haitch

That is exactly the difference between SPC900 and SPC880...

and the firmware... [sings] they call me Spc900... that's not my name

(Basically it knows its name so won't automatically install as the other)

What version of Win 7 have you got? The professional version has an XP mode you can download which gives you a XP virtual PC for free. I used that to flash the firmware based on details I found via this forum.

Control Panel => Device manager=> Update Driver => Manually Select Driver - untick compatible hardware - point to the SPC900 drivers I think off the top of my head. (Should work for unflashed cams)

sorry for a newbie question, has anyone come up with a method and instruction list for people with only Windows 7 32 or 64 bit laptops.????????

from what I read problems are with the webcams in the newer laptops..

want to try this but flashing things are the bane of my life, bricked a few mobiles doing it

I've seen an SPC880 running on Windows 7 without being flashed. All you need to do is install the drivers manually and point it to the SPC900 drivers. It'll probably give you some warnings about the driver not being the right one but it does work - I've seen it.

The main advantages of flashing the SPC880 to an SPC900 are 1) you can use it on Windows 7 (and Vista?) as there are no Win7 drivers for the SPC880 an 2) you can get to all the little settings that the original Philips driver offers for the SPC900 but the .inf file for the SPC880 does not.

As for the risks, many here have done it an had no issues. Just make sure you're doing the flashing on a Windows XP otherwise it won't work.

I've now seen an unflashed SPC880 used on Windows 7. Don't ask me exactly how it's done but it basically uses the 900 driver but just requires you to manually point to the driver rather than let Windows pick it.

Just got round to finishing testing my 4 cams.

Out of the 4 I have one with several stuck pixels (incidentally that is the one that came for a now banned member), 2 with more minor hot pixels (well off axis and only show at extreme frame levels / gain etc in a dark environment) and 1 where I cannot detect any hot pixels.

I intend to use one for planetary and mod 1 for deep sky. I know I can use dark frames to remove the effect of the hot pixels but for which use will I see more benefit from less evident hot pixels? I'm guessing deep sky due to the added factor of long exposure but I'd be grateful for any advice.

How much have they gone up? I think the 2 I bought were 13.26 but the email invoice is not itemised.

Not a great deal they're now £6.99 + p&p I think.

I bet all this is paying for their staff Christmas lunch this year!

Can you imagine what they must have been thinking when they saw the rate these have been selling at. I bet they expected them to be sitting on the shelf for months if not years!

Although the price has gone up they're still not exactly a rip off price are they? [thinks back to last week and rolls eyes in an ironic fashion]

I see the adaptors look distinctly "Weedonesque"

I'm gagging to get mine so I can chop one up for a long expsure mod! If that fails I'll send the second to Astronomiser for a professional job... £6 + £60 for a deep sky camera!... or should I get the chip changed too whilst I'm at it?

Yea once i saw a dobsonian i thought it would be difficult to mount a camera on it for the same reason you said and the stress on the camera itself. Thanks.

I'm in the process of altering my tube & mount on my dob. Mainly due to balance issuess caused by simply upgrading the focusser to a 2". For the past couple of months I've had to hang a bag of rocks off the back end.

Thanks and thanks to everyone for your helpful input, you guys are the best. Does anyone know where i can buy a camera mount so i can take pics of my findings? I have a Canon EOS Digital rebel XTI.

If you really want to get into imaging then maybe a dob isn't right for you. Even if you get one of the newer dobs with computerised goto you will get field rotation in longer exposures (because the sky does not rotate along the same axis as the scope) although planets should be ok I think. If you went for an expensive equatorial platform for it to sit on you could over come the field rotation.

There is still one major problem though using a camera on a dob...Balance. Hanging your DSLR of the top end of a dob is going to cause you tremendous problems trying to stop it nose diving towards the floor. Even balancing out with weights at the rear may not provide a great solution as the extra weight may also cause the tube/truss to flex and affect collimation.

In any case if imaging is what you want to do then aperture isn't so important - a camera can pick up far more through a smaller aperture on a long exposure than your eye can see.

The reason a Dob gives you so much aperture for your cash is because of the mount's simplicity. Once you start moving away from that simplicity you begin to defeat the object in terms of price and ease of setting up.

I'm not saying imaging and dobs can't go together but they're not an obvious pairing. IMO