QHY5 or SPC900 Webcam for planetary imaging

[palebluedot]

I have played around a bit with the SPC900 in the past, albeit not very seriously and would now like to go back and revisit planetary imaging and work harder to obtain some decent images. I have a QHY5 and was wondering whether I would be better off using this plus filters. Does anyone know whether this would give me much over the SPC900?

[lukebl]

I've had a go with my QHY5, but wasn't too impressed although I didn't really try particularly hard. This guy has produced some fabulous images with his QHY5: QHY5, some planets & deepsky objects

[Pete Presland]

there is some pretty good photo's on there

[palebluedot]

Any recommendations for a "getting started" set of filters if I did decide to give this a go?

[lukebl]

Just like to say that I take back what I said about using the QHY5 for planetary imaging! I had a quick run last night on Jupiter and Venus, and the results were much better than I had thought was possible (see here). Certainly better than the results from my webcam, even if they were only in monochrome. With the QHY5 software, you can reduce the size of the capture area and get a faster download rate. I reduced the area to 400 x 400 pixels, and it was managing a download rate of 25/sec, which was certainly better than a webcam can do without a reduction in image quality.

[wolfgang.f]

I've used both, but somehow I got better images with the QHY5, especially for lunar imaging.

It has a higher resultion (1280 x 1024) and needs less light than the Philips, and it can handle higher contrasts (10 bit as opposed to 8 in the SPC9000). If you don't need the full field of view (for planets), you can just record a video of the region of interest at higher frame rates. With the full field of view, it's easier to center the planet on the chip. Owners of mirror-shifting SC telescopes will understand... ;-)

I'm quite pleased with the results for lunar imaging, but I haven't tried using colour filters for planets yet. The price tag for a full set of filters was about as much as a 2nd hand IS colour camera...

For a sample QHY5 image, have a look at this thread:

http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-lunar/118612-shadows-plato.html

W.

[lukebl]

Very nice image, Wolfgang. Was that captured with the cam set at full size (i.e 1280 x 1024)? It's just that when I try to capture videos at that size the program crashes. It only seems to be able to capture videos at the smaller size.

[wolfgang.f]

It seems that the QHY5 can be a bit of a diva at times...

The video was recorded at full resultion on a rather rather s-l-o-w Atom netbook. The recording software is not 100% stable, though - I had my share of crashes, too. After some experimenting, it seemed that the camera + software was more stable when I used a shorter, higher-quality USB cable. I'm not sure if this was the real reason or just a coincidence, but it's worth a try :-)

Good luck, W.

[palebluedot]

You guys have me champing at the bit now. I'll be giving this a shot at the next oportunity. If I can tease half the detail you did I'll be over the moon.

[earth titan]

Which software did you use for the QHY5?

[lukebl]

Which software did you use for the QHY5?

I used the QGvideo software which comes bundled with the camera. Pretty easy to use and, as I mentioned above, you can reduce the capture area to reduce file size and increase the download rate.

[palebluedot]

Could I screw these directly onto the camera instead of using a filter wheel?

[Cornelius Varley]

I think those filters are for visual use, not imaging. Besides that, the time taken to remove one filter and replace it with another then place the camera back into the focuser tube in the same position and possibly having to refocus as well would make imaging difficult.

Peter

You changed the link to a set of RGB filters from this link Skywatcher*1.25" Lunar & Planetary Filter Set: Ace Astro, Ace Cameras . The same comment applies.

[riklaunim]

Those are the "entry level set" for color RGB imaging. A wheel is highly recommended

[palebluedot]

You changed the link to a set of RGB filters from this link Skywatcher*1.25" Lunar & Planetary Filter Set: Ace Astro, Ace Cameras . The same comment applies.

Sorry about that Peter. I realised my mistake and thought I could change the link quick enough, and that the Baader filters would be adequate. Point taken regarding the changeover time, but these filters were listed under imaging filters at FLO.

Would there be such a thing as as a filter wheel that accepts this type of filter?

[palebluedot]

Would this work in conjunction with the Baader filters?

[riklaunim]

Would this work in conjunction with the Baader filters?

Yes it would R,G,B in the wheel, and the IR/UV on the camera or wheel nosepiece.

[Cornelius Varley]

Sorry about that Peter. I realised my mistake and thought I could change the link quick enough, and that the Baader filters would be adequate. Point taken regarding the changeover time, but these filters were listed under imaging filters at FLO.

Would there be such a thing as as a filter wheel that accepts this type of filter?

You will have to be quicker than that. The RGB filters are imaging filters the others were visual filters.

Filter wheels are available.

Peter

[palebluedot]

Yes it would R,G,B in the wheel, and the IR/UV on the camera or wheel nosepiece.

Great thanks guys, I'll let you know how I get on.

[lukebl]

Sorry about that Peter. I realised my mistake and thought I could change the link quick enough, and that the Baader filters would be adequate. Point taken regarding the changeover time, but these filters were listed under imaging filters at FLO.

Would there be such a thing as as a filter wheel that accepts this type of filter?

I think there's a bit of confusion here. These cheaper Baader filters definitely are intended for imaging, although they do need the IR filter as well, rather than having IR cut built-in which the more expensive ones have:

Although they are cheaper, it says clearly on the rim that they are a CCD filter, and are marketed as such.

[Cornelius Varley]

There was no confusion on my part. The original link pointed to set of visual filters for Ace Cameras, which was changed to a link to a set of RGB filters from FLO whilst I was responding.

Peter

[lukebl]

There was no confusion on my part. The original link pointed to set of visual filters for Ace Cameras, which was changed to a link to a set of RGB filters from FLO whilst I was responding.

Peter

Ah. Confusion on my part. Sorry!

[Gina]

The cheaper LRGB filters from Baader (£73 the set) are not parfocal so you would need to refocus for each filter.

[palebluedot]

The cheaper LRGB filters from Baader (£73 the set) are not parfocal so you would need to refocus for each filter.

Another great nugget. Thanks Gina.

[lukebl]

Actually, I have these filters myself and, although everyone says they aren't parfocal, they certainly seem so to me. I have never needed to refocus with mine, despite checking carefully with a Bahtinov mask.