Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2017 3:49:09 GMT
Thanks Everyone for your input, yes howie the reducer is the dedicated f7 for the HD SCT could not get one in Australia , got it from the UK! Wedge is all good got that second hand, there nearly $900 new !
With the computer I have a screen or small tv that I can hook up to , would help me see things better than a small laptop screen. The only thing I was concerned with with a desktop in my observatory is it's stuck in there and if I want to play around with photos or what ever I have to be in the observatory. With a laptop I can bring it inside and play! Im hooking my wife's laptop to my big LCD TV easy to see and watch Howie's you tube clips! Thanks for those good learning. ill go to centrecom and see how much there pc and laptops are. Yes Chris I know about USB 3 thanks.
howie as for what I think a good camera is , what about a Nikon D5 ? Not cheap lol I can't afford that . but really that's why I asked the ? But if my 600D is all good then I'll learn with that. But I was thinking of the AS1224 but I know nothing of these type of cameras , but there is plenty of info on CN so I just thought is that better than my 600 D ? Or maybe find a 6D to use I'm not sure. Just play with what I have and see how we go.
chris what is AT ? And DSS is deep sky stacker ?
Thanks all Dave.
|
|
|
Post by davy on Sept 9, 2017 5:24:57 GMT
AT is astrotoaster, DSS ,,,deep sky stacker Astrotoaster works in conjunction with deep sky stacker,, it uses it's engine ,
You can have different software working together Canon utilities - astrotoaster/ DSS Backyard Eos - astrotoaster/DSS Ect ,, I'm going to try my new piece of hardware/software with astrotoaster, it will be my wireless adapter called CAMFI, it's software will allow me to take images and astrotoaster will hopefully monitor the folder and stack my images.
Hopefully sharpcap will be incorporating DSLR function in there software in the very near future, myself and Howie are waiting patiently for this.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Sept 9, 2017 6:28:35 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2017 7:09:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Sept 9, 2017 8:08:57 GMT
Yes dave, that one is excellent Cooled with a Peltier cooler. That particular model is becoming the most popular.
|
|
|
Post by NewBee101 on Sept 9, 2017 11:08:11 GMT
Yes dave, that one is excellent Cooled with a Peltier cooler. That particular model is becoming the most popular. Knock Knock, any body home. NewBee101 Just been surfin' the post's. Ken, I have had a look at the ASI224 that you were talking about, $381-11 from Aliexpress free shipping to Aust' the same camera I have been looking at. They are claiming that the older models are better for planetary imaging. Still Waiting For Clear Skies
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Sept 9, 2017 14:24:11 GMT
Yes dave, that one is excellent Cooled with a Peltier cooler. That particular model is becoming the most popular. Knock Knock, any body home. NewBee101 Just been surfin' the post's. Ken, I have had a look at the ASI224 that you were talking about, $381-11 from Aliexpress free shipping to Aust' the same camera I have been looking at. They are claiming that the older models are better for planetary imaging. Still Waiting For Clear Skies I don't know who, or why, they would be saying that older models of the 224 would be 'better' for planetary imaging. They are identical cameras except the newer versions have updated firmware to reduce Amp Glow during long exposures. Same sensor, same electronics, same everything except for that updated firmware. Which one is $381.11 shipped to Oz? The $160 one from Rising Tech is only $198.57 Aussie dollars with free freight. EDIT: Ahhhh, sorry, I didn't see you wrote ASI224. ASI cameras are from ZWO I'll shut up now I would rather get one from Bintel at the extra $30 - $40 so it is covered by Australian warranty, not cost me freight back and forward to the UK for any repairs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2017 23:14:18 GMT
The ZWO 224 cooled is $899 and the RT 224 cooled with usb3 is $355 au and claims to have the amp glow reduction. A computer with plenty of grunt and a usb3 is certainly needed for a camera like the RT 1600 but the usb2 seems to work fine for the 224. Trying to do shorter exposures with stacking with the 1600 is still a struggle for me.
I need a second big screen to align and focus rather than do it from a laptop screen. Paul
|
|
|
Post by ChrisV on Sept 10, 2017 0:35:11 GMT
You don't need a cooled 224 for video astro! This camera is the most sensitive out there so you will be using very short subs (2-15sec). As Ken says - newer the better. Amp glow circuitry. I just my old asi224mc upgraded and is way better now. I'm not necessarily pushing the zwo as ken and others are getting great results with the other makes.
I'd give the dslr a good shot. But the 224 would complement it nicely ... and now for something completely different. Also the 224 would be easier as you could just use one program, eg sharpcap or whatever.
Edit. Sorry about acronyms.
|
|
|
Post by howie1 on Sept 10, 2017 0:38:50 GMT
Hey daveg,
I love posting up this "tip" ...
The simple test is to lookup the specs from the camera manufacturer and find the sensor size in mm horizontal and vertical. Not the number of pixels ... you want the size in mm of the sensor itself.
The 224 sensor is 4.8mm x 3.6mm and so ......here's the tip ... will behave in your scope (any scope) very similarly to a 4.8mm'ish eyepiece in that scope. Not exact, but very similar, and very handy to figure out if that cam will suit your kit. EG 4.8mm .... very high magnification, very narrowfield, tougher to focus, etc.
Your DSLR sensor is 22.3 x 14.9mm so will behave in your scope (any scope) very similarly to a 22.3mm'ish eyepiece in that scope. IE much less magnification (nearly 5 times less mag in fact compared to the 224), much wider field of view (nearly 5 times more FOV in fact compared to the 224), easier to focus, etc.
So with your reducer on you'll get most messier objects except the big ones using your DSLR. You'll only get a very few of them using the 224 based cameras cos it magnifies so much. But that 224 cam will be good for the very small stuff in the ngc and IC catalogues (although you could crop into the DSLR images of that very small stuff!
Or use the 12dstring FOV website to check cameras and scope combo's ... google search for "12dstring fov calc" ... I'll throw up a vid to show you what a great tool that is (IMO) as I am bored today! LOL. Will post the vid link shortly.
cheers Howie
|
|
|
Post by ChrisV on Sept 10, 2017 0:55:13 GMT
Bored? At least you are not confused like me. I set up last night for a full night with the 071. Then about 930pm the moon came up. "What the hell I thought - dooh- I was a week ahead of myself".
So between the moon and the nearby bushfires (it's only September!!). Not a great night.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2017 2:28:14 GMT
Hey daveg, I love posting up this "tip" ... The simple test is to lookup the specs from the camera manufacturer and find the sensor size in mm horizontal and vertical. Not the number of pixels ... you want the size in mm of the sensor itself. The 224 sensor is 4.8mm x 3.6mm and so ......here's the tip ... will behave in your scope (any scope) very similarly to a 4.8mm'ish eyepiece in that scope. Not exact, but very similar, and very handy to figure out if that cam will suit your kit. EG 4.8mm .... very high magnification, very narrowfield, tougher to focus, etc. Your DSLR sensor is 22.3 x 14.9mm so will behave in your scope (any scope) very similarly to a 22.3mm'ish eyepiece in that scope. IE much less magnification (nearly 5 times less mag in fact compared to the 224), much wider field of view (nearly 5 times more FOV in fact compared to the 224), easier to focus, etc. So with your reducer on you'll get most messier objects except the big ones using your DSLR. You'll only get a very few of them using the 224 based cameras cos it magnifies so much. But that 224 cam will be good for the very small stuff in the ngc and IC catalogues (although you could crop into the DSLR images of that very small stuff! Or use the 12dstring FOV website to check cameras and scope combo's ... google search for "12dstring fov calc" ... I'll throw up a vid to show you what a great tool that is (IMO) as I am bored today! LOL. Will post the vid link shortly. cheers Howie Thanks Howie, now this advice is very good! I understand eyepieces perfectly well ! High mag stuff is no good my seeing down here is poor most times. So using the likes of a 25/20 Ep is more about right. So if that's the DSLR then that's much better. Very good thanks. cheers Dave.
|
|
|
Post by NewBee101 on Sept 10, 2017 8:02:48 GMT
Knock Knock, any body home. NewBee101 Just been surfin' the post's. Ken, I have had a look at the ASI224 that you were talking about, $381-11 from Aliexpress free shipping to Aust' the same camera I have been looking at. They are claiming that the older models are better for planetary imaging. Still Waiting For Clear Skies I don't know who, or why, they would be saying that older models of the 224 would be 'better' for planetary imaging. They are identical cameras except the newer versions have updated firmware to reduce Amp Glow during long exposures. Same sensor, same electronics, same everything except for that updated firmware. Which one is $381.11 shipped to Oz? The $160 one from Rising Tech is only $198.57 Aussie dollars with free freight. EDIT: Ahhhh, sorry, I didn't see you wrote ASI224. ASI cameras are from ZWO I'll shut up now I would rather get one from Bintel at the extra $30 - $40 so it is covered by Australian warranty, not cost me freight back and forward to the UK for any repairs.
|
|
|
Post by NewBee101 on Sept 10, 2017 8:33:53 GMT
Knock Knock, any body home. NewBee101 Just been surfin' the post's. Ken, I have had a look at the ASI224 that you were talking about, $381-11 from Aliexpress free shipping to Aust' the same camera I have been looking at. They are claiming that the older models are better for planetary imaging. Still Waiting For Clear Skies I don't know who, or why, they would be saying that older models of the 224 would be 'better' for planetary imaging. They are identical cameras except the newer versions have updated firmware to reduce Amp Glow during long exposures. Same sensor, same electronics, same everything except for that updated firmware. Which one is $381.11 shipped to Oz? The $160 one from Rising Tech is only $198.57 Aussie dollars with free freight. EDIT: Ahhhh, sorry, I didn't see you wrote ASI224. ASI cameras are from ZWO I'll shut up now I would rather get one from Bintel at the extra $30 - $40 so it is covered by Australian warranty, not cost me freight back and forward to the UK for any repairs.
|
|
|
Post by NewBee101 on Sept 10, 2017 9:35:42 GMT
Ken, I think there is a mix up some where!!! The ZWO ASI224 color has the 1/3"CMOS IMX224 sensor, and the Rising Tech model number G3-1200KPA 1.2mp USB3 has got the IMX224 1/3" sensor also, which is today $359-08, the price may fluctuate with the exchange rate. Bintel has the ZWO ASI224 MC-C Cooled Color with the 1/3" CMOS IMX224 sensor for $899-00,that was at the 15/08/16, I like to print out hard copies of what I am looking at or wanting to buy it saves me time and the hassle of searching on the comp' for what I am looking for. I should have put the model number of the Rising Tech in the other post. Robert
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2017 7:02:52 GMT
Hey daveg, I love posting up this "tip" ... The simple test is to lookup the specs from the camera manufacturer and find the sensor size in mm horizontal and vertical. Not the number of pixels ... you want the size in mm of the sensor itself. The 224 sensor is 4.8mm x 3.6mm and so ......here's the tip ... will behave in your scope (any scope) very similarly to a 4.8mm'ish eyepiece in that scope. Not exact, but very similar, and very handy to figure out if that cam will suit your kit. EG 4.8mm .... very high magnification, very narrowfield, tougher to focus, etc. Your DSLR sensor is 22.3 x 14.9mm so will behave in your scope (any scope) very similarly to a 22.3mm'ish eyepiece in that scope. IE much less magnification (nearly 5 times less mag in fact compared to the 224), much wider field of view (nearly 5 times more FOV in fact compared to the 224), easier to focus, etc. So with your reducer on you'll get most messier objects except the big ones using your DSLR. You'll only get a very few of them using the 224 based cameras cos it magnifies so much. But that 224 cam will be good for the very small stuff in the ngc and IC catalogues (although you could crop into the DSLR images of that very small stuff! Or use the 12dstring FOV website to check cameras and scope combo's ... google search for "12dstring fov calc" ... I'll throw up a vid to show you what a great tool that is (IMO) as I am bored today! LOL. Will post the vid link shortly. cheers Howie I haven't tested this personally, but the version of the "tip" I am familiar with says that the eyepiece equivalent focal length is 2x the sensor width in mm.
|
|
|
Post by howie1 on Sept 11, 2017 12:19:41 GMT
Hi Robert ... I didn't get to make the video demo'ing this as I had unexpected guests.
Give it a go sometime! It is not twice the FOV though ... unless perhaps they are using a 120 degree AFOV EP.
Its not precise, but yields a "very similar" FOV. Good enough for someone who is thinking of sticking a camera on a scope ... to get a pretty good idea how it will perform. EG they read on the forums about a particular camera everyone is raving about and buy it ... only to find it has way too much magnification on their scope. The quick test of sticking on an EP of same mm as the sensor, would have quickly shown them very close to how that camera would have performed in their scope (IE high magnification/narrow FOV) and alerted them to that issue.
Sticking in some scope camera details into the many online FOV generators shows this relationship. The Stellarium occular plugin with pixel sizes and other sensor data and OTA data shows the following FOV's for 60 degree AFOV EP's. If you go up to 80 degree AFOV EP's the FOV is a third more ... still fine for someone who has no idea if a camera will yield good view or not on their scope of choice ... a very close and easy to do check on their kit.
OTA .....Camera..........Larger (H) sensor dim.....Cam FOV..........EP details............................EP FOV ED80....Canon 650d.....22.3mm.........................2.1deg............60deg AFOV 22mm FL...........2.2deg ED80....ASI224.............4.8mm.........................0.47deg...........60deg AFOV 5mm FL.............0.5deg CPC8"...Canon 650d.....22.3mm.........................0.6deg............60deg AFOV 22mm FL............0.6deg CPC8"...ASI224.............4.8mm.........................0.14deg...........60deg AFOV 5mm FL.............0.1deg
Cheers
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2017 0:10:26 GMT
Hi Robert ... I didn't get to make the video demo'ing this as I had unexpected guests. Give it a go sometime! It is not twice the FOV though ... unless perhaps they are using a 120 degree AFOV EP. Its not precise, but yields a "very similar" FOV. Good enough for someone who is thinking of sticking a camera on a scope ... to get a pretty good idea how it will perform. EG they read on the forums about a particular camera everyone is raving about and buy it ... only to find it has way too much magnification on their scope. The quick test of sticking on an EP of same mm as the sensor, would have quickly shown them very close to how that camera would have performed in their scope (IE high magnification/narrow FOV) and alerted them to that issue. Sticking in some scope camera details into the many online FOV generators shows this relationship. The Stellarium occular plugin with pixel sizes and other sensor data and OTA data shows the following FOV's for 60 degree AFOV EP's. If you go up to 80 degree AFOV EP's the FOV is a third more ... still fine for someone who has no idea if a camera will yield good view or not on their scope of choice ... a very close and easy to do check on their kit. OTA .....Camera..........Larger (H) sensor dim.....Cam FOV..........EP details............................EP FOV ED80....Canon 650d.....22.3mm.........................2.1deg............60deg AFOV 22mm FL...........2.2deg ED80....ASI224.............4.8mm.........................0.47deg...........60deg AFOV 5mm FL.............0.5deg CPC8"...Canon 650d.....22.3mm.........................0.6deg............60deg AFOV 22mm FL............0.6deg CPC8"...ASI224.............4.8mm.........................0.14deg...........60deg AFOV 5mm FL.............0.1deg Cheers Great information Howie , can I ask with the 8" that is @ F10? So it will be a bigger field at F7 ? Thanks. dave.
|
|
|
Post by howie1 on Sept 13, 2017 10:37:30 GMT
Here you go dave ... made a short video using a great, free, online, visual FOV generator to show you how to easily get the info (HINT I actually put your scope, camera and reducer in to show the resulting FOV).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 11:55:29 GMT
Here you go dave ... made a short video using a great, free, online, visual FOV generator to show you how to easily get the info (HINT I actually put your scope, camera and reducer in to show the resulting FOV). Thanks Howie, that's absolutely fantastic! I will use that program to get a good feel of different cameras. But mainly stick with all the equipment I have. thanks again and I really enjoy your online videos great help. cheers, dave.
|
|