JamesF

It has occurred to me that an Arduino-based controller would probably work. As far as I can tell there's not much in the box other than the microcontroller and a set of darlington drivers for the motors. I assume the microcontroller just takes the inputs from the buttons on the front of the box and generates pulses at the correct rate into the darlington pairs to drive to motors at the proper rates. I admit that's poorly-educated guesswork, mind

James

I did look at buying the chips and building a copy, but hit a similar problem to Oily - no info on reader/programmer

It seems odd that the microcontroller should be so cheap (I think Farnell sell them singly for about £2.50) yet the programmer seems to be hard to source. Perhaps that's why they're so cheap

I wonder if there's a pin-compatible replacement that does have an easily-obtained reader/programmer that might also read the existing microcontroller, assuming of course that the latter is even possible at all?

James

If the lens works you can probably re-sell it for a fair proportion of that price.

James

Well, not much you can do but carry on, I guess...

James

What are the lines in the second image, GIna? There's one vertical and three horizontal that I can see, two of them close together.

James

Latest... Still dead after reassembling - anyone want a 350D body with dead sensor??

Bottom line - scraping the edge of the sensor killed it! All was well with removing CFA until I went over the short edge. Remedy for next try - epoxy over the short edges up to the sensor imaging area or even a little bit more to be sure.

I'd be pleased to have the bayonet fitting etc. from the 350D body if it's just going to go in the bin, Gina. Happy to pay postage and so on. If someone else can use the entire thing I'd prefer to see less of it wasted though. Having to throw away a camera that's mostly functional is a little galling

Putting epoxy on the short edges as well seems like a good plan.

James

I'm fairly sure that Gina has demonstrated hers working after epoxying the wires.

James

Thank you I've cleaned the sensor off again and taken another photo.

The only thing I can think of is that perhaps one of the gold wires was still sticking out of the epoxy and got nicked during scraping.

If it still doesn't work I might be tempted to try to pick up a dead 350D from ebay (surely they can't be much more than £10?), remove the sensor and see if it works in your camera, and if it does have another go. In fact if you (or anyone else UK-based, I guess) fancy trying that, let me know and perhaps we can work out splitting the cost and I'll have the bayonet fittings from the gutted camera. Let's hope it doesn't get that far though.

James

I can't see any obvious damage either Gina. There are some bits of what appear to be fine wire or thread on top of the epoxy. What are they? Perhaps it just needs a good squirt with compressed air or something to make sure any little bits of CFA are dislodged and reassembling?

James

It's barely consolation I know, but those cameras that have been turned into expensive paperweights might at least become donors for a DSLR lens to CCD camera adaptor project, I guess

James

Oh dear. That's not good at all

James

That looks better

James

Are all the wires covered, Gina? Looks from the image like some of the ones on the bottom have been missed, but that might just be the way the light reflects from the epoxy.

James

Or down as the market gets flooded with dead Canon cameras

Possibly so, possibly so.

James

does the weight of an epoxy drop move the golden wire at all?

how did you apply the epoxy?

I can see the prices of dead Canon cameras suddenly going up on ebay and no-one but us will know why: they're all being used for CFA removal practice

James

That's excellent news

James

When the time comes I would be tempted to fracture the surface of that little piece of epoxy to weaken it and try to control where it breaks. It would be just a touch annoying if it broke off and snapped one of the gold wires at the same time.

James

It seems it's one of the 80C51 microcontroller family. There seem to be a few programmers for the 89C51 series, but I can't find any that mention the 87C51 at the moment.

James

I've been doing a little reading on this,QM says the chip could be at fault as he switched one and it started working again.You can buy the chip for £4.50 and a reader/programmer for a tenner.Just waiting hear back from the guy who sells the reader to see if it can program this type of chip

That would be really handy. My gut feeling is that the only difference between the EQ3-2 and EQ5 handsets is the programming of that microcontroller to account for the different gear ratios, though there's a trimmer pot somewhere as far as I recall that may also be set differently.

James

Well with regards to Quatermass' and my own issues, and those of others, I think you have to be a bit masochistic to persist with the EQ5! I know the move upwards is costly, but then when handsets are £100 a go.....

Yes, it would help if there were spare handsets available, or if they were a little better engineered to start with. I guess it wouldn't be hard to solder a 6V regulator across the wires in the box oneself given the skill with a soldering iron. I don't know if a simple bridge rectifier might also be incorporated to protect against reversed-polarity connections -- it's not something I've thought of before.

James

Quarter mass I thought you ended up getting an HEQ5?

I thought so too, but in the light of Mark's comments in this thread I assumed I must have been mistaken. I'm sure there was someone who had a guided EQ5 who eventually caved in and bought a HEQ5 in the last year or so though.

James

I have more motors and battery packs then I need now why on earth don't sky watcher sell spare parts for these kits it would certainly be a big help. If your out in the damp and cold every night imaging you need to know that your kit is not going to let you down and these control pads are simply not up to the job in my opinion.

Stick the motors in the classifieds? Someone might want a spare or two, or to replace a DEC motor with a broken connector (seems to be a common failing) and it would help offset the cost of a new handset if that's the way it has to be. Otherwise perhaps the AstroEQ mod is the way to go for the future?

James

I'd hazard a guess that the software writers in the main don't consider it a very high priority to support multiple cameras. I imagine that people using multi-camera systems aren't that large a proportion of their customers yet, so potentially it's a load of work just to support a few users who they might make more money from if they bought two licences anyhow. I'm struggling to find a compelling reason there

James

I attacked it with a hammer and chisel

Gina!!

James

Indeed it is. You barely notice it's there.

James