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_globular_clusters.thumb.jpg.b518052b915c2cf31f5f12e33ce0e9d2.jpg

MarsG76

DSLR Active cooling MOD process - Part 2

Recommended Posts

On 08/11/2018 at 23:58, Gina said:

Good thermal insulation of the cold parts makes a lot of difference.

Absolutely.. my next stage is the insulate the heat syncs from the copper plate by inserting a piece of aluminium between the peltier and the copper plate on both side to increase the gap and fill out the gap with first Styrofoam than perhaps expanding foam as a final product is the styro insulates the heat away from the copper and stops it from heating it up....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/11/2018 at 00:22, Thalestris24 said:

FWIW my 550d showed temps of 12 to 15 deg (filename) in a batch of 14 x 600s darks. The cooler was preset to +4 deg. So a difference in temp of 8 to 11 deg from the internal value. Unfortunately I don't know for sure what the ambient temp was at the time. They were taken indoors in the afternoon in March 2016 so ambient was probably around 15-20 deg. So clearly, with the cooling on, the actual sensor temperature was quite a bit different from the reported internal camera temperature.

Louise

Apparently the EXIF sensor is a bit of distance from the CMOS so there is slight a difference in reported temperature vs actual temperature so....

On 09/11/2018 at 00:26, Gina said:

I used a digital thermometer device directly on my cold finger close to the image sensor.

.. I placed a NTC sensor directly on the CMOS so this might show a bit more accurate temperature...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for documenting this Mars, I've been thinking of doing something similar myself.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Spaceade said:

Thanks for documenting this Mars, I've been thinking of doing something similar myself.

Hopefully it ends up being a success and helps others thinking about this take the plunge into cooling their DSLRs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Adam J
      I have decided to create this thread to take anyone who is interested through the design and construction of my DSLR Cool Box over a series of posts.
      I made my start in astro-photography / DSO imaging about 18 months back using a Canon 1000D on a 130DPS / HEQ5pro.
      I have a very limited budget and so almost every piece of equipment I own is second hand or self built. Living in a yellow zone area I started out using a Astronomic CLS filter and this worked well for me for a short period. However, once I started guiding it became clear that I was limited by light pollution in longer exposures. To that end I decided that I wanted to try narrow band imaging, but I knew that I could not afford a mono CCD or CMOS camera to go with the narrow band filters and that with my DSLR I would suffer from low signal to noise ratio if I attempted narrow band imaging through the Bayer Matrix.
      I initially looked into debayering a DSLR in an attempt to get more signal and I did in fact manage to successfully remove the bayer matrix and create a good quality mono sensor.  However, extensive testing convinced me that this was not the way ahead and that I had in fact lost performance overall due to the loss of the micro lenses along with the bayer filters. As a result I decided to focus on the other side of the S/N equation and have a go at reducing the noise through cooling.
      All of this of course has been well covered by others in the past, however I would hope that my approach has proven to be a good one with some original design elements and so it sill worth sharing.
      I began by researching ‘do it yourself’ DSLR cooling, as I said I am certainly not the first to have attempt this and a wealth of information exists on the internet not least this forum. It was immediately apparent that no two approaches are the same, but it was possible to group DSLR cooling into two main methods both of which make use of Thermal Electric Cooling (TEC) modules, a TEC being a solid state heat pump that uses the Peltier effect to draw heat from one side of the module to the other. The module itself consisting of two ceramic plates sandwiching a semi-conductor matrix. When a voltage is applied across the TEC one side of becomes hot and the other cold. 

      Cooling Method 1: The first method is very similar to that used in commercially available CCD cameras and uses a copper plate or ‘cold finger’ in direct contact with the rear surface of the DSLR CMOS sensor to remove heat through conduction. This consists of a copper plate cooled by a TEC which is in turn cooled by a heat sink and fan. While this method is extremely effective in cooling the CMOS sensor it requires significant modification to the camera which carries a significant level of technical risk, problems can also occur with condensation inside the camera body due to the low temperature of the cold finger.
      Cooling Method 2: The second method leaves the camera body intact and places it within a ‘cool box’ enclosure (essentially a miniature fridge). This effectively lowers the ambient temperature of the air around the camera which in turn leads to the temperature of the CMOS sensor being lowered. The effects of this type of cooling on noise can be simulated by placing a camera into a fridge on a hot day and taking a long exposure dark frame before and after cooling. While this method is lower risk than the direct cooling method it does come at the expense of bulkier less efficient and less effective cooling. However, I selected this method for my cooling project as the primary goal is to improve performance with minimum expenditure, accidentally destroying a perfectly good DSLR camera would not aid me in this goal. The ability to seal a DSLR within an air tight box would be essential in preventing dew from forming.
       
      To be continued:-
×

Important Information

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