Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

Meade lunar planetary imager worth the purchase??

blueranger

By blueranger
in Imaging - Discussion

Recommended Posts

blueranger

blueranger

Posted
Posted

Hi all,

I am thinking of buying the above product from around £88 and was wondering if this would be a reasonable entry level web cam.

I have the skymax 127 auto but the only thing that worries me is that on the advertisement it says that the imager is equivalent to a 6mm eyepiece that would make my scope around x250 which is pretty much its max, can this be adjusted?

Also I like the fact you need no extras like adapters other programmes etc, but just plug and play (obviously there would be a few settings etc.)

Any advice welcome.

Regards,

blueranger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mik

mik

Posted
Posted

The Lpi is the same inside as the Philips spc900 webcam as far as i know you will be able to use it on your 127 no problems you will even get away with a 2x barlow.

someone will be along soon who knows more than me on this subject.

See i knew i would be wrong........ :angry:

Mick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blueranger

blueranger

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the quick replies.

I did think about the toucam II, but I think it is now discontinued and I didn't really want one second hand one.

The fact that the LPI is the complete package is also appealing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blueranger

blueranger

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The LPI is camera and software, Berns stuff is the camera and adaptor but you have to D/L the free software. Its not really a big difference and you end up with a better camera.

So your're advising the "Bern" route as you get the better camera??

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barkis

barkis

Posted
Posted

You could also consider a second hand Deep Sky Imager. They seem to crop up on Astro buy and sell forums, and Ebay on a regular basis. The LPI at £88 seems a bit steep. I would save a few more quid and go for a more substantial camera. However, it's only my opinion, and your money. :angry:

Also, if I may add, you can use these cameras attached to a lens, you do not have to connect to a scope. Some great widefield stuff has been produced that way.

Ron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted

The LPI is camera and software, Berns stuff is the camera and adaptor but you have to D/L the free software. Its not really a big difference and you end up with a better camera.

So your're advising the "Bern" route as you get the better camera??

I am..:angry:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sparrow

Sparrow

Posted
Posted

Hi Blueranger - I'm fairly new to the hobby but I've been using the Meade LPI for a few months now so I thought I'd share my thoughts with you.

For ease of use it certainly is good - The software can do the whole process including stacking the images, although I soon realised that it was better to save the individual images and stack them with Registax. - I was able to go out from the first night and capture images of Saturn that were acceptable. If it weren't so expensive for what it is, I'd thoroughly recommend it as a starter to get a taste of the hobby.

On the bad side - as has already been said, it has a CMOS sensor and not a CCD so it's not as sensitive - that's OK for Saturn/Jupiter/the moon, but anything fainter and it just doesn't do the job. It struggles to capture anything of the Saturn moons at all. It claims to be able to do a few of the brighter DSO's but to be honest I never managed to even get M42 (Orion Nebula) with it.

I've now abandoned it and got a Trust webcam for £25 from Maplins which I've only had one chance to use so far so I can't really comment on it's performance other than the images I've managed to capture are much better resolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Macavity

Macavity

Posted
Posted

And, if you want increase the "field of view" of the chip, use of a focal reducer is quite easy. Here's a calculator that shows the principle, and gives the numbers for several common reducers. I have had some success with the relatively inexpensive ATIK 0.5x on an ST102 and I suspect the MAK127 has a fair range of (in)focus... You can probably secure a lot of this, simply by removing the default 1.25" diagonal... Well worth fiddling, anyway! :angry:

http://timosastro.1g.fi/tools/focalreducer.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted

You won't need a reducer for planetary imaging although they can come in useful for lunar work, Bern sells the Atik model for around £25. Reducers are also useful for deep sky imaging but the Phillips isn't really capable of this sort of imaging without modification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrEd

MrEd

Posted
Posted

Hi Blue Ranger

I used the LPI quit a bit and i think

Sparrows post sums it up.

The images are all stacked for you, so as far

as ease of use goes Autostar (LPI/DSI software)wins points there.

It was second to none on Lunar mosaics.

Planetary work i found was never as crisp or detailed

as using a Toucam.

The Autostar software is great but i dont think

the camera is worth the money compared to the

current market.

Hope that helps

Ed

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.