Planetaty Imaging Question

[Colan]

Hi

Am toying with the Idea of getting an Imaging Source DMK Camera for Planetery imaging.

Any opinions on how good they are?

Also, is it the case that a mono with filters would be better than a colour one?

If yes does this also mean I need a Filter wheel?Would you divide the total imaging time equally between each filter?

Sorry for all the questions. I always feel bad just posting questions instead of practical help, but unfortunately I am still new enough to not have anything useful to offer :-)

[GazOC]

Hi welcome to SGL,

They are very good cameras, the mono (with filter wheel) is considered to be a better option than the colour one. How the time is divided between the filters depends on what the target is.

[Ant]

I use the DMK for both lunar/planet imaging and guiding.

It's much more sensitive than the DFK (which is the colour version).

I really like it.

Ant

[astromerlin]

Hi, Dont know about the DMK I've never had one but yes using a mono imaging source with filters is better than a color one. The mono sensors are more sensitive and from all the planetary images on this forum I've seen, the ones done with rgb filters seem to be far more in focus with sharp contrast and detail.

[Colan]

Thanks for the responses.

I think a Mono is the way forward then

Any preferences Re: Resolution vs Frame rate.

That is am I better going for the higher resolution models? or the lower resolution models with the lower higher rate?

[MeerkatinBKK]

At the risk of hijacking the thread...

How does mono-with-filters work for something like Jupiter, as I thought its rotation speed meant that you only get a minute or so before it becomes evident? Is it just being very dextrous, or must one use an automatic wheel?

Thanks,

Nick (not dextrous at the best of times!)

[moocher]

You have approx 3 mins before you get blurred features so approx 45 secs per colour. I regularly image at 30 frms /sec with decent results but don`t forget its all down to the seeing conditions......

Alan:)

[MeerkatinBKK]

Cheers Alan - ah yes many more fps available for starters than my little-old-webcam.

Nick

[Helen]

I've read that for purely planetary work the smaller chip is more than adequate (as you only use a small part of the frame anyway). And smaller means higher frame rate, which is good! Oh, and the smaller ones are cheaper too. (Its not often in this hobby where cheaper really is better!)

Helen

[brianb]

I've read that for purely planetary work the smaller chip is more than adequate (as you only use a small part of the frame anyway). And smaller means higher frame rate, which is good!

Yeah, but for lunar (or solar) work a larger chip saves a lot of processing & stitching time. Really you need a '21 (640x480, 60fps) and a '41 (1280x960, 15fps). If you can afford only one, I suggest you compromise on the '31 (1024x768, 30 fps).

I agree altogether with the mono camera being better than the Bayer filtered version ... for a start it gives you the flexibility to use extreme filters, IR for beating poor seeing, UV for clouds on Venus.

Here's an image I shot with a DMK41 this morning - Mars was tiny but there's still detail visible in this IR filtered image; it would just have been a blob in a colour camera.

2009 Sep 09, 0440 UT. L=358 degrees. North up.

Celestron CPC1100, 1.5x barlow, Astronomik Planet Pro 742 IR pass filter, DMK41 camera. Seeing poor.