Starlight express loadstar x2c for eaa

[Trevor PC]

Hello All

Many thanks in anticipation of a response.

I would like any opinions on using a Starlight Express Loadstar x2c for EAA, with Starlight Express Live software, along with if possible what would be the effect of a loss of resolution due to the large pixel size to nebulosity, I hope this makes sense.

As always any assistance is greatly appreciated.

Clear Sky's

Trevor 

 

 

 

 

[Martin Meredith]

The X2 is a very good camera for EAA and many of us have used it [in fact, it was seeing Nytecam's original images taken with a Lodestar that got me into EAA back in 2013] -- though I prefer the mono version. In general, CCD cameras like this have some useability advantages too -- no messing around with gain for instance due to large bit depth. 

Resolution is not a function of the camera (pixel size) only, but also depends on the focal length of the scope, and there are some focal lengths that are fine for the Lodestar's large pixels. I've used my X2mono at 800mm (8" f4) for nearly a decade without really wanting better resolution. 

I'm not sure if LodestarLive is still supported but you ought to be able to find a version that works for your architecture. Are you running on OSX or Windows?

Good luck

Martin

[Trevor PC]

Hello Martin

Many thanks for responding to my question.

The Loadstar software is still available, looks like the newest version was from 2017. Would look to try that first before trying sharpcap pro, or other software, it will be interesting to see if more up to date software gives any real benefit.

It is quite strange that most people I have spoke to all suggest CMOS is the way to go, as I will have both it will be interesting to see how they match up.

As always any help or guidance is much appreciated.

Clear Sky's

Trevor

 

[Martin Meredith]

Hi Trevor

I also have both CCD and CMOS cameras (Lodestar X2 mono and ASI 290MM). While on nights of good seeing I get better star shapes with the ASI, I don't see much difference in for example how deep they go in terms of magnitude reach. The disadvantage for me of the ASI is the need to mess around with gain, something that isn't needed with the Lodestar since it has sufficient bit depth. Gain setting of course isn't necessarily a big issue but it does mean having to take a set of darks -- if you use them -- at the same gain.

Here's a comparison (taken years apart!) of the two on Arp 145 with a similar exposure (3m15/20) that doesn't necessarily prove anything but at least shows that each is capable of getting a decent result on this polar ring galaxy.

cheers

Martin

 

[Trevor PC]

Hello Martin

As always many thanks for responding.

To my eyes the asi photo looks sharper, or more in focus.

I thought Royal Mail were delivering it today, stayed in didn't hear a knock on the door, looked on the web site, said they had attempted delivery.

When it does turn up it will be interesting to see the results, as people try to put you off CCD cameras.

Will post my results and thoughts.

As always many thanks for your assistance.

Clear Sky's 

Trevor