Quote:
|
I often wonder if the LPI is underrated
|
I think the LPI is underrated. There is no doubt in my mind that a ToUCam is the better camera because of pixel size (better image scale) and sensitivity - but the difference is not as great as I once believed.
I almost despaired when I was posting Saturn images at 1/4 second exposure time and the ToUCam brigade were posting images with exposures of 1/25 second! How could I compete with a camera that is 6 times more sensitive than mine? Then, Paul (1ponders) posted a link to the K3CCDTools site where an analysis was done on exposure times for the ToUCam - briefly, the exposure time is wrongly reported. Depending on the frame rate, the real exposure time might be more like 1/5 second. That sounds more correct to me - I can believe the ToUCam is 25% more sensitive than an LPI, it may even be 50% more sensitive, but it is not 600% better!
Another area where the LPI really falls down is frame rate. I can't get more than about 2 frames per second so I just don't get the sheer number of frames. The reason for the slow frame rate is that there is no compression to the image in transfer. I can see the logic behind no compression but, in practice, I would gladly suffer the effects of some compression for more frames.
Having said all that, if someone was to ask me, should I buy an LPI or should I buy a ToUCam, I would have to say the ToUCam is the way to go (assuming both are at a similar price). I got my LPI for 'free' with my LX200 so I'm happy!
