Basic planetary cam

[dmk]

Due to the heavily shackled wallet, which of these options would work out the best for basic planetary imaging with a SW  Explorer 130p?

Modded Xbox webcam,Celestron Neximage S/S  imager or ZWO ASI034MC?

Thanks,

  Dave.

[Leveye]

I'd go with a ZWO. I love mine

[dmk]

I would imagine that the Xbox way would be the poorest.but are there any major differences between the latter two?

Please don't just say xxxx is better just 'cause you have one,I want to make the best choice for my limited budget,based on SGL members'  vast knowledge.

[dmk]

No disrespect to Leveye.

[dmk]

C'mon guys and girls,need some help here.

There must be many out there who have been down the same route that I am on.

Tried,tested and discarded many variations of cams when you first started out.

Only 3 options here, can't be that taxing......

[Stu]

dmw, a little patience goes a long way. It's only been a couple of hours so give it some more time and I'm sure you will get some input.

[happy-kat]

Xbox is very cheap it is a start, but if you are looking to spend more than £5 with the other two then I'd rule it out.

[dmk]

Sorry all, the older you get,with 'modern' technology,the less patience one has!!!

[Feral Rabbit]

Sorry all, the older you get,with 'modern' technology,the less patience one has!!!

Err! I think you will need a lot of patience with astronomy and bucket loads of the stuff with AP. Are you sure you've chosen the right hobby?  

Sorry I have no idea on which camera is best. I been using an old Logitech Quickcam (total £20) which gives acceptable if not brilliant results and am just about to "upgrade" to a Microsoft LifeCam.

Although I suspect if you throw enough money, if there is enough in the world, at AP (and importantly, have a bit of skill composing and post production) then you will get fantastic results.

All the software you need is free, which is a bonus in a hobby that eats money quicker than I can produce!

I'm going down the road of cheap and cheerful to learn the trade and then buy better later.

[dmk]

Err! I think you will need a lot of patience with astronomy and bucket loads of the stuff with AP. Are you sure you've chosen the right hobby?  

Sorry I have no idea on which camera is best. I been using an old Logitech Quickcam (total £20) which gives acceptable if not brilliant results and am just about to "upgrade" to a Microsoft LifeCam.

Although I suspect if you throw enough money, if there is enough in the world, at AP (and importantly, have a bit of skill composing and post production) then you will get fantastic results.

All the software you need is free, which is a bonus in a hobby that eats money quicker than I can produce!

I'm going down the road of cheap and cheerful to learn the trade and then buy better later.

My patience is with social media,not astronomy.

I have spent many a freezing hour observing.

I have posted a simple question on budget cameras.

No offense to you

[JamesF]

The Xbox camera won't be a patch on the other two.

There doesn't seem to be much information about the Neximage or the ASI034MC.  I'd guess the Neximage might well be an Imaging Source camera in disguise.  This one looks a strong candidate: http://www.theimagingsource.com/en_US/products/cameras/usb-ccd-color/dfkecu010m12/

If that's true then I'd go with the ASI034MC because I'd much prefer to have the full raw colour image from the camera than a YUY2 frame as the Neximage provides (YUY2 is a lossy video format, so the camera is effectively throwing away data that you could use).

The one point in the Neximage's favour is the smaller pixel size.  It would probably work nicely with a 3x barlow in your 130P OTA.  To get the most out of the ASI camera you'd probably be wanting to use a 5x barlow or even more.  That said, those are not lengths you're likely to go to until you've got the hang of imaging at smaller scales so it may well not be an issue.

For me personally, the video format would tip the balance.  I'd go with the ASI.

The other option that springs to mind is to wait for an SPC900 to come up here or on ebay for around £50.  They're not that common, but I'd say they come up more often now than they did perhaps two or three years ago and if they're not already modded to add a nosepiece it's really not that hard.  Much more than that price though and I'd pass.

James

[Stub Mandrel]

If you want cheap, I got a Microsoft HD Lifecam Cinema (phew!) off Ebay, a bit more work to mod than a standard webcam (you have to remove the autofocus lens which means also using an aftermarket IR filter (about £10). I have a SW150PL and this is the sort of thing I've got in my first 'season' using it with Sharpcap and a 2x barlow:

[JamesF]

Oh, yes, I'd forgotten about the Lifecam

The mod is a bit of a pain because it involves completely stripping down the camera and rehousing it in another case, but depending on how much you pay for the camera it probably works out in the same sort of ballpark price-wise as the SPC900.  Of those two though I found I never really got on with the Lifecam and I'd still have the SPC900.  I posted some comparisons quite some time back.  I'll see if I can find them again.

James

[JamesF]

Here you go: http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/168060-spc900-vs-xbox-live-webcam-vs-lifecam-cinema/

James

[Stub Mandrel]

I'll be interested in the comparisons - the Lifecam was only £20 too!

[JamesF]

I'll be interested in the comparisons - the Lifecam was only £20 too!

That seems very cheap.  I think I paid nearer £40 for mine.

James

[Garethr]

Dmk

As someone who owns a drawerful of "make do" cameras I would suggest the ZWO. It's far easier to image using something that is designed to do the job and from what I have read the ZWO seems a good camera. I have the neximage and found it next to useless along with a couple of other supposedly good planetary cameras.

It's hard enough to do this hobby without using poor kit and getting frustrated with poor results.

At the moment I use a canon 1100d un modded and have just bought a zwo 178 mc. Wow what a difference so the message is save up and get a dedicated camera otherwise it's really difficult and can be dispiriting.

Good luck

Gareth.

[beamer3.6m]

There is a spc900nc in the classifieds section.

It has been lx modded also and comes with nosepiece etc for £65

[jimbo747]

Another one is the ps3 eyecam for about 5 quid. Bit more faffing than the Xbox one but sensor is at least as good and importantly will do 75fps at VGA (I found that to be usable on Jupiter earlier in the year). Mines also peltier cooled which reduces noise a fair bit if i want to use 10s exposures.

I've also purchased a qhy5l-ii, will be interesting to see how much of an improvement it gives me.

[Stub Mandrel]

Another one is the ps3 eyecam for about 5 quid. Bit more faffing than the Xbox one but sensor is at least as good and importantly will do 75fps at VGA (I found that to be usable on Jupiter earlier in the year). Mines also peltier cooled which reduces noise a fair bit if i want to use 10s exposures.

I've also purchased a qhy5l-ii, will be interesting to see how much of an improvement it gives me.

Can you do 10-sec exposures without modding?

[Joseki]

A simple comparison between my lifecam cinema and asi120mm (mono camera) (same scope and barlow, slightly different chip size):

the lifecam (now sold) was about £20 from ebay (custom billets part housing was another £20 though).  - both done with only very basic processing skills.  The lifecam was getting 30 fps. 

[Stub Mandrel]

A simple comparison between my lifecam cinema and asi120mm (mono camera) (same scope and barlow, slightly different chip size):

the lifecam (now sold) was about £20 from ebay (custom billets part housing was another £20 though).  - both done with only very basic processing skills.  The lifecam was getting 30 fps. 

That's interesting, the lifecam shows a few artefacts and doesn't seem as sharp on the micro scale, yet it seems to pick up more detail. If it was me I'd probably blend the two images (and get the worst of each, no doubt!)

[Joseki]

That's interesting, the lifecam shows a few artefacts and doesn't seem as sharp on the micro scale, yet it seems to pick up more detail. If it was me I'd probably blend the two images (and get the worst of each, no doubt!)

probably that's mainly my poor processing.  I was using just the green channel for the lifecam (which seemed to bring out better detail) and the dynamic range is more stretched on the lifecam version, plus the capture settings could probably have been improved .. but what I was hoping to show was that the lifecam, costing around £40 could get results not a million miles away from the as120mm which new costs £230 ish.  For the money the lifecam seems especially good for lunar and solar imaging.  However 2nd hand dedicated imaging cameras come up on ABS around £100.

[JamesF]

I wonder if the Lifecam image just appears to show more detail because the contrast range is different?

I think perhaps that the difference between the darkest and lightest pixels is greater in the Lifecam image, but the total number of different pixel values may be greater in the mono image.

James

[JamesF]

For the money the lifecam seems especially good for lunar and solar imaging.

That's where I think they probably do best.  They seem to be much happier when there's more light available.

James