Electric filter wheels. Not convinced.

[ollypenrice]

You'll often see people on here ask about CCD cameras on a budget and yet assume they need an electric filterwheel. Well, I hate the darned things. Absolutely nothing is so talented at wasting your time and crashing your software as these things. Lovely when they work, a pain in the beam end when they don't. I've used three, an Atik EFW1, an SX (running in a Mac) and an Atik EFW2 running in that Gatesian gibberish, Vista. They all do it. Change a filter and phut, down goes the capture software. It doesn't happen all the time but it happens often enough for me to want a PC free wheel. I knew I would reegret buying the EFW2 and I do. Tonight it crashed Artemis Capture (again) and then that gets you into a mire because the device manager still leaves Artemis open behind the scenes so the cameras won't re-open. Then the coolers are all to pot and don't know where they are.

So do you need an electric filterwheel? Yes, like a fish needs a bicycle.

Olly

[Jessun]

I nod to my OSC...

Then I realized that, even provided the wheel works, how on Terra Firma do you know for sure, which image was taken through which wheel? Are they tagged differently in Artemis and the likes? Mono is still a complete mystery to me... Hope they flog some at NEAF!

/Jesper

[Sp@ce_d]

I have to say my only experience is with the EFW2 and (tempting fate here I know) it hasn't faltered once. I am very pleased with it. However thats running on Win7... I wouldn't want to have to fight with Vista.

Jesper

You can add a file extension in Artemis capture and also the FITS header has the position recorded. As long as you know which filter you loaded into which slot of course..

[Zakalwe]

Vista is 7 years old. C'mon people...get with the program and upgrade

It was pretty rubbish when it first came out too.

[perfrej]

Come on, Olly! The wheels have been trouble free here. I have an SX USB wheel and one QSI built-in (683wsg8). Neither of them have ever done anything wrong and have definitely never caused any software component to fail. The SX one has failed to initialize upon power on a few times but that's easily fixed by pulling the cable and plugging it in again (which I can do with software). After that it goes on until hell freezes over.

I think that I will, eventually, have to put Mr Penrice in a chair, similar to what they did to Alex in A Clockwork Orange, and hammer automation into the gray windings. There will be no charge but you have to pay for the software yourself

/per

[ollypenrice]

Well, the facts are the facts. Artemis Capture has been near flawless for me for six years. I add a flterwheel and it is as flaky as hell now. And Yves is an IT professional and set up his SX in Nebulosity. Once every thirty or so filter changes it crashes Nebulosity. That restarts easily but mine plunges into Device Manager Hell.

Vista was replaced in October 2009 which is not six years ago, it's just under three and a half years ago. Why should I ditch a three and a half year old laptop? Should I put my prices up?

Olly

[IanL]

Vista was replaced in October 2009 which is not six years ago, it's just under three and a half years ago. Why should I ditch a three and a half year old laptop? Should I put my prices up?

Not saying it is Vista, but Vista was a train wreck and 7 was the finished product. You can still pick up OEM Windows 7 upgrade for 70 quid from any decent online retailer, was a happy day when I upgraded. (Not sure about Windows 8 though, seems almost as badly thought out as Vista was).

[Gina]

I'm running XP and haven't yet had any problem with the EFW2 or Artemis. Other software has caused problems - principally PHD which usually won't close without rebooting the computer (Asus EeePC netbook). XP with it's 3 rebuilds and hundreds of updates is much better than it was. I also have Win 7 Pro 64bit on my desktop and that's pretty reliable. In fact a big improvement over XP. The intermediate versions of Windows seem to have been beta versions and totally unreliable.

OTOH I agree with Olly that for most people a manual wheel will be perfectly adequate. You only really want one if you're a totally automatic/remote control nut like me

[opticalpath]

This sort of thing is maddening, Olly; stuff that plays nicely on its own but doesn't know how to share the PC with anything else. My personal nemesis is devices attached to virtual COM ports .

I must say, though, I would not be without the filter wheel in my QSI583 controlled by Maxim - it has worked flawlessly for nearly 3 years without troubling any other components (and that's under Vista!)

Adrian

[Zakalwe]

Well, the facts are the facts. Artemis Capture has been near flawless for me for six years. I add a flterwheel and it is as flaky as hell now. And Yves is an IT professional and set up his SX in Nebulosity. Once every thirty or so filter changes it crashes Nebulosity. That restarts easily but mine plunges into Device Manager Hell.

Vista was replaced in October 2009 which is not six years ago, it's just under three and a half years ago. Why should I ditch a three and a half year old laptop? Should I put my prices up?

Olly

A Win 8 upgrade could be had for £15, and it actually is very, very good.

Vista is and was a dog, but having said that, it mightened be at fault. No need to change the laptop...Win 8 will run happily on older kit.

[Sp@ce_d]

If I remember rightly I didn't have to install a driver for the EFW2. Think it uses one of the standard Win drivers?

[Earl]

I had no issues with a Quantum when i had one, and it was linked to Nebulosity.

I never bothered with Artemis, as well, its downright aweful

edit

However when i was using Filters I stuck to one per session so electric was not really needed.

BUT 7 Position 2" was needed, 5 has two essential slots missing, its like having a car and leaving a window missing.

[Sp@ce_d]

I had no issues with a Quantum when i had one, and it was linked to Nebulosity.

I never bothered with Artemis, as well, its downright aweful

edit

However when i was using Filters I stuck to one per session so electric was not really needed.

BUT 7 Position 2" was needed, 5 has two essential slots missing, its like having a car and leaving a window missing.

Oh whys that Earl? i use both but prefer Artemis capture with the 314.

[Earl]

Oh whys that Earl? i use both but prefer Artemis capture with the 314.

Terrible layout it looks like a shareware program from the 90's

Everything I needed to do on Nebulosity once it was configured was all on the one screen.

The only issue with nebulosity was a poor screen stretch on preview / downloaded image

[DanH]

No issue at all with the SX filterwheel, apart from a couple of failures upon first connection.

As Per said, it's solved in seconds with replugging the USB cable !

[Earl]

No issue at all with the SX filterwheel, apart from a couple of failures upon first connection.

As Per said, it's solved in seconds with replugging the USB cable !

USB. there in lies IMO the whole bane of Astro Gear.

USB is Useless the sockets are not designed for constant removal (unless your set in an climate controlled obsy you should at the least store cameras inside (especially in old "Blighty").

I personally would love to see all the USB rubbish abandoned and everything run via IP over a network.

[Zakalwe]

USB. there in lies IMO the whole bane of Astro Gear.

USB is Useless the sockets are not designed for constant removal (unless your set in an climate controlled obsy you should at the least store cameras inside (especially in old "Blighty").

I personally would love to see all the USB rubbish abandoned and everything run via IP over a network.

I'd agreed with that. USB plugs and sockets are totally unsuitable for hanging leads from.

[Naemeth]

Less to go wrong with Manual Filter wheels presumably.

Can anyone tell me why electric filter wheels are chosen over manual filter wheels? Seems to me like you'd be safer with a manual filter wheel.

[IanL]

USB. there in lies IMO the whole bane of Astro Gear.

USB is Useless the sockets are not designed for constant removal (unless your set in an climate controlled obsy you should at the least store cameras inside (especially in old "Blighty").

I personally would love to see all the USB rubbish abandoned and everything run via IP over a network.

Well to be fair, USB sockets are designed for frequent connection and (unfortunately) disconnection. In "ye olden days"** connecting computer kit together it was a nightmare of different connectors types, none of which were very easy to connect or disconnect, and don't get me started on checking the wiring of serial cables to figure out why things weren't talking to each other.

USB has made that a lot easier, even though there are four different connectors they're ubiquitous and you don't have to wonder if they're wired properly at least. Where it falls down for astro-gear is that the connectors are clearly designed for static desktop equipment, and not for gear that's moving about or subject to variable strain on the cable. The reason is that the connectors are supposed to be easy to push in and pull out without breaking anything if you are joe public and not a computer technician in a white coat. (I have spent a fair bit of time trying to straighten bent pins in various types of connector for which we didn't have a spare due to some clot trying to force it in upside down).

The flat USB 'A' connectors will usually fall out at the drop of a hat; I've take to using cable ties to fix them to the usb hub on the mount but even that isn't always successful. The USB 'B' (square) connector is a bit more robust and tends to stay connected but even if you have a 'B' at one end, you inevitably have an 'A' at the other so it still disconnects. Don't get me started on mini and micro USB connectors, usually great at the start of their life but quickly they wear to the point where cables drop out under their own weight.

I'm not sure your idea of running everything over an IP network is exactly the solution though; devices that work over USB generally need the host computer to do a lot of the work for them. Converting everything to IP before it leaves the device incurs a lot of potential cost. At the very least it has to be turned in to IP packets, connections made, managed, dropped, etc. and that requires a more expensive chipset than a simple serial output over USB. Devices get more expensive, power hungry and harder to configure.

There are some options for eliminating wires, e.g. wireless modules for DLSRs or self-build create Bluetooth EQMOD-type devices (though Bluetooth is worse than USB for reliability in my book). On the whole though, I think you are stuck with wires for a lot of kit. One idea is to use a different type of connector; the USB cabling spec is really basic (it is serial after all) and it is entirely possible to wire the cable to any type of connector you want. For example:

http://www.instructa...AT5-connection/

That is a simple design for making a USB to CAT5 converter. You still have a USB connector in the mix, but you could fix it to the equipment semi-permanently using hot glue or cable ties or whatever. The CAT5 cable can be plugged and unplugged easily and will be a lot more secure than a USB connector due to the locking tab. (And if your locking tab fails as it will eventually, dead easy to get a new cable or attach a new connector). it doesn't convert the data to IP, it's still just serial signalling so you need to respect maximum cable lengths, but I'm seriously thinking about making some for my gear to eliminate random disconnects due to dodgy USB connectors.

** Let's just say you're qualified to talk about "ye olden days" if you ever actually used an acoustic coupler to link your post-office issue telephone handset to a paper teletype and move on eh?

[Zakalwe]

Ximea use this type of USB 3 connector. Every camera/USB device on astro kit should be like this...

[Earl]

Ximea use this type of USB 3 connector. Every camera/USB device on astro kit should be like this...

Now that's a massive plus, nice to see a bit of common sense.

[ollypenrice]

I agree that USB is not observatory compatible but I like Artemis enormously and greatly prefer it to Nebulosity which I use on Yves' instrument. Artemis gives me just what I want and is generally immensely popular so Earl's view isn't the majority one (but it's right for Earl, and that's fine!) That screen stretch in Nebulosity is so bad that I waste an incredible amount of time at the initial framing stage because I can't see anything on faint targets! I also detest going through 'Abort' which only takes seconds to stop the activity but it feels like five minutes when you're trying to get a move on. (16 meg CCD camera so stopping takes some doing...)

Well, I tried another laptop today (XP) and Artemis was far more robust and the camera and FW worked perfectly. My great fear is that I'll be all set to go with a guest and, phut, Bill Gates will strike again.

Personally I would far rather run things like FW and focuser in separate handsets rather than get into the inevitable mire of com ports and USB interactions and failures.

I got landed with Vista last time because XP had just disappeared and I don't want to get bitten twice by getting a Win8 machine. I suppose I'll be able to get a new WIn7 somehow?

I'm thinking that I'll put a desktop in the second observatory because laptops are short lived things. I've never had a CD drive that lasted for much more than a year on them.

Do I find these things unreliable because I'm particularly bad at plugging them in (I have the USB ports marked for each item) or is it just that I run two rigs a night for maybe 200 nights a year? I probably collect about 500 hours a year of data.

Olly

[Gina]

I remember the old acoustic couplers, teleprinters and teletypes as the Americans called them, Ian. Been there done that but not sure T shirts had been invented My first programing was done using a teleprinter connected via the ol' telephone network to a room full of computer in a university. That was back in the 1960s

[Macavity]

I certainly agree re. the "devil's device" - the USB connector. "Bing-Bong" usually ain't Avon Calling, right folks?

No significant contribution, but I am happy messing with my (manual) "Brightstar". Gives me time to ponder on the "what & whys" re. filters? But then I've always been intrigued by filter transmission curves... Albeit not at the top of everyone's interest list?

We get lots of GREAT "Hubble Pallet" stuff presented at local Astro Meetings. I sense there is a genuine intrigue in "what it all means"? But not always much exlanation. A "black box" (that works) is great - I am a long-time convert. But sometimes it's great to KNOW (describe to others) what's going on inside.

[kirkster501]

Back to the original topic.....

If you use a manual wheel do you have to write down what filter was used for a particular exposure number? How do you keep track?