Lodestar X2 - mono or colour decision time

[Chinapig]

Hi folks

Been planning to get a Lodestar for a while, more than little inspired by the results I've seen people getting with LodestarLive. It'll also get used now & again as a guide camera for more conventional AP, but the prime reason is for VA. Been using a PD1 for a while, and enjoying it, and now want to step it up a tad.

So, mono X2, or the new colour version?

My natural inclination is to go for colour, but would welcome advice from those of you using these cameras regarding the relative merits of both. Is it simply a case of going a bit deeper with the mono X2, compared to the prettier views from the colour version on certain targets?

Comments hugely welcomed - many thanks!

Cheers

Simon

[RobertI]

I haven't got a colour Lodestar X2 but I want one! Perhaps someone can advise on the reduced sensitivity over the mono - I have read anything from 15% to 50% reduction, but either way it's at least as good as the mono version of the previous model (which I have) and that's still pretty darn sensitive. Personally I am craving the additional dimension that colour brings, so am saving my pennies for the colour X2, but I'll leave any advice to more experienced video astronomers.

Rob

[kerrylewis]

I'm not experienced and still feeling my way with the Lodestar that I bought recently, but for what it's worth I decided to go with the mono version. I am interested in producing some images which are more like what I see visually and the colour results that i've seen still look a little 'artificial' to me, but that is purely a personal preference. And anyway, the colour would one more thing to get right for this beginner in the field!

[Martin Meredith]

Hi Simon

I've found a surprising number of objects (mainly summertime nebulae) -- M8, M16, M17, M20 (for sure!), M27, M57, Centaurus A, globs, some doubles -- enhanced by 'real' as opposed to artifactual colour.

It is true that colour makes live manipulation trickier, but for me that isn't a deciding factor, and I think future releases of LodestarLive will make balancing much easier. I don't mind seeing a mild background colour cast either. I still remember the golden star field in which the Snake dark nebula appeared one night on my screen (although it appears this way in 'proper' photos, maybe it was an accident of colour manipulation on my part -- either way, it enhanced the experience).

Having said that, if the X2 mono is significantly more sensitive than the X2-C then that would be the deciding factor for me if and when I update -- I like the idea of having the most sensitive camera possible for deep/faint galaxy clusters where colour isn't an issue.  If the colour version were say only 15-20% less sensitive then I would go for that.

BTW Do we have any definitive data on this rather than extrapolating from the original mono to original colour? I've looked around but can't find the spectral response for the colour-X2. I'd need to see not just maximum QE but also the bandwidth.

What you shouldn't do is what I did: bought the older model a couple of months before the more sensitive one was released 

Martin

[nytecam]

I'm a great fan of Lodestars for prime imaging in brief exposures for Electronic Assist Astronomy [EAA] - don't use the word 'video' !  Been using the original Lodestar-M for 6yrs [http://home.freeuk.com/m.gavin/etx70mg.htm] and Lodestar-C for 3yrs [http://home.freeuk.com/m.gavin/eyelode2.html] and Lodestar Mx2 from April and Cx2 from July.  

Don't think you can buy early Lodestars except 2nd hand.  The new Lodestars have been upgraded with an improved socket for autoguiding [their prime market] and new Sony sensors so slightly [~10%] dearer than before. 

The new x2 sensors are ~x2 faster than the old sensors and I rate under test the colour version ~65% the speed of the mono version.   Due to the pale complementary colour CMYG used on these camera, against 'heavy' RGB Bayer on-chip filtration, the difference in camera speed is modest.  In theory 60s in mono needs ~100s in colour for the same density image but results are very flexible - the difference is no great deal in EAA.    Colour is a vital bonus although some will dismiss it as trivia - that's their loss

[kerrylewis]

Interesting debate.

I don't dismiss colour as 'trivia', far from it, but I don't think it's 'vital' either. I liked the mono images that I saw and I did say that it was a personal thing that I wanted to replicate what I see and I don't see much colour in most objects.

You pays your money....... And least cost difference is not an issue.

Kerry 

[Dom543]

I have had a Samsung SCB-2000 video camera for three years and that conditioned me on colour. I felt that the extra sensitivity of the mono was not enough to compensate for the sense of loss inflicted by the loss of colour. Also the X2C became available in the summer and ahead of the fall, which are the seasons of colorful nebulae. So I bought the X2C. Had we been in the winter/spring galaxy season, I might have given a more serious consideration to the mono version.

--Dom

[arkosg]

I'm pretty new to the Lodestar X2C, but I've been very impressed with it (and the Lodestar Live software) so far.  

I have a Mallincam Jr Pro/PC (monochrome, 429 HAD chip), which is the same as the chip in the original Lodestar B&W.  I haven't 

done any rigorous testing at this point, but my perception is that the Lodestar X2C is at least as sensitive as the Mallincam is, 

possibly even more (the Mallincam has adjustable gain control, which I always used, so it's hard to directly compare).

Nytecam and HiloDon have taken images with both, and probably if you look in their respective galleries you can see the difference 

there.  I'd say the monochrome is noticeably more sensitive, and the B&W images show more "detail".... but the colour X2C isn't 

that far behind, and it is in colour.  For me, it adds an extra "dimensionality" to objects, helps them to stand out more, but it's a 

very personal preference.

In the end, I don't think  you can go wrong with either one if your goal is to enhance the viewing of DSO's!

Cheers,

- Greg A

[HiloDon]

Hi Simon,

I have both the X2 and X2c Lodestars. I bought the mono first and really liked it, so I bought the color as soon as it came out. As far as sensitivity, I can't say I see much difference. Nytecam has done probably most definitive testing, so I think his estimates would be the most accurate. I agree with Kerry that the mono lets you see the images as you would through the scope for DSO's, only in much greater detail. If you want to go after some really deep stuff, like the Hickson Compact Groups, it's best to do that in mono. I think the color v mono issue is difficult, because there are objects that looked better in mono and some that need color to really stand out. My suggestion to you would be to get the mono, especially if you liked some of the posted examples that you've seen. You'll get immediate results without much effort. Color complicates the process. If you like the mono for your near real time viewing, you can then feel more confident in getting the color once you can budget for it. You can buy two Lodestars for the price of a high end video camera and still have significant dollars or pounds left to get some decent focal reducers. Nytecam convinced me to go this way and I am very happy I did. In any case, I don't think you can go wrong with either one.

If you have any questions, just post them here.

[Chinapig]

Folks - very grateful for all your various inputs, huge thanks all round!

Nicely balanced comments, excellent points made, and some very rational suggestions.

Several equally valid reasons for going either route.  But I'm rapidly thinking that the best option - thanks HiloDon - is indeed ultimately to buy both!  Just not at the same time though, as there are a few other things on the astro shopping list (no change there then!).  

And with both, I could obviously guide with one, if I really felt it necessary, and near-real time view with the other.  I have a little 60mm finder-guider, and so I can foresee a kind of hybrid triple rig on the horizon.  Guiding with one Lodestar, imaging/viewing with the other, while grabbing some wider-field dslr data with the third - why waste a good target, when you could shoot it every which way!  Ok, that's probably a bit bonkers, but might be fun trying sometime with certain targets.

As to whether to go mono first and colour second, or vice versa, I'll ponder all your suggestions for a bit longer.  Will let you know which way the decision goes.

Thanks again everyone for your guidance - very much appreciated.

All the best

Simon

[Paul81]

I agree its a tough decision! I have the older mono lodestar and I am tempted to get the new colour one at some point in the future.

Looking at other folks images colour enhances the view of a lot of objects (nebulae and clusters). I am not quite so convinced myself for galaxies, which are so faint that the colour doesn't seem to really leap out as much in our short exposures. Perhaps I will change my mind when more galaxy shots start appearing with the enhanced colour correction forthcoming in V0.11 

Like you say - the ultimate idea is to get both! 

To throw another fly in the ointment, some point in the future I will be getting a filter wheel + RGB filters - these are for lunar / planetary imaging. However, at that point I am thinking of hacking around to add control of the filter wheel in LL and given the stacking routines can already handle it, its feasible to take mono filtered images and have LL combine them to RGB. A step too far towards imaging? I like the more instant result of the OSC Lodestar, but then I think with a bit of SW coding effort I can save myself 450 GBP...

[Chinapig]

I took the jar of decision-making ointment off the shelf, all set for improving FLO's order book and, hey presto, there was a fly buzzing around inside!

Stacking filtered mono images with LL? Hmm, that's intriguing... Thanks for the thought Paul, it could be an interesting development along LL's roadmap.

Funnily enough, while pondering the Loadstar options over the last couple of days (should be an easy ponder really, with only two options!), I wondered if there was any way to use the mono X2 in conjunction with narrowband imaging. I admit I'm a total novice on that point, having yet to try narrowband filtered imaging of any type. I guess using a filter wheel could take away some of the immediacy of near-real time observing, but if control could be integrated into LL, I can see the logic.

Thus swings the pendulum ever so slightly towards mono...

G'night all!

[Geordie mc]

I've just ordered the x2 mono as a guide camera. I had no idea about this software and am now quite excited about giving it a go. Does it come with the camera or is it a download from the sx site?

[HiloDon]

I've just ordered the x2 mono as a guide camera. I had no idea about this software and am now quite excited about giving it a go. Does it come with the camera or is it a download from the sx site?

The latest version of Lodestar Live v0.10 can be downloaded from this link.

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/221635-lodestar-live-version-010-beta-download-transformation-update/

Paul is working on v0.11 which will have some improvement for the color version, so that shouldn't impact you. Have fun with your new Lodestar.

Don

[Geordie mc]

Thanks Don. Much appreciated.

[Paul81]

Have fun! Looking forward to seeing your first light!

[iksobarg]

Thanks from me too, to all of you, Op included.

I'm looking at the X2c Lodestar really hard now!

[Geordie mc]

New X2m arrived today. Downloaded the live software and hope to try it out as soon as it's clear - so first light should be around May.

[AstroEd]

Coming from the NSN/Malincam/Miloslick world I have the original lodestar so decided to get the x2 color as an affordable way to learn color CCD imaging. I have worked with LL from 0.8, 0.9, and 0.10 and have found the software to be intuitive and uncomplicated. I plan to get a apochromatic scope soon to compliment my 11" EdgeHD I just wish some one would design a basic video grabber software with out the un-needed add-ons like in webcam max. I was wondering how different is imaging with lodestar and LL vs a true dedicated CCD imaging camera color or Mono? Is this a good cheap way to learn the skills needed or am I going to complicate my learning?

May your skies be dark and your visions bright.

AstroEd

[DoctorD]

Hi Ed

Lodestar Live can be used to capture data for later processing - in essence, astrophotography is the collection of data and the subsequent processing of this data to extract the maximum detail possible.

Lodestar Live has the added benefit of allowing us to see the image whilst we are capturing the data giving an added dimension to the task.

All the things that contribute to good data for astrophotography will also assist in your Elwctronicaly assisted viewing. The single biggest difference is the lack of guiding, however at the relatively short exposure times used this should not be a problem.

HTH

Paul.

[HiloDon]

Coming from the NSN/Malincam/Miloslick world I have the original lodestar so decided to get the x2 color as an affordable way to learn color CCD imaging. I have worked with LL from 0.8, 0.9, and 0.10 and have found the software to be intuitive and uncomplicated. I plan to get a apochromatic scope soon to compliment my 11" EdgeHD I just wish some one would design a basic video grabber software with out the un-needed add-ons like in webcam max. I was wondering how different is imaging with lodestar and LL vs a true dedicated CCD imaging camera color or Mono? Is this a good cheap way to learn the skills needed or am I going to complicate my learning?

May your skies be dark and your visions bright.

AstroEd

Hi Ed,

My experience with dedicated CCD imaging is limited, but I have been using LL for a while now and am becoming very familiar with it. I think the main difference with LL and conventional CCD imaging software is that LL continually updates the image and provides a near real time video like experience. In color LL automatically de-bayers the image. It also provides for sum, mean and median stacking during imaging and automatically registers the images without manual selection of stars. The image controls (gamma, contrast, brightness) can be used during the imaging process and will retain their settings for the next cycle.

I have recently been experimenting with Nebulosity 3 and the Lodestar. There is a continuous imaging setting, but it is designed just for focusing. It appears that the program is more of a single capture process that then provides post processing tools to get the image you want. Stacking is done in the post processing stage as well, and it doesn't appear to have a sum stacking setting. I'm still playing with the demo, but it is definitely more complicated than LL and has a steeper, longer learning curve. If I eventually purchased the program, I will probably only use it for imaging with my Nikon D70 modded DSLR and post processing some of my Lodestar captures. One thing that appears to work well is the auto color balance. LL is a little tricky in getting color balance and saturation. Paul is working on improving that in the next version of LL, but I found that if I download a LL captured image into Neb3, I can get perfect color balance and better saturation with a couple of clicks. I can't save a clean image now with the demo, but if I buy it, I'll post some examples here.

I'm sure there are more experienced users out there that can add to or correct what I've written. Starlight Xpress also has free imaging s/w for the Lodestar that you can try. Nytecam has a lot more experience with it, so maybe he will respond. I find the SX s/w more like dedicated imaging s/w.

Hope this helps to answer your question.

Don

[Paul81]

I think Paul and Don have summed it up spot on! LL was always intended as a tool to get instant results and give a live view of what the camera was looking at (as near live as your exposure time anyway...). There is an option in LL to save each are exposure (and darks) to FITS files which you can then process offline using much more sophisticated tools (like nebulosity or pixinsight). In the right hands such tools will give much better results, but they are not near-live and have a steep learning curve. LL was always intended to be as simple as possible.

I think this style of EAA is a great first stepping stone for many people who have AP aspirations, as it allows you to get into the AP way of things with the minimal of kit (i.e. no need to guide, camera is much cheaper than dedicated cooled CCD plus you can later use the Lodestar to guide). Processing the Lodestar data will also allow you to learn the off-line imaging tools and once that is mastered I suspect you will be able to hit the ground running after purchasing the 'rest of the AP kit'.

The main thing is always to have fun though!!