Imaging Source DMK 41 Deep Sky?

[bkm2304]

Hello Imagers,

I was wondering if the Imaging Source DMK 41 camera was any good at deep sky imaging?

Any views?:help:

Thanks

Richard

[renormalised]

Frame rate is a bit slow if you want to capture DSO's (15fps), but if you want the lowdown on these cameras, just ask Mike and he'll fill you in on the go:D

[sheeny]

I have been tempted by the DMK 41 as well. No doubt you can do DSO's with the DMK, but for not much more in money you can get a Meade DSI III Pro. I think I was looking at about $1300 for the DSI III Pro and $900 for the DMK 41.

The advantage the DSI has is it is 16 bit so you can get more dynamic range out of it before losing data. The DMK is only 8 bit.

For DSO's I think I would lean towards the DSI III Pro, but if your budget eliminates the DSI then the decision gets easier!

Al.

[citivolus]

I just picked up a DMK 41 to replace the 21 for guiding purposes. I wanted the larger chip area, as I was having a hard time finding a guide star when using my LX200 as the guide scope, due to too much focal length :p

If I get a chance, I'll point it at a nebula tonight and see how it does, however the fact that it is 8 bit is going to seriously limit its utility on nebulous objects, as it will end up with graduations. It would likely work just fine for stuff like supernova and minor planet searches, though.

The lowest in-stock price that I could find in Australia was $900.

Pixel size is 4.65μm, vs 5.6μm on the 21.

QE is around 40% from the sensor, which is OK, but far from what you can get out of more expensive chips.

Regards,
Eric

[Alchemy]

not for quality deep sky imaging.... great for planetary, i asked about this a couple years ago and the concensus was .....no.... someone did do an interesting shot of the homonculus in carinae, but trying to really work an 8 bit image is limiting.

clive.

[citivolus]

I gave it a quick shot tonight while doing some other things, and no, you really wouldn't want to call it a DSO camera. It could do it if you tried, but is not very well suited to the task.

[bkm2304]

Thanks Everyone. I,m going to have a look at the dsi iii pro.
Richard

[Paul Haese]

Certainly not a camera for DSO work. The main strength of this particular camera is Lunar work. It has a larger sensor than the DMK21 which is great for planetary work.

You will be better served by using a DSLR. I am sure you could pick up a second hand 350D or similar for around the same price of the DMK.

[citivolus]

Yes, I was most certainly having fun browsing the lunar surface the other night with this camera. It is both an excellent guider and lunar imager.

A DSLR in live view mode connected to a computer may offer a similar image and resolution. However, the DSLR won't be such a good guider :)

After only a few days with my DMK 41, I wouldn't part with it. It fills its niche well.

Regards,
Eric