Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

Which planetary camera?

Tim

By Tim
in Imaging - Discussion

Recommended Posts

Tim

Tim

Posted
Posted

I might be looking for a decent planetary camera for good/excellent results on lunar and planetary targets.

This is a new area for me and I would welcome advice, examples and suggestions.

To work along with a C1100EdgeHD, probably a barlow. I have 1.25" filters but am not averse to colour imaging.

Thanks in advance

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Tim

Tim

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Do you have a budget in mind?

Not really, I suppose I wouldn't want to spend more than £500 or so on it.

No offence Buzz but I have one QHY camera and am not especially inclined to purchase another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bus_ter

bus_ter

Posted
Posted

My choice with that sort of budget would be a DMK21 (with the 618 chip) about £380, and a filter wheel for the colour filters. Looking at about £500 all together.

If you want to make life easier (but perhaps not as good final results) then the colour version, DFK21618

Lovely scope by the way!

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/imaging-source-cameras/dmk-21au618as-mono.html

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/imaging-source-cameras/dfk-21au618as-colour.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riklaunim

riklaunim

Posted
Posted

Micron based cameras (like ASI cams) aren't as good as those with Sony CCD or newer CMOS sensors (but they are cheaper). For best results ICX618 or e2v ruby based cameras are the choice. More entry level are e2v sapphire and those Micron based - ZWO Optics ASI cameras. ICX618 camera will cost most, e2v ruby bit less (IDS Imaging), and other around half the price (Point Grey Blackfly, Ximea xiQ, ZWO ASI..., IDS Imaging e2v cams).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cgarry

cgarry

Posted
Posted

Not seen any results from the ZWO cameras so can't comment.

This is the first light image from my ASI120MM:

post-9259-0-69509700-1357428663_thumb.jp

Due to the poor weather I have not had as much time with this camera as I would like, but I already rate it higher than the DMK/DFKs with the 618 chip (which I also own).

Cheers,

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bus_ter

bus_ter

Posted
Posted

In my opinion the DMK is dead in the water now, all down to this camera: http://www.zwoptical...SI120/index.asp

This is the reason so many 2nd hand DMK's are up for sale right now.

I bought mine direct from that website and it cost about £190 all in. My DMK has not been on the scope since it arrived.

Cheers,

Chris

I recently bought a DFK72 clone which I believe has the big brother 5MP version of the Micron CMOS sensor. £150 all in. I think for the money the new generation CMOS sensors are the best, however given the choice I would rather have a DFK/DMK with the 618 chip (however that assumption may be wrong!). Was your DMK with the 618 chip? Have you ever done a same night comparison? C-14's are going to produce amazing images on any sensor, so it would be good to see a comparison. At the end of the day the cameras aren't really the big limiting factor. I bet I could produce a massively better image from a C-14 and a cheap webcam, than with a cheap scope and a very expensive camera!

EDIT: I've just seen you have the 618 version too. Interesting! There must be some same night, same equipment comparisons going about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cgarry

cgarry

Posted
Posted

I recently bought a DFK72 clone which I believe has the big brother 5MP version of the Micron CMOS sensor. £150 all in. I think for the money the new generation CMOS sensors are the best, however given the choice I would rather have a DFK/DMK with the 618 chip (however that assumption may be wrong!). Was your DMK with the 618 chip? Have you ever done a same night comparison? C-14's are going to produce amazing images on any sensor, so it would be good to see a comparison. At the end of the day the cameras aren't really the big limiting factor. I bet I could produce a massively better image from a C-14 and a cheap webcam, than with a cheap scope and a very expensive camera!

EDIT: I've just seen you have the 618 version too. Interesting! There must be some same night, same equipment comparisons going about?

I find that direct comparisons are tricky because of the different pixel sizes making it hard to achieve the same image scale. Also, on many occasions I have done back to back imaging runs with the same camera and found the results do vary quite a bit from image to image. I just put this down to the C14 always being limited by the seeing conditions and the quality of the images vary as the seeing varies.

What I did find on the one night I have used the ASI120MM was that even though it had a larger image scale I was able to use a shorter exposure and the results had less noise than the DMK. With the limited testing I have managed to do so far, I believe the ASI120MM to be better than the DMK (even ignoring the price difference) and I do not see my DMK being used again apart from in some comparison tests. I know of 2 other imagers who immediately sold their DMK cameras after getting ASI120MM cameras.

The other advantages I see for the ASI120MM:

* Faster frame rate than the DMK (when not using the full sensor).

* ASI120MM has more pixels 1280x960 for lunar/solar work.

* Less powerful barlows are required because of the smaller pixel size (Actually this is a bit of a pain with the C14 but might be good for faster scopes).

* ASI120MM has 12-bit sensor, though the current driver only supports 8-bit output.

* ASI120MM is lighter than the DMK.

I look forward to some clear nights with some half decent seeing so that I can do some proper comparison tests.

Cheers,

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riklaunim

riklaunim

Posted
Posted

Sensors used in ASI and QHY5* cameras do not have higher QE than ICX618. They also have much higher read noise and rolling shutter. They may have higher gain values just to make the effect of beeing more sensitive (while it's just higher multiplier from the gain).

Micron CMOS sensors aren't better than modern Sony CCDs, so don't over-prise the ASI cameras.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bus_ter

bus_ter

Posted
Posted

Here are my thoughts and some technical information I found online about my new 5MP Micron sensor:

I actually borrowed one of your graphs riklaunim :-) Hope you don't mind!

I do think these new CMOS sensors are the best budget options out there, and as we've pointed out, the scope and seeing conditions are by far the limiting factors. It doesn't make sense to throw lots of cash at the camera, and certainly not if it means a trade off in buying a cheaper scope. Aperture is king!

@cgarry: If you boost the gain up quite high on your Micron sensor camera do you find you get a lot of 'hot pixels' all over the place? I'm wondering if that's common to the whole range or just my camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cgarry

cgarry

Posted
Posted

@cgarry: If you boost the gain up quite high on your Micron sensor camera do you find you get a lot of 'hot pixels' all over the place? I'm wondering if that's common to the whole range or just my camera.

I had not noticed any hot pixels, I always thought that was more of a problem with longer exposures than high gains. I am not sure about how much value there is in this but here are some individual subs from captures taken on the same night (with similar histogram levels) for you to check out the noise levels. I do not have anything from the DMK as the seeing had taken a nose dive by the time I put it on the scope and I deleted the captures without processing them.

All captures at about 60 fps, I am not sure of the actual exposure times.

ASI120MM red channel.

Gain: 71

post-9259-0-78783400-1357494309_thumb.pn

ASI120MM green channel:

Gain: 69

post-9259-0-67473200-1357494478_thumb.pn

ASI120MM blue channel:

Gain: 80

post-9259-0-12160800-1357494486_thumb.pn

DFK21AU618 raw (not debayered):

Unsure of the gain as IC Capture did not write a log file.

post-9259-0-82540100-1357494330_thumb.pn

Cheers,

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sammyb

Sammyb

Posted
Posted

This is the first light image from my ASI120MM:

post-9259-0-69509700-1357428663_thumb.jp

Due to the poor weather I have not had as much time with this camera as I would like, but I already rate it higher than the DMK/DFKs with the 618 chip (which I also own).

Cheers,

Chris

Thats a beautiful image. Well done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tim

Tim

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Also, what is the major advantage of mono over colour cameras? Is it just sensitivity?

At the moment I just strap a video camera to an eyepiece and kind of like the way the images are there ready to view, and I don't have to worry about rotation of the planets etc.

I am slightly more interested in lunar close ups though than planetary images, and wondered if the mono camera would be better suited for this purpose??

Thanks again

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riklaunim

riklaunim

Posted
Posted

Also, what is the major advantage of mono over colour cameras? Is it just sensitivity?

For planetary imaging mono vs color may be a hard case. Mono camera allows extra type of imaging or getting better channel images - but you have to do the extra to gain the advantage of a mono camera. Like I shoot R,G,B with mono camera and additionally a luminance channel with more infraredish filter to create better LRGB type image - only doable with a mono camera. That's for most demanding planetary imaging ;)

I am slightly more interested in lunar close ups though than planetary images, and wondered if the mono camera would be better suited for this purpose??

Lunar and solar are very mono-cam oriented as you don't shoot color, but in specific bands for best image quality. For Moon it's infrared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riklaunim

riklaunim

Posted
Posted

Going multi-purpose:

Around 300 EUR / 245 GBP:

1a. Blackfly: http://blackfly.ptgrey.com/GIGE/Blackfly (GigE)

1b. Ximea xiQ MQ013MG-E2 http://www.ximea.com/usb3-vision-camera (USB3, early support in ShapCap only, needs good USB3 host / PC with PCI-E slot)

1c. IDS UI-1240LE http://www.ids-imaging.com/frontend/products.php?cam_id=159 (USB2)

High end:

1. IDS UI-1240LE-NIR (470 EUR)

2. PGR cams with big Sony CCDs (very high price)

And with smaller CCDs (planetary): ICX618 based camera in good price.

On ebay there may still be some PGR Chameleon left (good lunar/solar camera). There are still PGR Firefly cameras in "webcam price" - but treat those as entry level mono cameras for planetary imaging (and small area of Sun/Moon) that at the moment doesn't offer high gain values.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bus_ter

bus_ter

Posted
Posted

Good information Riklaunim. I know you have a good knowledge of cameras from reading your website. All three of those cameras are quite rare on here. People tend to go for the more common (and more expensive it seems) 618 equipped DMKs and DFKs.

I'm looking forward to more USB3 cameras. There's a lot of bandwidth for uncompressed high fps video streams. Just what we want. However has the USB3 vision standard been finalised yet? I wouldn't want to get an early one and have problems down the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tim

Tim

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hmmm, even more food for thought.

I'm actually wondering whether a camcorder might actually be a decent solution after all. With the right software they are capable of 50fps in practice and the newer HD ones used with ultra fast SD cards can write a lot of data very quickly.

But what about getting the data onto the camera without using the inbuilt lens?? Remove the lens? At present I am using it with an eyepiece, but there's lots of glass in the way like that.

I do have an older camcorder I could possibly dismantle to test the theory, but the touch/viewscreen has broken and im not sure i'll be able to retrieve the data unless I can repair it.

Would that work though, at least in theory?

Cheers

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riklaunim

riklaunim

Posted
Posted

I use the DMK, but I'm selling it to get the bigger IDS camera ;) Basler was quite popular, and still is in some European countries. IDS got some attention in France. PGR is quite popular, but mostly in America where it's easy available.

A lot of experienced planetary imagers don't buy their cameras in astro shops any more ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jnc71106

jnc71106

Posted
Posted

how does the PGR chameleon work as a guidecam ? i use PHD for guiding and i'm in the process of buying a OAG are they sensitive enough for use with a OAG ? i currently have a QHY5

i'd like to maybe get a cam to do both planetary/lunar imaging and be able to guide when im doing DSO's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.