Webcams

[EdF_uk]

Evening,

I've been doing some webcam research and it seems that a lot of the community rate the Phillips SPC 900 webcam. I've tried to find this particular device to buy but cannot find it anywhere? I've searched on the Phillips website and although they display lots of images of webcamws there's onbly one that you can click on and display specs for. Incidentally this isn't the SPC 900.

I was wondering if anyone knows why I'm having trouble finding it and if there are any equivalent alternatives?

Cheers

Ed

[rowan46]

here you go

Cheap Philips SPC880 webcam - 49269 - discounts & offers

they will flash it for you to the 900 for a small fee , you will also need the nosepiece adaptor and ir filter

[jabberwocky]

They don't make it anymore, the spc880 is identical and there are loads on eBay, don't pay more than£30 and you will need an adapter for about £11 from FLO.

[EdF_uk]

Wow,

Thank you very much for the speedy reply guys. Is this still considered the best camera for the job based on its cost? If not what is?

Thanks again for the info,

Ed

[brantuk]

The SPC900NC is almost the same as the Toucam pro webcam wich was used in the original Steve Chambers modification. I think it has an identical chip. But the SPC880 flashed to resemble an SPC900 is the way to do it now as both former models are discontinued and hard to find second hand.

These have been standard for astro use for many years now and very popular. The only "better" ones I know of are the DMK or DFK range made by Imaging Source and they start around £300:

First Light Optics - Imaging Source Cameras

[EdF_uk]

OK thanks Brant. It looks like the SPC 880 with flash is the way to go. What does the flash actually do for you? I guess the hardware is the same but maybe the processing is more optimised??

Ed

[Dann]

Hi Ed

I’m also looking at getting hold of one of these webcams.

I think flashing it allows you to use the SPC900 drivers meaning your operating system will just see the camera as a 900 and not an 880, although im sure some others will be able to add to that.

I have a question regarding these, I know the camera is sensitive to Infra red, however I remember seeing something that said a filter isn’t necessary if imaging through a Newtonian Reflector. Is this correct or will the camera require an IR filter regardless of telescope type?

Thanks

[RogerTheDodger]

I've tried it and you do need it... you are right about the drivers btw.

[Dann]

Thanks Roger.

I thought as much, after all surely the light directed to the camera is the same regardless of whether its passed through a lens or been reflected by a mirror.

At least that's the way I see it.

[brantuk]

Yup - flashing it makes it appear to be an SPC900 to the operating system. So you can use the Philips drivers.

Webcams are great for snapping planets - you'll also need Registax to align and stack the frames of an avi (also free).

RegiStax- Free image processing software

[stev74]

Hi EDF,

You will also need software to capture the avi's with, I find SharpCap (developed by a SGL member) very good but there are others as well and they are all free which is even better!!

Hi Dan,

I think it will have be this quote that you saw on the Telescope House website -

Revelation IR Blocking Filter 1.25" Ref: BC019

Telescope objective lenses are not corrected in the infrared and ultraviolet range of the spectrum (exception: reflecting telescopes). Unlike the naked eye the CCD chip of cameras is sensitive in the near IR. As a consequence contrast and sharpness would suffer. For this reason you should cut off the IR and UV light whenever there are any glass elements between the camera and the lens, The IR blocking filter is an interference filter with a steep, precisely controlled filter curve. For the naked eye the filter seems fully transparent since the human eye doesn't perceive the IR and UV light.

Although it is true with regards newtonians you will find that most people will use 2X to 5X barlows to get enough magnification on planets which will bring a glass element into the equation even on newts.

Cheers

[Dann]

Ahh I see, thanks for the explanation.