Best web cam for planets

[Mattdavies241184]

Anyone recommend a good web cam for planetary imaging??

[nightfisher]

best webcam is the philips spc 900 or spc 880.........if you can get one, be wary of ebay prices, people want silly money for them

[Mattdavies241184]

Cheers

[JamesF]

Yup. I've posted this once today already as it happens, but I reckon for around the £50 mark the SPC900 is probably the best planetary camera you can get. You'll need a nosepiece and an IR filter to go wtih it. With a 200P you may find that a modded LIfecam Cinema would work well for you too, but I'm really not sure.

James

[Mattdavies241184]

I'm looking to spend £50, can't seem to find the spc900 anywhere

That was my next question how would I connect web cam to scope

[JamesF]

The cameras come up for sale now and then, on e-bay where they tend to go for stupid prices, or AB&S where they tend to be a bit more realistic, or in the classifieds here where people often sell at very reasonable prices. Someone had one for sale over the weekend I think, but I'm sure it's gone now.

Different cameras demand different solutions, but with the SPC900 you pop the lens housing off, remove the lens and replace it with a nosepiece that is available for around £10 to £15. The nosepiece fits the 1.25" eyepiece holder on the scope.

James

[Mattdavies241184]

James

http://bit.ly/143Ih9E

Would that do the job

[JamesF]

I'd have thought so.

James

[majapala]

You could have a play with an Xbox livecam to walk you through the learning curve. It'll cost you less than a fiver.

[twelly27]

The spc900 is amazing a huge step up from the Xbox,

my best result

[Mattdavies241184]

Anyone know where there is a spc900 going for sale?? Reasonable price??

[Mattdavies241184]

Would this be ok

Logitech QuickCam 3000 Pro CCD Chip = Philips Vesta PCVC 675 680 690K Astronomy Camera

uses same CCD chip (ICX098AK) such as philips vesta PCVC 690K / 690K / 690K

with a sensitivity of < 1 lux this webcam is ideal for astronomy imiging

video capture: 640 x 480 pixels

still image capture: 1280 x 960 pixels (interpolated via software)

frame rate: up to 30 frames per second

modifications:

the webcam-lens & ir-filter was dismantled (included in delivery)

for use with a refraktor / lens-telescope the ir-filter can be easily reinstalled

the green led was unsoldered

the 1,25" adapter (removeable) is a filmcan

the following web links are transmitted after end of auction:

tutorial modification for long time exposure photography

astrophotography software (stacking)

logitech driver

[JamesF]

I think so. I'd wait for someone else to confirm for certain though.

James

[Mattdavies241184]

also looking at this one

Logitech Pro 4000 CCD web camera with telescope adaptor

Logitech Quickcam Pro 4000 CCD Based Web Camera with the lens removed and LED light disabled (therefore cannot be used as a normal webcam)

he webcam comes with a user fabricated adaptor that can be inserted into the telescope eye piece (1.25”) and a computer/laptop can be used to take pictures or record video.

The USB cable is 2.6 metres Long.

It works on my Samsung Netbook running Windows 7 (I used Vistadrivers and it works fine).

The Sky at Night Magazine (May 2012) has a letter (Page 23) from a reader that purchased one of these web cameras from me. The article includes a picture of the moon taken using the software's snapshot mode.

Product Specifications

Video capture: Up to 640 x 480 pixels (VGA CCD)

Still image capture: Up to 1280 x 960 pixels, 1.3 megapixels

Frame rate: Up to 30 frames per second

[ursamajorro]

I recommend to you Microsoft Lifecam HD series, very good webcams. I modified 2 of then, a 6000HD (HD sensor, only 720p) and a Studio (full HD sensor, 1080p) and despite theirs CMOS sensors, I'm sure you can get better results than using an old VGA webcam.

Look here:

Modification here: http://translate.google.ro/translate?sl=ro&tl=en&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http://astronomie-amatori.forumgratuit.ro/t30-webcam-uri-microsoft-lifecam-modificate-pentru-astrofotografie-planetara

[JamesF]

I recommend to you Microsoft Lifecam HD series, very good webcams. I modified 2 of then, a 6000HD (HD sensor, only 720p) and a Studio (full HD sensor, 1080p) and despite theirs CMOS sensors, I'm sure you can get better results than using an old VGA webcam.

I'm really not sure about this. I think it may well depend on how much aperture you have in your imaging scope. The smaller pixels of the CMOS sensors can work against you if there's not enough light to get them working properly. I know Gary Honis said he thought the CMOS camera could match the SPC900, but to the best of my recollection he was using a 20" scope for imaging.

I did some back-to-back comparisons a while back of an Xbox cam, Lifecam Cinema and SPC900 and the SPC900 worked better for me with my 127 Mak:

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/168060-spc900-vs-xbox-live-webcam-vs-lifecam-cinema/

James

[ursamajorro]

I used a 5" Mak for my Saturn. So, no 20" of G. Honis. Usually, I don't speak using the others words, but mines, from my experience.

I used my dSLR to record movies, too, with a 90mm refractor at f/27. The dSLR (a 550D Canon) is worse than the webcam and still it can record good enough videos with faint subjects, like Saturn at f/25-30. In fact, the f number is the key and not necessary the aperture.

I would like myself to see an old VGA-CCD webcam picture at least like mines!

[Mattdavies241184]

I recommend to you Microsoft Lifecam HD series, very good webcams. I modified 2 of then, a 6000HD (HD sensor, only 720p) and a Studio (full HD sensor, 1080p) and despite theirs CMOS sensors, I'm sure you can get better results than using an old VGA webcam.

Look here: http://stargazerslou...cam-and-mak127/

Modification here: http://translate.goo...rafie-planetara

Your pictures look great!!

Im very confused about what to buy ha!!

[JamesF]

I've seen your images and I think they're very good. It's always a problem trying to compare cameras using images taken at different times by different people because of variations in seeing and kit setup which is why I did the back-to-back test I linked to in the posting above. My intent was to compare the cameras whilst removing as many variables as possible.

Another possibility is that the CMOS cameras lose out more as you try to increase the image scale and if you keep the image scale lower then you get a better quality image. I've also spent a couple of years working with the SPC900 and nowhere near that length of time with my modded Lifecam, so it may be that it's possible to squeeze a bit more out of the Lifecam than I did. It may be that re-processing the images with AS!2 might help the Lifecam ones as well.

There are issues with the SPC900 that relate to it being older. In particular the USB v1 interface really limits it to 10fps. In fact I found it hard to get a sufficiently bright image at the image scale I was using when going much above that with the CMOS cameras.

My experience from using both is that the SPC900 beats the Lifecam. I quite accept that other people's experience may be different

James

[ursamajorro]

Another possibility is that the CMOS cameras lose out more as you try to increase the image scale and if you keep the image scale lower then you get a better quality image.

In fact, the bigger image is the original. The smallest is 66% redim.

it's possible to squeeze a bit more out of the Lifecam than I did.

I expect to squeeze even more, because the seeing wasn't excellent when I recorded Saturn.

I quite accept that other people's experience may be different

James

I agree it!

Anyway, comparing a VGA camera with a full HD (the Lifecam Studio) is unappropriate. No need to say what means 1920x1080 vs. 640x480 when imaging the Moon, for example... Right?

[JamesF]

Ah, for the Moon (and probably for the Sun too) the game is very different and it's absolutely possible that the CMOS camera would be the better choice, especially the Studio for its large field of view. With a target such as the Moon you're really not short of light and you can go for the best possible image scale.

Unless I want to add barlows though I usually stick the DSLR straight on the back of the 127 Mak and image the entire disc in one hit

James

[ursamajorro]

Believe me, there is no problem of light when imaging Saturn through a 5" Mak at f/30. It's a myth... I still have 30 fps by only by a little increasing of the brightness. Sharpcap, probably the best software for webcams, IMHO, allows me to take full HD clips @ 30 fps. You can check it on my Youtube channel . Here you can find an

, obviously downgraded by the compression of Youtube.

[JamesF]

I found I was getting too much noise when I increased the brightness. It doesn't really help that there isn't a separate brightness and gain control and how the two interact is unclear.

You may also have an advantage in being six degrees (it would appear from Google Earth) further south than me (and I'm further south than most people in the UK). Saturn will therefore be six degrees higher for you.

James

[ursamajorro]

I recorded my videos when Saturn was lower than Meridian by 6 degrees.

The truth is that I was lucky to have a fair seeing, that I have a good optic on my Mak 127 copy (tested by myself when I bought it) and that the Lifecam Studio (and any HD Lifecam) is a great webcam, a cheap low end planetary. I reccomend it over any USB1-VGA-CCD-old webcam. The Omnivision sensors (OV9712 for 720p & OV2710 for 1080p) are very sensitive sensors and good enough for astro-planetary-videos.

[JamesF]

I recorded my videos when Saturn was lower than Meridian by 6 degrees.

I think most of us in the UK would be very pleased to see Saturn that high this year

James