Clavius - ASI120mc vs EOS250d

[don4l]

I've taken two shots of Clavius tonight to see what the EOS250 is capable of.  Having a large sensor, and many more pixels, it would make lunar mosaics much easier.

Initially, I was very pleased with the result from the EOS, but after I processed the ASI result, there really wasn't any contest at all.  I think that the biggest factor is that it is easy (ish) to take 1000 frames with the ASI.  I also took some video with the EOS, but I have no idea how to process it.  If anyone knows, then please tell me.

Anyway, the first image is from the ASI - 40% of 2000 frames.  Processed in Autostakkert and wavelets applied in Registax.

The second image is a crop from the EOS.  The image did cover about 5 times the area, but I wanted to compare the detail that each produced.  This image is a single jpeg - so I could do a bit better with RAW.

Of course,  taking a full Moon shot would take 5 minutes with the EOS, whereas it takes me 45 mins to take all the panels with the ASI.  Assembling the EOS frames just takes a couple of minutes, versus several hours processing is involved with the 120.

[tooth_dr]

The 120 seems to be a formidable camera.  Honestly, you can almost feel the dust from that picture, it's phenomenal.  I really don't like the moon, but yet when I see images of this quality I am in awe of it's beauty.  Super job.

[geeklee]

16 hours ago, don4l said:

The second image is a crop from the EOS.  The image did cover about 5 times the area, but I wanted to compare the detail that each produced.  This image is a single jpeg - so I could do a bit better with RAW.

For a single JPEG that has no processing, it's excellent.  I wonder what even 50-100 of those frames would look like stacked and processed?

For the 120 image, great detail all round, but in Clavius Rutherfurd also has some lovely, subtle detail on the outer wall.

[geoflewis]

16 hours ago, don4l said:

I've taken two shots of Clavius tonight to see what the EOS250 is capable of.  Having a large sensor, and many more pixels, it would make lunar mosaics much easier.

Initially, I was very pleased with the result from the EOS, but after I processed the ASI result, there really wasn't any contest at all.  I think that the biggest factor is that it is easy (ish) to take 1000 frames with the ASI.  I also took some video with the EOS, but I have no idea how to process it.  If anyone knows, then please tell me.

Anyway, the first image is from the ASI - 40% of 2000 frames.  Processed in Autostakkert and wavelets applied in Registax.

The second image is a crop from the EOS.  The image did cover about 5 times the area, but I wanted to compare the detail that each produced.  This image is a single jpeg - so I could do a bit better with RAW.

Of course,  taking a full Moon shot would take 5 minutes with the EOS, whereas it takes me 45 mins to take all the panels with the ASI.  Assembling the EOS frames just takes a couple of minutes, versus several hours processing is involved with the 120.

Great comparison Donal and as you say really no contest - lucky imaging will win every time. FWIW I have previously process DSLR video using my ImagesPlus software which has a convert MOV to SER option. If you google search 'convert MOV to SER' I think you'll find several options, some online some to download, but I haven't used any of them so can make any recommendation. Good luck.

 

[don4l]

44 minutes ago, geeklee said:

For a single JPEG that has no processing, it's excellent.  I wonder what even 50-100 of those frames would look like stacked and processed?

For the 120 image, great detail all round, but in Clavius Rutherfurd also has some lovely, subtle detail on the outer wall.

This is what I was wondering.  I'd love to be able to stack the video, but I am at a loss about where to start.  I was very impressed with the quality.  I think it compares very favourably with the 120, with the enormous advantage that there are far fewer panels to process.

 

 

[geoflewis]

20 minutes ago, don4l said:

This is what I was wondering.  I'd love to be able to stack the video, but I am at a loss about where to start.  I was very impressed with the quality.  I think it compares very favourably with the 120, with the enormous advantage that there are far fewer panels to process.

Hi Donal, can you post the DSLR movie and I'll see if I can convert it using ImagesPlus - it's been several years since I did that, so no promises, but I'm happy to give it a try....

[don4l]

28 minutes ago, geoflewis said:

Hi Donal, can you post the DSLR movie and I'll see if I can convert it using ImagesPlus - it's been several years since I did that, so no promises, but I'm happy to give it a try....

I only took two. This one is about 12Mb.  The other is about 200Mb.

They don't look too bad when I view them.  However, I haven't yet figured out how to control video capture from the PC - so this is a bit shaky.

I've just downloaded FFMPEG, but I haven't got it working yet.

EDIT:  I wasn't expecting to see it displayed as a video.  Geof, can you download this?

 

Edited April 3, 2020 by don4l

[don4l]

I've used PIPP to convert to AVI, and processed in Sharpcap.  Here is the result.  I think that a lot of the image has been cropped because it was very jumpy.  However, this is looking very promising indeed.

 

[geoflewis]

Hi Donal, good to see that you found a solution. I converted to SER, which runs in AS3! but the SER file size was ~240m..... So I stacked 50% and a quick wavelets in Registax... Like you said, lots of edge artefacts, but definitely promising. I haven't uploaded the SER as probably too big, especially as you found another method

[geeklee]

@don4lDoes the camera take an uncompressed RAW video or is it already "preprocessed" and compressed?  For only 25% of 72 frames, the result was pretty good anyway!  PIPP, AS!3 and Astra Image for a quick deconvolution, sharpening and contrast

Edited April 3, 2020 by geeklee

[don4l]

57 minutes ago, geeklee said:

@don4lDoes the camera take an uncompressed RAW video or is it already "preprocessed" and compressed?  For only 25% of 72 frames, the result was pretty good anyway!  PIPP, AS!3 and Astra Image for a quick deconvolution, sharpening and contrast

I haven't a clue what the camera is doing, and I'm not sure that the manual will help.

I was surprised when @geoflewis said that it went to 200Mb.  However, my 190Mb filewent to 7G after taking about 30 minutes for PIPP to convert it.  Autostakkert then took another 30 mins to stack it, and then I discovered that the alignment had got itself confused.

 

I do feel that if I could figure out some sensible settings, then the EOS could do a great job, but I think that I will have to read the badly written manual.  So, it might be some time before I have another go.

 

[geeklee]

3 minutes ago, don4l said:

I do feel that if I could figure out some sensible settings, then the EOS could do a great job, but I think that I will have to read the badly written manual.  So, it might be some time before I have another go.

What about a back to basics approach if it's on a tracking mount?  Get the camera to take 50-100 individual frames (or more!).  There will be some slight shift but given the size of FOV it'll crop out; with a fast exposure time too, it should rattle through that many in no time.  Those RAW frames can hopefully then be processed by PIPP into something that AS!3 can take.

Good luck when you're next playing with it, especially if you have to refer to the manual 😅

[don4l]

4 minutes ago, geeklee said:

What about a back to basics approach if it's on a tracking mount?  Get the camera to take 50-100 individual frames (or more!).  There will be some slight shift but given the size of FOV it'll crop out; with a fast exposure time too, it should rattle through that many in no time.  Those RAW frames can hopefully then be processed by PIPP into something that AS!3 can take.

Good luck when you're next playing with it, especially if you have to refer to the manual 😅

That is definitely worth thinking about.  I think that I would have a problem keeping track of the files, but that could be sorted by being a bit disciplined when taking the images.