Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_30_second_exp_2_winners.thumb.jpg.b5430b40547c40d344fd4493776ab99f.jpg

steppenwolf

DIY All Sky Camera

Recommended Posts

Before I start running my fully automated observatory from a remote location, it is useful to know what the weather conditions are like at the observatory site and an all sky camera is a great way of seeing what is going on in conjunction with my AAG CloudWatcher that 'measures' the weather conditions.

Unfortunately, commercial all sky cameras have a pretty hefty price tag and I had a very limited budget for this project so I decided to make my own. The camera is the easy part and the excellent ZWO ASI 120mm was an obvious choice - it even comes with a 150° wide angle lens. However, the key to a reliable all sky camera is the enclosure it operates in. A camera and lens combination like the ZWO will work very well on its own for this purpose right up until the dew forms on the lens or even worse, it starts to rain so a waterproof enclosure with its own heating system is a prerequisite.

Before I even started to think about the enclosure itself, I gave a lot of consideration to the heating aspect. The solution was sitting in my bits and pieces drawer - the components that I'd bought in a couple of years ago to make a dew-band for my 28mm camera lens when I wanted to capture a meteor shower! I never did make the dew-band but the Nichrome wire and pulse width modulation (PWM) power supply were perfect for this project. I calculated that I would need up 8 watts of heat for a 'de-frost' but a lower output for general use.

With the heater resolved, I looked around for a suitable transparent dome for the enclosure and found a 100mm diameter dome for under £10.00 on Ebay. All I needed then was a suitable box to match the total width of the dome and again, Ebay came to the rescue.

Awful skies mean that I have used it very little but I have enjoyed making time lapse videos of the night sky and I ended up buying a fisheye lens for the camera to give me a full 180° view.

So here's the camera enclosure in all its glory

all_sky_enclosure.png

Click here to view my first light timelapse video

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since posting this, I have received an outraged email from a member on SGL accusing me of stealing his design.

This is not the case although it would appear that we have used the same components. I would just like to publicly apologise to a member called 'Olly' (not Penrice!) - and I don't know his SGL alias - if he feels that I have in any way copied his design but he is mistaken, I carried out my own independent research but have apparently reached the same conclusion as to the choice of the components used.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmppfff...  In my opinion any design posted here or anywhere else on the internet becomes public domain (unless specified otherwise).  If someone doesn't want their design used they shouldn't publish it!!  "Simples".  Have to say, I'm disgusted that anyone who posts their design on here should grumble if anyone publishes a similar design.  A direct copy should acknowledge the original poster I agree but this isn't the case here.  In fact any ASC is going to use much the same design - there are olny so many ways of doing things.

Personally, I reiterate that anyone is very welcome to copy any of my designs or ideas - they are freely published into the public domain.  Indeed I post my ideas and designs in the hope that others might benefit from them though admittedly, I'm always glad of other people's thoughts or suggestions and that benefits me - it's a two way exchange. 

Edited by Gina
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's so right Gina, it's a camera with an ebay dome on top. What other way is there of doing it?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I´d concur most designs I´ve seen look like this it´s not likely you´d come up with something different.

Dome, Heating element and box er....perhaps add a picture of a fruit and call it an iskycam thus infringing on at least 2 copyrights!

Nice video and graphics on the video.

 

Neil C

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have done what anyone else would do, research will show only certain components needed for the job, only certain components available on the bay, conclusion: most will end up with a similar result. 

Anything put on the web is free game as far as I'm concerned, if you don't want anyone to admire/copy/learn from what you have done, don't put it on the web!

Great bit of time lapse footage, good detail, you should be very happy with a great job completed.

These are all my own views not copied from anywhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice camera solution, shame about the rest. You do realise that your dome and mount have been done before as well, shame on you!?

Edited by martin_h
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the original thread he seems to be encouraging people to copy the idea:

I think he was probably upset as he thought his idea had been copied without giving him credit. Who knows, Steve may have seen it and been subconciously influenced, although a sealed electrical case, perspex dome and acrylic sealant are a fairly obvious way of doing it.

Stranger things have happened in Led Zeppelin.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that's the way I did my first one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I think he was probably upset as he thought his idea had been copied without giving him credit.

Thanks for posting the link to his thread because I couldn't find it when I looked yesterday to see what the fuss was about - what is strange is that the same person reported my post to the moderators BUT his alias wasn't 'MagnaMan' which is why my search didn't find it. It is the not giving credit that has apparently caused the upset.

Without doubt I have purchased the same box and most likely the same dome but as for copying the design, well, my conscience is clear on this as my research was rigorous (as always) and having located a suitable dome, I looked for some time for a square box as I wanted the camera to be as compact as possible but I was unable to find one of around 140mm that didn't have a curved top! However, the 140mm dimension did bring up a supplier who sold a suitable external use box that was rectangular but with a 140mm short side so that is what I eventually went for. Anyone who has followed some of my other much more complex original projects would surely realise that I don't need to copy anyone's designs but am more than capable of original thought!

I don't think this member is being malicious and I can see why he has mistakenly assumed that I have copied his design but I didn't so no credit was required, end of. It is a matter of record that I give credit to others in my projects and elsewhere (for example my false coloured mono images on Facebook where I credited Sara Wager for the idea) and there is a list of names credited in my automated observatory thread so if I had used this earlier thread as my source for all sky camera components, it would surely be unlikely that I would fail to give credit this time.

I appreciate the support that several of you have given over this but would ask you not to let this episode cloud your judgement of the other party.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To get half reasonable star shapes towards the horizon in these ultra wide images I had to employ 'off axis focusing' whereby instead of focusing on a central star, I focused on a star about half way between the centre and edge of the FOV to distribute the focus more evenly. This results in more bloated stars in the centre of the FOV but to my eye is better than the horrendous comets achieved normally!

However, I noticed that Martin Lewis has used a range of different lenses in his all sky camera project in the search for imaging Nirvana, one of which was not too expensive so with some difficulty, I purchased an Arecont 1.55mm f2 fisheye lens and produced this short time-lapse video  which shows much better formed stars across the whole FOV but at f2 rather f1.4 I am going to have to take much longer exposure subs.

So much for my low budget .........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have already come to the conclusion that an ASC is not a low budget imaging system and still being a bit dissatisfied with mine I expect to spend more on it - not that we've had any decent clear night skies to test it properly.   I have been using colour cameras to date because I like to see a bit of colour im my images but I'm beginning to think perhaps I need to go to mono for better sensitivity.  The ZWO lens that came with my ASI185MC camera has good focus down to the edge but doesn't give me 180° except on one axis.  The Fujinon zoom lens gives full coverage but as you've found Steve, doesn't give good focus over all the FOV.

One reason for spending more on the ASC is that the weather has not permitted any "normal" astro imaging for ages so I'm reluctant to spend on that but the ASC can catch any short period of clear sky and the Milky Way is in a good position at this time of year.  I think I shall look at ZWO cameras with a larger image sensor.  Pity they don't do square ones - rectangular sensors waste a lot of pixels!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like all things astro related the "low budget" is a starting point for deep pocket syndrome .

Edited by martin_h
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends which camera you intend to use, but those 1.8mm fish-eye lenses sold by Bern at Modern Astronomy are pretty good for this job. Not cheap at around £80 though. I wanted a better camera so had the brilliant idea of buying an ASI174MM to replace the QHY5L-II I'm currently using, but it just dawned on me the 1.8mm lens won't cover the sensor!

ChrisH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

but it just dawned on me the 1.8mm lens won't cover the sensor!

That would also be an issue with the otherwise excellent Arecont lens if you used it on a sensor larger than 1/3" - you would get a 'porthole' view.

Quote

I have already come to the conclusion that an ASC is not a low budget imaging system and still being a bit dissatisfied with mine I expect to spend more on it

Sadly, this has been my experience also but it has been great fun and continues to fascinate me! I guess that we should not lose sight of the fact that this is still AP so expect bank balance depletion as a matter of course........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm having the opposite problem with my ASC.  I'm using the ZWO 2.5mm FL f1.2 lens and the image is too big for the ASI185 camera I'm using.  I've just been looking the the ASI174MM camera and that would seem to make the circular image just fit in the sensor frame with a Y axis of 7.2mm (I estimate the image circle as 7.1mm diameter - the 185 sensor is 7.3mm x 4.6mm).  One thing that puts me off the 174 though is that it says amp glow may be a problem with longer exposures.  It depends on what they call long - I'm unlikely to go beyond 60s AFAICT.  The 185 colour camera is fine at 60s exposure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those 1.8mm fish-eye lenses look interesting Chris.  Cheaper than buying a new camera at "half-a-grand" or so!!  Do they have good focus over all the FOV?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see any 1.8mm lenses on MA.  Only ASC lens is 1.25mm but no info on focal ratio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dome must affect focusing unless the focal point of the front element of the lens is dead in the centre in 3 dimensions. Perhaps you could use angled flat glass a few inches across at 150 degrees?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dome must indeed affect the focus but I'm not sure that a flat glass would help even with the 150° as the further away you get from the centre axis, the greater the distance the light will have to pass through the glass.

I do think these systems are a compromise which is why they are best suited to a 'quick look' to test the sky at a remote location or to produce time-lapse videos which by their very nature 'hide' many of the optical deficiencies! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be a daft idea to wonder about the compound eyes of insects ? ! maybe they have it sussed :)

I know there is software to make mosaics and panoramas and that is usually done 'one camera many pics' but the software wouldnt know that many cams had been used ? Not sure how it would be done on the fly (< oh, sorry bout that :) )

Edited by SilverAstro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gina said:

Those 1.8mm fish-eye lenses look interesting Chris.  Cheaper than buying a new camera at "half-a-grand" or so!!  Do they have good focus over all the FOV?

Yes it offers a sharp image over the whole field - but that field only covers a 1/3" sensor (it is a CS lens). In comparison most C-mount lenses cover a 1/2" sensor but larger than that it's difficult to find anything suitable. ZWO sell a Canon EOS lens adapter but then you need to find a wide-angle camera lens.

ChrisH

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gina said:

Can't see any 1.8mm lenses on MA.  Only ASC lens is 1.25mm but no info on focal ratio.

Apologies - I just checked my lens and it is indeed 1.25mm f/l

ChrisH

 

Oh, and I think they are f/2 - you're talking mega-bucks for a fast fish-eye.

Edited by ChrisLX200
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By masjstovel
      Hi,
      I bought my first telescope, SW 150pds about 6 months ago with the purpose of astroimaging "when i feel ready".  So far ive used my Nikon D810 for that, and I'm now  planning on taking the step buying my first AP camera.
      My targets would be DSO's, and not planetary. I want a mono-camera, not color. 

      I want to get away with a very good camera to a reasonable price (wouldn't we all...) and in this regard I've been drooling on the ZWO ASI 1600MM Mono for some time. The price for it is in the upper part of my budget, but I'm willing to if its worth it.  I've seen from other treads that sensor-size isn't everything, and dynamic range and gain and all is just as important, but i have trouble understanding it all 100% when it's all new to me, but in my experience i am a practical person who learns things much better and faster with the gear in my hand. So without getting to technical, and staying as objective as possible - please help me with; 

      1. Is this a good camera to go for?
      2. It's sold with options of filters 1.25", 31mm or 36mm - Why these options, and what determines what i would choose?

      3. Would you go for another camera in this price range, and why? - Or to rephrase it a bit; If you were in my shoes, which camera would you og for?

      I'd appreciate any help:)

      I might add, that i understand that with my lack of experience, buying a mono-camera with filters and all might seem premature, but for some strange reason. I enjoy these "way over my head"-projects and figuring  out things as time goes - I just need some guiding in the right direction. 
    • By AngryDonkey
      Hello!
      I'm afraid this will be yet another DIY all sky camera build! 😂 Hopefully interesting though... While developing my all sky software (shameless plug, see signature) one of the biggest problems is that I don't actually have a permanent all sky camera setup myself. I live in the middle of a big city with massive light pollution where the summer temperatures are just creeping up to 40C+, not ideal... So for a while I have been thinking about setting up a remote all sky camera to help with the testing of the AllSkEye app. Initially the idea was to mount it at a relatives house but then once I looked into what would be required to make it fully remote controllable I was thinking that if I go to all that trouble, I might as well look for a location with great weather and dark skies.
      After a few inquiries I got a really great response from Jose at the E-Eye remote hosting facility in Spain. This was fantastic news because not only will the camera have nice weather and dark skies but the facility also has fibre broadband which is almost a must for what I have in mind further down the road (I am also planning to transfer some image data to cloud storage for archiving and further processing and that could potentially be a lot of data). So this is where it is going to go (all being well and my 3D printer not packing up!
      I'll try to follow my progress here, maybe it will be helpful for someone. The basic idea is pretty simple:
      Setup a completely autonomous and remotely controllable all sky camera  Sounds easy enough... Well, let me tell you, it is not! To anyone having setup your own remotely hosted scope setup, my hat off to you, it's not an easy task! Initially I split this project into two parts:
      The camera, lens, housing and everything that goes with it The control box that will control the above Unfortunately I don't have time just now to go into any details but will hopefully be able to do so soon. I just though if I don't start this thread soon I never will 😀. The state of play at the moment is that the control box is pretty complete and the camera housing is nearing completion (3D printer is very busy, not a fast manufacturing process unfortunately).
      Mike
      Here are a few pictures of what it looks like at the moment:


    • By astronomer2002
      I thought my eyepiece collection was complete until I bought my "last ever" telescope. This operates at a native F8 and is just over 3250mm fl.
      I have the longer Naglers, 31, 26, 22, 17 etc and  35mm, 27mm Panoptics.  I was always a little disappointed with the kidney-beaning in the Naglers in other telescopes, though they were overall better than any other eyepiece I have used, but in this one they seem to be affected less and even the 26mm  is now a keeper. Before I got the Naglers (over many years all s/h) I had 35, 27 and 19 Panoptics. These were my favorite eyepieces until the Naglers came along. I kept the 35mm as stars seemed a little sharper in the inner 50 degrees than the Naglers, but trailed off in the outer regions and the 27mm as it really is an exceptional eyepiece.  In any case I often wanted to darken the sky with higher magnification so the longest ones were primarily used for sweeping and finding. Given sky brightness is becoming more of an issue I thought I would never need a longer focal length. Now the Naglers seem sharper over the entire view and with the higher magnification of a longer scope the sky is darker and I hanker after the widest possible field.
      The issue is that the 82 degree 31mm Nagler gives me a true fov of 0.78 degrees and the 35 mm Panoptic 0.73 degrees. There is noticeably more sky in the 31mm Nagler. A 41mm Panoptic will yield 0.85 degrees, an improvement of nearly 10% over the Nagler 31. As I can readily see the difference in the amount of sky covered by the 31mm Nagler and the 35mm Panoptic I believe the time to look at a 41mm Panoptic is here.
      Before going into a debate on whether ES eyepieces could fill the slot all I can say is that having been able to compare my old Naglers with new 82 degree ES ones in my scopes I and convinced that, for me, there is a small improvement with the Naglers at the outer regions of the field and so I am minded to discount them. They are fantastic value and I won't deny they are very good eyepieces.
      The 41mm Panoptic would seem fit the bill for this long fl scope though I suspect it would be a disaster in a fast Newtonian, which I also have.
      My quest is to find someone willing to part with theirs and/or suggestions of an alternative that someone has used in practice.
      Thankyou for reading
       
      Ian B
       
       
       
       
       
    • By Ricker
      I am imaging with a ZWO 178mc-cooled and am having trouble removing amp glow.  I am using darks in the same conditions as lights and stacking and imaging with SharpCap.  I am left with a image looking like below.  No matter what I do I seem to be always left with this residual amp glow signature,  Any ideas out there?
       
      Rich
       

    • By widotje
      Hi all,
      Since a few days, I'm the proud owner of the asi1600 Pro.
      Performed some first tests, see: https://youtu.be/hHJBbpNoi2I
       
      I used SGP Pro to test cooling and dark frames (2m and 5m) on unity gain settings.
      Is it ok to use unity gain (139) setting or should I use high dynamic range?
      Also, this is my first mono. Do I need to take flats/bias frames for each filter separately?
      And how could I stack either broadband or narrowband images? I'm used to deep sky stacker.
      Cheers,
       
      Wido
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.