Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Basic Equipment for imaging.

Darthdad8409

By Darthdad8409
in Getting Started With Imaging

Recommended Posts

Darthdad8409

Darthdad8409

Posted
Posted

I am wanting to gettting into lunar imaging but I am not sure what equipment I need. So my questions are

1. What is the difference between using a DSLR, a webcam or a CCD camera. Don't all three use a CCD chip?

2 Do I need to get a micro focuser?

3. What are the specs I should be looking at for either a webcam or a DSLR?

I have ETX-90 with 1250 mm focal length and f/ration of 13.8

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 25
  • Created
  • Last Reply
oldpink

oldpink

Posted
Posted

your F ratio isn't a good starting point

1. DSLR uses a Cmos chips Mostly CCD is a different technology
2. no but it does help
3. a webcam or dedicated astro cam like the ASI range are ideal for lunar / planetary and cheaper than a DSLR

you will have to take your mount into consideration as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RichM63

RichM63

Posted
Posted

Start with a $20 webcam.  The Moon will surprise you.

This shot, hand tracked 2000 frames stacked @10fps. No motors etc.

Not a very good shot but it gave me the bug. Camera $15 old 740/SPC 900 NC.

At least you'll know if the sport is for you, before spending the Earth.

post-34135-0-15700100-1411234741.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ronin

ronin

Posted
Posted

ETX 90 will be good for webcam imaging of the Moon and the planets, although the moon is big and may not fit on a webcam chip.

DSLR is not a good idea on the rear of an ETX 90 - just too big - although you may be able to attach one it will throw the balance out completely, you cannot alter the OTA position to improve the balance.

The ETX will do planets and the Moon, it will not do DSO's.

The scope is wrong (F/13.8 Mak) and the mount is wrong (Alt/Az).

For DSO you would need to throw the ETX scope and the ETX mount and replace with a short fast scope and an equitorial mount. That is 0% ETX bits and 100% other bits. :grin: :grin:

Only saying this in case the idea is to start on Moon+planets then have a go at DSO's.

In astronomy and when imaging is involved the following seems fairly close to correct:
You need one rig for visual, another for planetary imaging and a third for DSO imaging.

Start simple, get a webcam, carefully take apart, remove the front lens, the reassemble (put the filter back in). Then ;locate object, swap eyepiece for camera, get it focussed (not exactly easy or simple), get a video of say 2000 frames.

Likely to need a webcam adapter to get the webcam fitting in the diagonal tube.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darthdad8409

Darthdad8409

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the tips and help. I'd like to get into Imagining DSOs, but I want make sure I have enough patience and desire to do imaging before I spend the money on a better scope. And I figure there are a lot of things on the moon I can shoot for practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveS

DaveS

Posted
Posted

I supposed you could start with something like a QHY5 II, perhaps the colour version for solar system imaging, then if / when you go on to DSOs you can use it to guide with. About the only thing in common.

Also the emphasis is different for DSOs where the mount is the most important consideration, and focal lengths are shorter and f ratios smaller.

And while planetary imaging can get expensive if you let it (Celestron Edge HD 14' for example) DSO imaging is a bottomless money pit. I say to my colleagues that some people on here spend as much as a small car on their kit. Others spend as much as quite a large car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RichM63

RichM63

Posted
Posted

Same $15 webcam, again no motor drives or anything. Hand tracked video of 2000 frames @10fps in SharpCap, sorted with Pipp, AS2, Registax6. SW 150P EQ3-2.

And a little effort.

But it shows what you can at a minimum acheive for almost no money.

post-34135-0-52259000-1411257213.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darthdad8409

Darthdad8409

Posted
  • Author
Posted

And while planetary imaging can get expensive if you let it (Celestron Edge HD 14' for example) DSO imaging is a bottomless money pit. I say to my colleagues that some people on here spend as much as a small car on their kit. Others spend as much as quite a large car.

Yeah, I have noticed how expensive things can get while I was pricing out equipment. outside of the cost of a new scope, I can only justify spending around $500 for equipment. if all I can do is planetary and Lunar imaging I am okay with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darthdad8409

Darthdad8409

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Same $15 webcam, again no motor drives or anything. Hand tracked video of 2000 frames @10fps in SharpCap, sorted with Pipp, AS2, Registax6. SW 150P EQ3-2.

And a little effort.

But it shows what you can at a minimum acheive for almost no money.

attachicon.gifJupiter_30_01_2014.png

Thanks for the examples. I feel better knowing that I can get good results with a Web cam.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
rockinrome

rockinrome

Posted
Posted

As oldpink pointed out though, you need to also pay attention to the mount. This is sometimes overlooked. If you're scope is not stable then you might as well not bother, the images will be rubbish and you will become very frustrated and pack it in!!

I don't know if this still holds, but I was once told you should spend at least double on a mount than the cost of the scope. I know it does not work in *all* circumstances, but is not a bad starting point.

Also consider the upgrade path of the mount re. GOTO, Autoguiding, etc. Can't go wrong with something like EQ3-2, CG-4, EQ5.

All the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveS

DaveS

Posted
Posted

For the cost of a cheap-'n'-chearful webcam, give it a go, you may find the 'scope and webcam will give you decent lunar / planetary images, and if they don't, well it's only $15-20.

If you do find that the 'scope won't work well for imaging don't chuck it in the bin, hold on to it, because if you *do* go down the imaging route having a 'scope to look through while the subs are coming in is always a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Feral Rabbit

Feral Rabbit

Posted
Posted

From my limited understanding It may be worth adding at this point that newer webcams use cmos sensors and what you need is a webcam with a ccd sensor, which are on the older and cheaper ones. I'm sure someone with more knowledge will either back me up or shoot me down :smiley:

I have adapted a Logitech 4000 pro although I have yet to use it. There are many tutorials on Youtube as to how to convert this camera which was the prime reason for me to get this particular camera. It was well within my very limited grasp of DIY :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tingting44

tingting44

Posted
Posted

Cracking shots Martin.

I am very new to all this AP lark and if I get half as decent shots as you I will be happy. You must be very proud of your efforts.

Regards

Martin

Thanks buddy :)

i am happy with my results for now, its taking nearly 3 years for me to get to this point, you need to have a lot of patience lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rockinrome

rockinrome

Posted
Posted

One word of caution re. GIMP though (although I do use it for post-processing at the moment).

At the current release (2.8.14) GIMP cannot work with 16 bit TIFF files (this and FITS format are the "standard" format for astro photos which need post-processing).

GIMP converts the image to 8 bit format on the fly (there are warnings shown) and there is work in progress for version 2.10 for 16 bit support).

You may not think it matters, but 8 bit gives you 256 different light intensity values per pixel and 16 bit gives you 65536 different values, so you have much more control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Physicist13

Physicist13

Posted
Posted

I am wanting to gettting into lunar imaging but I am not sure what equipment I need. So my questions are

1. What is the difference between using a DSLR, a webcam or a CCD camera. Don't all three use a CCD chip?

2 Do I need to get a micro focuser?

3. What are the specs I should be looking at for either a webcam or a DSLR?

I have ETX-90 with 1250 mm focal length and f/ration of 13.8

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

ETX-90 is great for planetary and Solar(with correct filters, obviously!)

v briefly: DSLR are for daytime photos but can be used for Astrophotography very well, but thats not their main design purpose. But if you have one, then its def worth using to take AP. a webcam/video capture is used for Planetary,Moon and Solar imaging as a stream of images (a video) is taken so as to capture some images when the "seeing" is very good. A CCd is a dedicated AP imager that is often cooled (which greatly reduces the noise in the image) and often has no colour filter (Bayer) on it. They can be very expensive and require a PC to operate. Advantage of DSLR is that they are autonomous, so with say a remote interval timer can take lots of images without need for PC. They often have a filter that blocks a lot of the Ha light (but not all!), so lose on sensitivity, but these filters can be removed...can be tricky!

Planatary,Moon,Sun: video capture

Everything else DSLR(pref modded but not essential) or dedicated CCD(pref cooled)

Patrick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.