Paul Haese is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,391
Barry, certainly would not consider this as a quality imager. There are several other alternatives that will give better results and for a similar price. Perhaps take a look at the Imaging Source DBK 618 camera. It cost a little more but will give good results.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 24-03-2013, 10:52 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Haese View Post
Barry, certainly would not consider this as a quality imager. There are several other alternatives that will give better results and for a similar price. Perhaps take a look at the Imaging Source DBK 618 camera. It cost a little more but will give good results.
This one?

Would it be best to fit the ED120 With a Televue 4x powermate perhaps?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 25-03-2013, 06:42 AM
gbeal
Registered User

gbeal is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 4,299
The DMK/DBK certainly, but before spending that much, buy and try one of these Baz, either the mono, or the colour. Best value for money out there.
http://zwoptical.com/Eng/Cameras/ASI120/index.asp
Gary
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 25-03-2013, 07:30 AM
asimov's Avatar
asimov (John)
Planet photographer

asimov is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bundaberg
Posts: 8,819
If I were just starting out, I wouldn't hesitate to try the ASI120MC Baz, 'bang for buck' based on comparison prices & comparison images from them compared to the Imaging Source camera's.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 25-03-2013, 08:09 AM
Paul Haese's Avatar
Paul Haese
Registered User

Paul Haese is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,391
Yep the Chinese one is certainly a contender too. I have seen some nice images produced from them. I would not use that much magnification Barry as the light drop off is significant and you will have the gain up too high to effectively create a good histogram. That is the xaximum of 3x for that aperture. Even then it might still be too much.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 25-03-2013, 08:46 AM
Screwdriverone's Avatar
Screwdriverone (Chris)
I have detailed files....

Screwdriverone is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Kellyville Ridge, NSW Australia
Posts: 3,306
I use the DBK21Au618 for my planetary images Baz, the seeing hasn't been too kind for me, but the results leave my toucam for dead.

+1 vote for me for the DBK.

Cheers

Chris
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 25-03-2013, 11:17 AM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbeal View Post
The DMK/DBK certainly, but before spending that much, buy and try one of these Baz, either the mono, or the colour. Best value for money out there.
http://zwoptical.com/Eng/Cameras/ASI120/index.asp
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by asimov View Post
If I were just starting out, I wouldn't hesitate to try the ASI120MC Baz, 'bang for buck' based on comparison prices & comparison images from them compared to the Imaging Source camera's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Haese View Post
Yep the Chinese one is certainly a contender too. I have seen some nice images produced from them. I would not use that much magnification Barry as the light drop off is significant and you will have the gain up too high to effectively create a good histogram. That is the xaximum of 3x for that aperture. Even then it might still be too much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Screwdriverone View Post
I use the DBK21Au618 for my planetary images Baz, the seeing hasn't been too kind for me, but the results leave my toucam for dead.

+1 vote for me for the DBK.

Cheers

Chris
Thanks guys, great info and experience here to draw from.

The ED120mm scope has a 2" receiver for eyepieces and cameras. What does this mean for a planetary camera? It seems the chips in them are very small and don't need the whole 2 inches. Looks like they come in 1.25" anyway. Do these cameras come with the adapters to fit them to the telescopes or do you have to buy them separately?

Paul, if 4x is too much for my 120mm, what about 2x? Is it worth it? Why?

What software do I need to run the camera and process the images? Do they come in 64 bit for my new 64bit OS?

Sorry for all the questions, I just want to make sure I don't have a bad case of buyers remorse.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 25-03-2013, 12:01 PM
gbeal
Registered User

gbeal is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 4,299
Baz,
Within reason, most or all of the lunar and planetary cameras will be 1.25" anyway, and it just a matter of using the usual 2"-1.25" adaptor. For the same reason, my two "amplifiers" are PowerMates, 2.5x and 5x, both are 1.25".
To run the camera you have many choices. The Image Source series ship with their own proprietary software, as do Point Grey. The ASI120 series come with a more basic software package, but almost without exception all can run with the very excellent FireCapture software, free ware too. It works well with my Flea2, better to my mind that the genuine supplied software.
Processing is done with Registax.
My suggestion, ASI120, either in mono or colour, colour if you are happy to buy another mono camera later, no real hardship. For solar for example, mon is really the only choice, ditto for lunar.
Gary
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 25-03-2013, 12:25 PM
rogerco's Avatar
rogerco (Roger)
Roger

rogerco is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Woodford,NSW,Australia
Posts: 388
You might also consider the Celestron NexImage5, its a 5megapixel camera and is on ebay for around $260 at the moment.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 25-03-2013, 12:30 PM
asimov's Avatar
asimov (John)
Planet photographer

asimov is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bundaberg
Posts: 8,819
I might add something here & that is the concept of extension tubes to up the FL/FR. I use 100mm of extension on my 2X barlow to get to 3X. This *doesn't* work with the 2.5X powermate. Add an extension with that one & you'll be downsizing your scale.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 25-03-2013, 05:43 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Thanks gents. I appreciate all your help. I might be buying one in a week or two.

Any chance you guys could post a photo or two on this thread, with the telescope/powermate/camera combination noted?

I'd love to get the comparison shots together.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 28-03-2013, 09:49 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
It's come down to either the Imaging Source DBK21AU618.AS or the Celestron Neximage 5 combined with the TeleVue Powermate 2.5x (1.25")

Suggestions as to which combination would work best on my ED120 refractor?

Baz.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 28-03-2013, 09:53 PM
asimov's Avatar
asimov (John)
Planet photographer

asimov is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bundaberg
Posts: 8,819
A Celestron Neximage? No don't do it lol! Seriously though, that Celestron 'Toy' couldn't hold a flame to the DBK618.

As for a suitable barlow with the 120mm, I'll leave that for someone else to answer.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 28-03-2013, 09:57 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by asimov View Post
A Celestron Neximage? No don't do it lol! Seriously though, that Celestron 'Toy' couldn't hold a flame to the DBK618.

As for a suitable barlow with the 120mm, I'll leave that for someone else to answer.
Awesome. I thought as much. That decides the camera then. Now.... what about the image amplifier? Is the Televue 2.5x the go or what?

Baz.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 28-03-2013, 11:07 PM
Paul Haese's Avatar
Paul Haese
Registered User

Paul Haese is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,391
Sorry Barry just got back to this again. The DBK is by far the better of the two cameras.

A 2.5x powermate is good but a 2x and the addition of an extension as John suggested is a better idea.

Part of the problem you have is the diameter of the scope. It is quite small for a planetary scope and will let in a certain amount of light. Which in reality is it will be too small an aperture for very high magnification. I would suggest the 2x will be large enough and give you enough head room on your gain and exposure to all a 3/4 histogram. If you went higher in magnification the light intensity is less again and that means you would have the gain at full or near full and the exposure at a level that frame rates slow down just to get the histogram near the same position. This is not an idea situation for planetary imaging. At 4x I would think your light fall off would be so bad that you would struggle to get a 1/4 histogram and that would result in onion ringing and a very noisy image.

Everything is about the light intensity and how well you can fill the histogram. Hope that makes sense.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 28-03-2013, 11:48 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Haese View Post
Sorry Barry just got back to this again. The DBK is by far the better of the two cameras.

A 2.5x powermate is good but a 2x and the addition of an extension as John suggested is a better idea.

Part of the problem you have is the diameter of the scope. It is quite small for a planetary scope and will let in a certain amount of light. Which in reality is it will be too small an aperture for very high magnification. I would suggest the 2x will be large enough and give you enough head room on your gain and exposure to all a 3/4 histogram. If you went higher in magnification the light intensity is less again and that means you would have the gain at full or near full and the exposure at a level that frame rates slow down just to get the histogram near the same position. This is not an idea situation for planetary imaging. At 4x I would think your light fall off would be so bad that you would struggle to get a 1/4 histogram and that would result in onion ringing and a very noisy image.

Everything is about the light intensity and how well you can fill the histogram. Hope that makes sense.
Some does. Thanks Paul.

Down the track I hope to be upgrading to a 14 inch OTA therefore much better suited to planetary imaging. I still want to be able to do my widefields and DSO's so I will probably keep the ED120 and use it as a guide-scope.

Looks like the Powermates don't come in 2x except in 2". What would be the best, a Barlow or a Powermate? Which one?

Here's the page I'm looking at on Bintel.

What do you mean by the addition of an extension?

Baz.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 29-03-2013, 08:20 AM
Shiraz's Avatar
Shiraz (Ray)
Registered User

Shiraz is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ardrossan south australia
Posts: 4,787
Try this: http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...d.php?t=105057.

With 5.6 micron pixels (eg DMK21-618), rule of thumb suggests f28 – your scope needs a little under 4x. you could use a 3x with an extension tube or pay twice as much to get the same result from a 4x Powermate.

If you go for one of the very good 3.75 micron pixel CMOS cameras - ASI120, QHY5L2 - you will need ~f19, so suggest a 2x Barlow and extension tube to get out to about 2.5x

if you decide to try the new Neximage5 camera with 2.2 micron pixels, you will need f11, so a 1.5x Barlow would be best.

This guy gets pretty impressive results from his 120mm f7.5 refractor using 4x and a DMK21-618 camera (5.6micron). http://www.astrobin.com/users/FranckIM06/

Last edited by Shiraz; 30-03-2013 at 07:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-04-2013, 08:09 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
What's the difference between the 2.5 powermate and the 2x barlow? Besides the extra .5 magnification?

Why would I buy one over the other to go with the DBK 618 on the ED120?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-04-2013, 09:22 PM
Shiraz's Avatar
Shiraz (Ray)
Registered User

Shiraz is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ardrossan south australia
Posts: 4,787
a Powermate is a Barlow with (2?) extra lenses that make it telecentric. there is no performance difference in this application, except that a Barlow can give you varying magnification whereas a Powermate is specifically designed so that it doesn't.

If interested in details, this is a good summary on Barlows and telecentric Barlows - http://www.brayebrookobservatory.org...BarlowLens.pdf

With a 618 camera, you need a final FNo of about f28, so you want about a 4x magnification Barlow or Powermate for your scope - just like http://www.astrobin.com/users/FranckIM06/

suggest a 3x Barlow with a short extension - that will allow you to vary the magnification to suit the seeing. If you do get a Barlow, buy a good quality one.

Last edited by Shiraz; 03-04-2013 at 12:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 03:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
Celestron Australia
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement