Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2015 17:05:24 GMT
Hi Guys, Just a short review of my new X2 using LodestarLive V.11. As a "hybrid" camera it is very sensitive with the ICX829 chip, if not a bit more noisy than the color version of the X2. If you use a laptop, this combo has to be one of the easiest to use. One cable from the camera to your USB port, free software, and easy to use features. Exposure range is 20ms to 300 seconds, stacking has 3 options, Sum, mean, and median. For faint objects and short exposures, sum works best. For longer exposures mean seems to reduce background noise a lot up to 5 stacks, with diminishing returns after that. Have not used median yet. Also has other features which I have yet to explore. I kept it in "Linear" mode all night and seemed to work well. Also no amp glow visible at any exposure I tried, longest was 120 seconds on unguided mount. Another plus is round stars, and the way LL stacks. You can set for max pixel displacement that will reject frames that fall outside you setting due to tracking errors, processing limitations etc. What it doesn't have is any gain control, though the chip is so sensitive I don't know if it could be used if it had it. On most images I find the best results are achieved using minimal histogram adjustments. Black level at 3000 out of 65,535 White all the way to the right Brightness around 500 out of 65,535 W/B at .2 to .5 out of 1 Was using it in a 4.3" f7 Apo at f7 on a AVX mount. No guiding, no post processing. Conditions first night was poor transparency, lots of thin high clouds and light pollution plus moon. Seeing though was 3/5. I was able to see a couple of faint 16.4 and 16.6 magnitude galaxies in one image I took. Second night was very transparent, seeing 2/5, 1/2 moon using a Lumicon deepsky filter Overall very happy with this camera, the only limitation is getting my mount to track better. At $600 for the camera and free software I think it's a great deal! Richard
|
|
|
Post by davy on Mar 31, 2015 19:30:36 GMT
Yeah great camera and software well impressed with all the results both here and sgl..hybrid is just our name for these camera systems no disrespect to them was easier to categories them under hybrid
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2015 20:10:56 GMT
Hello Richard,
I'm sure glad to see your report. I've been thinking on the Lodestar for awhile.
Question for you: If you had it to do over again, would you go for the color version instead or the B & W, and why?
Thanks for your reply and for posting!
Clear skies...Bob
Davy, thanks for your mention of sgl. I'll amble over there for a look around...
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2015 20:52:44 GMT
Hi Bob, I had the color version, does a great job. The mono version is more sensitive, and I really like the mono "look". More like what you see in an eyepiece on most objects. I already have another color camera and wanted the mono to do Ha with. The color version while less sensitive, is also a bit cleaner, less noise. If I did not already have a color camera I would have both. You can't go wrong with either, just a matter of personal preference. Here is a color image taken with a X2C and my 4.3". This one has post processing (color balance). Richard
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2015 21:10:37 GMT
Hi Richard, Thanks for the "come-back". That is a nice image! For now, with budget constraints I'm still torn between the two. If you could only have one, which would it be ? Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2015 22:44:10 GMT
Hi Bob,
For me the mono, as I don't do public outreach (the public likes color)and I'm a bit old school.
Richard
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 0:55:08 GMT
Excellent report, Richard. In response to Bob's question, I have both the Lodestar X2 and X2c. I agree with Richard that the mono would be my pick, too. Besides higher sensitivity, the mono is easier to use in Lodestar Live, especially for someone new to it. Paul's LL v0.11 does make it easier to get color saturation and balance right, but mono eliminates all that. Also, the mono can be coupled with a narrow band Ha filter to get some stunning images of emission nebulae. Color will work, too, but some detail is lost because of the Bayer mask. If you're interested in seeing results from both mono and color Lodestars, here's a link to my gallery. All captures were taken during near real time viewing sessions and are what I saw on the computer screen without any post processing. You can see that I use a number of different telescopes, including a mini 50mm guide scope with a 162mm focal length. No need for C14's. stargazerslounge.com/gallery/member/36930-hilodon/To add to Richard's report, the lodestar Live program developed by Paul Shears in the UK comes in both Mac and Windows versions. Paul is now working on version 0.12. It keeps getting better and better. Hope this helps. Don
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Apr 1, 2015 2:28:40 GMT
Nice results Richard Did you use a focal reducer on those views? The FOV looks great, unless they are very small objects
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 16:04:38 GMT
Hi Ken,
No focal reduction on the mono images, done at 770mmfl (f7).Don't remember on M42. The 1/2" chip helps in this regard over a 1/3" chip. M51 is smallish, 4565 and 101 are somewhat large. Fov is 27.5 x 21.7 arcmin, sampling is 2.22 arc seconds per pixel according to CCD calculator.
Richard
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 16:20:07 GMT
Here are a few more, a couple of globulars, same scope etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 18:56:12 GMT
Richard and Don, Thanks!
Richard, you nailed it with mention of outreach. That's where I am and Color it will be. Nice glob's you just posted too.
Don, thanks for the link to your gallery. Looking over the images you two have posted has me convinced. I want a Lodestar!
I'm having a problem finding a good contact link for Paul Shears to learn if I can use my laptop with an Ubuntu OS. Anybody help with this?
Again, thanks guys!
Bob
|
|
|
Post by Rick in NWArk on Apr 1, 2015 19:45:05 GMT
Awesome shots Richard and Don!
Don, did you use any binning?
I'm really wanting to do mono Ha video/imaging. I was considering saving for an Atik-460 but those are some really nice X2 images!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 22:45:21 GMT
Awesome shots Richard and Don! Don, did you use any binning? I'm really wanting to do mono Ha video/imaging. I was considering saving for an Atik-460 but those are some really nice X2 images!! Thanks, Rick. No binning was used. The Lodestar Live s/w does not have that option. The SX s/w does, but I prefer using LL on my Mac. I really enjoy the NB Ha viewing. I have seen some NB Ha images on NSN with the Atik 460 and they were fantastic. But, the Lodestar does a credible job at a fraction of the cost, especially with wide field scopes on large emission nebulae. I thought about the Atik or the SX694, but I think the longer exposure time required takes away from the near real time viewing experience. And, I don't think my wife would appreciate me spending $2500 for another camera. I was able to get both the color and mono Lodestars for less than half that cost. The NB Ha filter isn't cheap either. I got the Orion 7nm on Amazon for $125 and free shipping. Right now I think the Lodestars give the perfect balance of quality and speed for EAA, and the NB filters offer a unique dimension to it. Don
|
|
|
Post by Rick in NWArk on Apr 2, 2015 13:52:03 GMT
Don,
For me, the gold standard is Tom in Southern Indiana (SoIN) who uses a 180mm refractor with the Atik-460ex. I have not seen higher quality live broadcasts, even from the Exterminator. Disclaimer: I do not count NJ Skys as video, since the method he uses for his excellent views is saving individual images to a folder and stacking/processing them with DSS or similar software. If it hits a hard drive, its imaging not video in my opinion. Granted, I think its good to broadcast imaging as long as folks know there can be some wait time.
Anyway, I'm with you -- $2500 for the Atik is hefty, and as these images show, the X2 does a real decent job.
--Rick
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Apr 2, 2015 14:59:49 GMT
Don, For me, the gold standard is Tom in Southern Indiana (SoIN) who uses a 180mm refractor with the Atik-460ex. I have not seen higher quality live broadcasts, even from the Exterminator. Disclaimer: I do not count NJ Skys as video, since the method he uses for his excellent views is saving individual images to a folder and stacking/processing them with DSS or similar software. If it hits a hard drive, its imaging not video in my opinion. Granted, I think its good to broadcast imaging as long as folks know there can be some wait time. Anyway, I'm with you -- $2500 for the Atik is hefty, and as these images show, the X2 does a real decent job. --Rick Totally agree about Tom's broadcasts. Stunning! And with broadcasters like NJ Skys, Joe is attempting to stop broadcasting from Imagers. It's not Live broadcasting. It is displaying a gallery of images. May as well go surfing on 'Google Images'.
|
|
|
Post by davy on Apr 3, 2015 7:45:54 GMT
great subject guys, I am impressed with the lodestar and it's video capabilities now and would be a nice camera to move on to. the daddy mallincam is way out of my budget for a while and weather wise have hardly had a scope out this year so to spend big dough on a camera like that I would be better standing at the bottom of my street handing out five pound notes to passers by.
agree with ken, if I want to see images there are pretty stunning images on sgl ,nsn is for video astronomers, we are a small number compared to astrophotographers and no malice to the chap showing his images but it defeats the role nsn was created for..cloudy nights forum has changed the perception of video to electronically assisted that opens the door to any and all to post and dilutes the video side, here we try and keep it video only,we used the term hybrid camera system for some methods of capture,but it still is video,yeah screen grabs go up on here but are taken from video..and we allow images stacked ect as long as they are said to be images,,keeps everybody happy lol.
|
|
|
Post by Rick in NWArk on Apr 3, 2015 13:57:55 GMT
Totally agree about Tom's broadcasts. Stunning! And with broadcasters like NJ Skys, Joe is attempting to stop broadcasting from Imagers. It's not Live broadcasting. It is displaying a gallery of images. May as well go surfing on 'Google Images'. I've watched several of NJ Skys' broadcasts. He has his camera taking exposures and saving individual images to a folder on his hard drive. He has software like AstroToaster or DSS Live that processes the files in that folder and generates a new image which is then broadcast. The time between image refreshes is about 12-15 minutes, if I remember right. He usually moves between 2-3 objects in a broadcast of 2 hours. I absolutely agree that its not live video astronomy. I disagree that its the same as displaying a gallery of images, as he is making adjustments to exposures, processes, etc. I think there is a place for this, especially for people who are interested in learning about imaging, in "astronomy broadcasting". --Rick
|
|
|
Post by Rick in NWArk on Apr 3, 2015 14:12:12 GMT
great subject guys, I am impressed with the lodestar and it's video capabilities now and would be a nice camera to move on to. the daddy mallincam is way out of my budget for a while and weather wise have hardly had a scope out this year so to spend big dough on a camera like that I would be better standing at the bottom of my street handing out five pound notes to passers by. agree with ken, if I want to see images there are pretty stunning images on sgl ,nsn is for video astronomers, we are a small number compared to astrophotographers and no malice to the chap showing his images but it defeats the role nsn was created for..cloudy nights forum has changed the perception of video to electronically assisted that opens the door to any and all to post and dilutes the video side, here we try and keep it video only,we used the term hybrid camera system for some methods of capture,but it still is video,yeah screen grabs go up on here but are taken from video..and we allow images stacked ect as long as they are said to be images,,keeps everybody happy lol. I have not had the chance to use B&W video in an outreach session, yet, so I'm not sure how well it would be appreciated in a public environment. But for NSN and my own interest, I definitely want to get there. Personally, I'm really interested in "how the universe looks in ______ light"... almost a weird "what if our eyes processed light differently" kind of thing. I'm sure color still wins with the kids, but if you can see so much more detail ... My Jr. Pro is nice, but my screen shots can't match what many of you guys are putting out. --Rick
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2015 17:08:03 GMT
Hi All,
I like to think of this technology as near real time viewing. Everything I do with my Lodestars is in a "viewing" session. I prepare for it just as I did when I was using eyepieces. The images I have in my gallery were captures taken during viewing sessions. I don't have the patience to image and I think to qualify as NRTV, any processing should be done on the fly in a short period of time. I use on the fly stacking sometimes to reduce noise, but with the new version of LL the stacking image stays as the noise is reduced similar to a video cam. I have used both analogue video cams and Lodestars with LL and I don't see much difference in the basic methodology for lack of a better term. You have to wait a short period of time before you get your best viewable image. The time is close to the same if the camera has the same sensor as does the LS and Exterminator. Both can be displayed on monitors for outreach. There are some advantages to each, but in the end the user is trying to do the same thing, see in detail the wonders of deep space. No more faint fuzzies! I do agree that if significant post processing is done and a viewable image takes 12-15 minutes, it starts to drift from the goal of NRTV and becomes less usable for outreach.
Don
|
|