Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

Best mono planetary camera?

tooth_dr

Recommended Posts

tooth_dr

tooth_dr

Posted
Posted

I've been told to pick something for my 'big' birthday coming up by my partner, up to the value of £500, but it must be one item. She doesn't want me to spend it on bits and bobs like filters, etc, just one item which is fair enough

She suggested to me (!) a PST, but I was thinking along the lines of a good planetary/lunar camera? I've got a decent filter wheel, and dichroic filters already.

Any pointers guys to whats good on the market? Are the Imaging Source cameras good stuff? Certainly second hand is fine as well.

I'm just a bit fed up with the slow frame rate of my webcam.

Thanks in advance

Adam

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 27
  • Created
  • Last Reply
brianb

brianb

Posted
Posted
Are the Imaging Source cameras good stuff?

Yes ... excellent value for money & as good as you'll get for £500. DMK21 is best for planetary (small chip, high frame rate), DMK41 for lunar (biggish chip, low frame rate), DMK31 is a great compromise (1024 x 768 with 4.65 micron pixel pitch, 30 frames/sec).

Lumenera Skynyx & Point Grey Research Flea3 are more sensitive (the Flea3 is especially sensitive to red & near infrared) and can go faster but the prices are steep ... and the improvement over the IS cameras is incremental rather than a big shift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brianb

brianb

Posted
Posted

DMK21 - 640 x 480, 5.6 micron pixel pitch, 60 fps max

DMK31 - 1024 x 768, 4.65 micron pixel pitch, 30 fps max

DMK41 - 1280 x 960, 4.65 micron pixel pitch, 15 fps max

I have both 21 & 41. The 21 is a bit more sensitive though the longer focal length you need to get the same resolution (in arc secs per pixel) balances this out. You don't need a bigger chip for planets, and it's fine for closeups of active areas etc. on the Sun. The Moon has lots & lots of light and the lower frame rate hardly matters, same applies to solar surface to a large extent.

If I could have only one camera, it would be the 31. If I was more planetary & less bothered with solar work my choice would be the 21. If I was primary lunar & solar the 41 would suit better. (I started with the 41 & added the 21 because the low frame rate was limiting for planetary work!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beamish

beamish

Posted
Posted

Lumenera , superb but out of the price range. Flea 3, 1st reports appear to be xlnt , out performs the Lu 2-0 re sensitivity and cheaper but you'll also need to think of capture S/W-Lucam recorder does not yet support the flea 3 but should by the end of this summer

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brianb

brianb

Posted
Posted

OK, yes, firewire is technically superior to USB, but Windoze hates firewire (*), most modern setups are limited to 100 Mbps which rather spoils the point ... and USB works well enough (even on a low powered Netbook). Also I hear that IS has an issue with supplying Firewire cameras at the moment due to non availability of Firewire chipsets. You may wish to look at the version with gigabit ethernet built in instead.

(*) Largely due to the commercial tie-ups between Microsoft and Intel, who licence USB chipsets ... and because Firewire is a competitor's product (Apple).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riklaunim

riklaunim

Posted
Posted

TIS DMK cameras are limited in speed due to circular artifacts they will usually make on planets when on max speed. So DMK21 can't use 60FPS but only 30 FPS. It's a good choice if it's cheap from the second hand market. I wouldn't buy a new one today as better choices are emerging. And for bigger lunary images 1/4" CCD isn't that good ;) On the other hand bigger CCDs are slower and less suitable for planetary work.

At the end of september QHY planetary cameras should kick in and it looks like they will be priced slightly higher than DMK21 (for QHY IMG0H) and other corresponding cameras. QHY will ofer 8/14 bit image format, TEC cooling and modern sensitive CCDs like 1/4" ICX618 in the IMG0H or ICX285 in the IMG2S model (the same CCD as in DSI III Pro or Atik 314L).

There are also bit more expensive, but very fast GigE ethernet cameras from Basler (Basler Ace) used already by some astronomers (mainly in Germany) and Firewire 800 Point Grey Fleae 3 and Grasshopper (used mainly in USA, Australia) which offer insane transfer rates compare to USB 2. Some PGR cameras with bigger CCDs (like ICX445 1/3" with very small pixels) are used in lunary as well as in planetary imaging as the faster firewire can give fast framerates for planetary imagin (+ ROI support which makes it faster).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brianb

brianb

Posted
Posted
TIS DMK cameras are limited in speed due to circular artifacts they will usually make on planets when on max speed. So DMK21 can't use 60FPS but only 30 FPS.

No - you CAN get artifacts at certain combinations of frame rate & exposure but this is by no means certain - and the "bad" combinations are ones that are daft anyway (e.g. setting 60 fps but 1/30 sec exposure, which limits the frame rate to 30 fps anyway.)

Sure, the IS cameras aren't perfect - but what is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riklaunim

riklaunim

Posted
Posted

A lot of industry cameras has this problem. Only the latest design of some vendors are free of that issue.

I'm waiting for the IMG0H from QHY. If it will work nicely I'll stick to that, and if not I'll fallback to Basler Ace with the same CCD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NickH

NickH

Posted
Posted

I picked up an LU075m for £240...and have owned several DMK's... for £240 the Lumenera will win every time in my books (though it's close for sure)...though the software sucks (you need lucam recorder), and on the DMK side the software is very good (a bit buggy, but good). It's slightly less noisy, and will do 60fps no issues at all..(see any of my solar images taken with the Lumeneras)

I have the Skynyx 2-0m and 2-1m as well they are steep in terms of price, and against the DMK's not justifiably so IMHO... BrianB's first reply was spot on, apart from the "as good as it gets" as the Lumenera barebones options I have seen at £230-40 are better, but, for an off the shelf solution, IS/DMK are superb, and they are currently at that price point for a stock off the shelf product, as good as it gets. The PG...not easy to get here..and GigE whilst nice is not common on the average netbook :-) (then neither is firewire)

QHY...I wouldn't personally trust anything they ever do...drivers sucked on the QHY5 and the sensitivity IMHO sucks as a guide cam ( I own one...and it's a toy compared to the DSI for sensitivity), but if they are coming out with a high frame rate 285, that will be interesting...keep an eye out for that, as I used the Lumenera Inifinity 3-1 and apart from the price tag, it was nigh on perfect

Just had a look on the QHY R&D threads, they look like Atik's :-) very amusing... be interesting to follow that 285 one for sure...depending on what price they get it out for...as the DSI-III is £699 right now

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riklaunim

riklaunim

Posted
Posted

Note that DSI III on optcorp is labeled as discontinued.

IMG0H with ICX618 will cost around 3499,- DKK (astroqcam.dk) and this CCDs is a huge improvement over ICX098 in DMK21 (if you want to do methane imaging or NIR at 1000 nm like me ;)). Initial reviews of pre-production units from this series are quite good. QHY can be good if you choose the right model. Now they are crazy about APS-C QHY10-11-12... and so on like Atik with 383, but at least they made some nice (I hope) dedicated "planetary" cameras (and they can guide too).

I don't know the price for ICX285 IMG2S version yet, but it you want it to be really fast - it won't be on USB 2 (look at grasshopper solar images). GigE or Firewire 800 is fast but adds a lot to the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.