How To Use Ccd Camera With Pc
#1 
Posted 05 September 2017 - 04:56 PM
Howdy,
I am a returner to amateur astrophotography. In the late eighty'south I bracketed many photos of the planets and a couple nebula with a 35 mm format and was proud to become a couple skilful shots. I had left the field for a number of reasons and now accept more time and coin to invest in the photography. I have seen many pictures that take been taken lately of the planets and deep heaven objects that have interested me to come back. I have a 14" Celestron that I would similar to hook up a CCD camera and download images onto a computer.
The question I have is how exercise you size up the camera to the computer and vice versa. Is high GB of Ram and a video card the virtually important variables to consider in the reckoner? Is the pixel number almost of import for a camera? I want room to grow with the computer simply want a good beginner or intermediate camera also to grow. The net has almost too much information to pinpoint my needs.
Whatever direction from current astrophotography would exist appreciated.
Sikaman
#2
Posted 05 September 2017 - 06:01 PM
Hello,
I am a returner to apprentice astrophotography. In the late 80's I bracketed many photos of the planets and a couple nebula with a 35 mm format and was proud to get a couple practiced shots. I had left the field for a number of reasons and now have more than time and coin to invest in the photography. I have seen many pictures that have been taken lately of the planets and deep heaven objects that accept interested me to come up back. I have a xiv" Celestron that I would like to hook up a CCD camera and download images onto a computer.
The question I accept is how do you size upward the camera to the computer and vice versa. Is high GB of Ram and a video carte the nigh important variables to consider in the computer? Is the pixel number nigh important for a camera? I want room to abound with the computer but desire a good beginner or intermediate photographic camera also to grow. The internet has virtually too much information to pinpoint my needs.
Whatsoever direction from current astrophotography would exist appreciated.
Sikaman
The moderators prefer that discussions of imaging take place in the Beginning and Intermediate Imaging forum. They'll probably movement this thread there. And you lot'll get ameliorate answers there. But, some answers to your specific questions, all prepare for the trip. <grin>
Pixel number, as such, is not important. For DSOs, what you desire to expect at is first, image scale, the number of arc seconds per pixel. Take the focal length divide by 200. Separate the pixel size by that number. Something in between 1 and 2, approximately, is good. It depends on your seeing. Second, you want to look at the field of view. Calculators like this make information technology like shooting fish in a barrel to summate, and run across how information technology works for various targets.
https://astronomy.to.../field_of_view/
For planets, the speed with which you tin accept frames is extremely of import. Meet the book recommended below. In general the best planetary cameras are specialized for that purpose.
The figurer you utilize for information acquisition demand not exist much. That'south realtime work, very deadening for the estimator. What counts nigh is a number of USB ports.
Processing your data is a different story. If you don't want to wait effectually, more computer power is better. Processing is at least half the game that makes imaging work.
Only, near important is this. The setup for imaging tiny brilliant planets, and that for imaging DSOs is completely different. The C14 is fine, fifty-fifty nifty, for planets. And it would be about the worst choice for getting into DSO imaging. It's long focal length, heavy, and slow. What y'all desire is brusk, light, and fast.
I cannot possibly emphasize that plenty. Many have gone downwards that road, the swell majority of them regret it.
Yous'll as well want an excellent mountain for DSOs. The two big mistakes DSO beginners make, are inadequate mounts, and too big a scope. Nosotros run into those over and over again here. Unfortunately AP of DSOs is just not intuitive.
That the tiniest of windows into AP. It's impossible to convey all the information you lot demand in brusque posts here. Books are better. Two excellent ones.
For DSOs.
https://www.amazon.c...due north/dp/148180491X
For planets. Completely unlike setups and techniques, practise not be deterred past the fact this says "DSLR", nearly of it applies to CCDs. The best entry level book I know, and my bookshelf is extensive.
http://www.astropix....gdpi/index.html
Curlicue down to the three images of Mars for a glimpse of the magic involved. "Lucky imaging" is the proper name.
Bottom line. Those pretty pictures don't come up easy. Information technology takes knowledge and experience. Time. I've been at this for three years, have dragged myself all the way upwards to average. <grin>
Edited by bobzeq25, 05 September 2017 - 06:12 PM.
#three
Posted 05 September 2017 - 06:49 PM
When I made my conclusion to "Shoot the Moon", I began looking into how. (I wasn't interested in the Moon, actually. I wanted to chase Orion.) It took me a month to determine I actually wanted to venture forth. Later all, the Internet can take you anywhere, and bear witness you anything. But those aren't your things.
Nebula are my fascination. So I knew what I hoped to accept pictures of. And to that end went my march.
My offset thought was bigger is meliorate. Wrong! As I continued my looking into how great Nebulae photographs were taken, the telescopes began shrinking. And the optics more and more refined.
Finally, I found myself looking for a telescope that is a great camera lens. Because that was what I wanted information technology to practice.
At the moment, I had my choice of a $1,000 bare telescope, or a $2,700 larger aperture telescope in the same league. Since I had a LOT of other things to go surrounding my decision, I opted for the lesser telescope. Trying to stretch my budget.
And I've been very happy I did!
I as well thought I could utilise my DSLR as my camera. I speedily learned it wasn't my best choice, and wound upwards getting a cooled CCD camera specifically for my new telescope. Merely I chose a crappy camera.
Recently a skillful friend loaned me one of his Atik Infinity camera'due south. I had already spent 2 years learning guiding, and ironing out the quirks of my mount. When that camera met my telescope, everything clicked into place.
While my equipment is beginner level, I practise have my skills and abilities honed to a fine chorus with information technology. Finally getting to paradigm deep infinite with a decent camera was amazing!
And then in a nutshell, I ask what you think you might similar to image of the night skies. Because it makes a big difference in what you may want to look at.
Then buy/build toward that end.
I decided a refractor was what I wanted. I wanted to take one shot at it. And through a lot of perseverance, I manged to brand it work out.
Where would you lot like to go and what would you lot like to Image?
Welcome back! It's like riding a Bike. Y'all didn't forget.
But the Bicycles have inverse a bit.....
#4
Posted 05 September 2017 - 08:03 PM
Thank yous both for your insight and experience.
The pictures I took 25+ years ago was with a C8 and eyepiece projection photography. Since then I picked up a C11Edge and a C14 XLT that is Fastar uniform. I refurbished a 23 year old dome and built a building around it. The C14 is on a CGEM DX mount on a tripod now and I am finishing pouring a 18" diameter physical pier to mount it on soon.
I estimate if I were to programme what I would focus on is both the planets and deep sky objects. The planets will probably be short lived for me merely with the kids are the most pop. I volition be trying to get the local people involved in gazing. I retrieve my personal passion will be star clusters, nebula and galaxies.
I will get a fast i7 reckoner with 16G of ram. I was looking into the Canon ESO 60D/60Da for the milky way and wider fields or an CCD Camera like a SBIG but I am not committed to annihilation correct now. I would like to get something to abound into...over the next couple years. The C14 I encounter would be adept for planets. I was trying to use it for both planets and DSOs. Peradventure use the C11Edge for the DSOs with the flat field? Tin can you lot go enough sky with reducing lens, or exist fast enough with the Fastar option? ... Or should I exist looking for an additional scope for Deep Sky?
Sikaman
#five
Posted 05 September 2017 - 08:21 PM
BobZEQ25,
I ordered both the books
Thanks,
Sikaman
#half dozen
Posted 05 September 2017 - 10:22 PM
Thank you both for your insight and feel.
The pictures I took 25+ years ago was with a C8 and eyepiece projection photography. Since then I picked up a C11Edge and a C14 XLT that is Fastar uniform. I refurbished a 23 year old dome and built a edifice around it. The C14 is on a CGEM DX mount on a tripod now and I am finishing pouring a 18" diameter concrete pier to mountain information technology on presently.
I guess if I were to programme what I would focus on is both the planets and deep sky objects. The planets volition probably exist brusk lived for me but with the kids are the most popular. I will exist trying to get the local people involved in gazing. I call up my personal passion volition be star clusters, nebula and galaxies.
I volition get a fast i7 estimator with 16G of ram. I was looking into the Canon ESO 60D/60Da for the milky way and wider fields or an CCD Camera like a SBIG but I am not committed to anything correct now. I would like to become something to grow into...over the next couple years. The C14 I see would be practiced for planets. I was trying to use it for both planets and DSOs. Maybe use the C11Edge for the DSOs with the flat field? Can you get plenty sky with reducing lens, or exist fast enough with the Fastar option? ... Or should I be looking for an additional telescopic for Deep Sky?
Sikaman
You definitely should go a curt, lite, and fast telescopic for starting out in DSO AP. And a good mount. This is not a close call.
Hither are some sample quotes (I collect them to advise beginners) from people who tried starting out with SCTs for learning DSO imaging. Note the reference to time in the starting time ii. That'south a big deal. If your goal is to image small galaxies with the SCT, you lot'll reach it faster if you start with a minor scope, and large bright targets. Information technology will brand learning much easier/faster.
"Of all the recommendations though, if you want to go into imaging and then a short imaging refractor is probably the all-time 1 (IMHO). I have a C8 and this was the telescopic I learned AP on. It was a long, tough struggle and I have no good pictures to bear witness for it. I could have easily saved a year by starting with a more than prototype-friendly scope."
"I'yard biased as I wasted two years starting out with a C11. Later on I sold information technology and bought a 660mm refractor I was up and running 2nd or 3rd dark out."
2 more. These are people who started out with an SCT, had bug, and switched gears.
"I made the mistake of trying to learn how to shoot with an F/10 SCT, an EdgeHD 8". I spent six months struggling with that, and so I made the switch to a William Optics Star 71 F/four.9 and I couldn't be happier with the results! IMO, I think if you're just staring out AP, you would definitely accept an easier time learning with a refractor."
"If you lot're new to astrophotography I highly recommend getting a small refractor. It'due south much lighter on the mount, incredibly easier to guide, easier to shoot with, no coma, better images. I used an eight" SCT for my starting time 7 months of astronomy/astrophotography and it was headaches. I just got an 80mm stellarvue triplet refractor and my first image is bangin' compared to my previous ones. Blows my SCT'southward out of the water, which I honestly don't think I'll exist using for a long time."
Fastar could theoretically work, but I don't recommend information technology. It's a choosy thing to get to work well, more an expert tool. The small refractor is recommended by the great majority of the experts who write "how to get started in AP of DSOs" books. The simple, proven tool.
Edited past bobzeq25, 05 September 2017 - ten:25 PM.
#seven
Posted 06 September 2017 - 03:51 PM
Thanks for your input once more.
I will read the AP books. With a refractor what aperture would be a minimum for AP of DSOs? what are the names that I would not get in trouble with?
#8
Posted 06 September 2017 - 04:17 PM
Thank you for your input again.
I will read the AP books. With a refractor what aperture would be a minimum for AP of DSOs? what are the names that I would non make it problem with?
People shoot fine images with the AT65EDQ, $650. There'due south a new, even cheaper, starter scope, the AT72ED Version two.
https://www.astronom...-f6_p20533.aspx
This is goose egg at all like visual. Long exposures change everything. Many people consider an lxxx an ideal starter telescopic. A good short focal length scope will be useful as a wide angle imager for big targets even after you become something bigger. Or perhaps serve equally a guidescope.
Hither'due south an image of mine with a 70. An first-class 70 (Stellarvue SV70T), but withal, a 70. This was with a reducer, 335mm focal length. Shot from my light polluted lawn with a DSLR. And, with two years experience. <grinning>
Astronomics is a good deal brand, Stellarvue high end (non the highest), William Eyes is in betwixt. The specific scope is more important than the brand, of course.
Edited by bobzeq25, 06 September 2017 - 04:26 PM.
#nine
Posted 06 September 2017 - 05:10 PM
I do propose going to a site such as Astronomy Tools and utilise their *imaging* tab reckoner to run into what things fit with a particular F/L telescopic and photographic camera philharmonic.
Bob'south image of Andromeda is smashing, only Andromeda is *huge*. If you're interested in Galaxies, annihilation else (OK, mayhap not M33) shot at 335 mm volition wait very small.
That said, a brusk refractor of about 80mm is great for starting.
#ten
Posted 06 September 2017 - 06:33 PM
Offset, Bob,
Cheers once again for your information. I looked at the astronomics website an there is some corking reading on many subjects. I also went on the astrobin site and saw many great pictures taken past you. What scope mount and camera are you using?
Soyuz,
I went on the Astronomy tools and I recall this is the greatest. I did not realize that in that location are sites that aid with the image size. I can encounter will be extremely useful.
Ranger four,
Also your comments volition be taken in adept spirit.
Thank you,
#11
Posted 06 September 2017 - 06:47 PM
Starting time, Bob,
Give thanks y'all over again for your data. I looked at the astronomics website an there is some nifty reading on many subjects. I also went on the astrobin site and saw many slap-up pictures taken by you. What telescopic mount and camera are you using?
Click on the thumbnail and a larger image will come with (usually) all the details. They vary.
#12
Posted 07 September 2017 - 08:56 AM
Sorry for asking and so many questions only I am pouring the peak of the pier this weekend and want to brand the selection on a mounting interface that will work with a refractor.
Bob,
The iOptron CEM60 appears to be a skillful mount. I looked at it at just over $2k
Soyez,
The Mach 1 GTO is what you are using. This appeared quite a fleck more.
With the mounts what are the nearly important items that you feel makes the mount?... Or what sold you on the mount selection. Lets presume it is for a 4 or 5" refractor.
Thanks,
Sikaman
#13
Posted 07 September 2017 - 09:07 AM
Hello,
I am a returner to apprentice astrophotography. In the belatedly eighty's I bracketed many photos of the planets and a couple nebula with a 35 mm format and was proud to get a couple good shots. I had left the field for a number of reasons and at present have more time and coin to invest in the photography. I have seen many pictures that have been taken lately of the planets and deep sky objects that have interested me to come back. I have a 14" Celestron that I would like to hook upward a CCD camera and download images onto a computer.
The question I take is how do you size up the camera to the computer and vice versa. Is high GB of Ram and a video card the most of import variables to consider in the computer? Is the pixel number nigh important for a camera? I want room to grow with the computer but want a good beginner or intermediate photographic camera also to abound. The internet has virtually too much information to pinpoint my needs.
Any management from electric current astrophotography would be appreciated.
Sikaman
welcome your at a expert place for returning info. I too did 35mm deepsky film imaging in the 80s and took off 25 years waiting for todays gear.
bobzeq25 and others will be very helpful.
#14
Posted 07 September 2017 - 10:04 AM
Sorry for request so many questions but I am pouring the elevation of the pier this weekend and want to brand the selection on a mounting interface that will piece of work with a refractor.
Bob,
The iOptron CEM60 appears to be a proficient mount. I looked at it at just over $2k
Soyez,
The Mach i GTO is what you are using. This appeared quite a bit more than.
With the mounts what are the most important items that you feel makes the mountain?... Or what sold you on the mount pick. Lets presume it is for a 4 or 5" refractor.
Thank you,
Sikaman
There are a lot of things that make a mount expert. The fundamental one is how accurate information technology is. It'south hard to make gears that precise, which is ane reason why, even with a proficient mountain, imagers more often than not autoguide. Information technology'south not trivial to make sure the two axes are exactly perpendicular. Bearings come in diverse qualities. Some people care a lot about the appearance of the outside.
The mount needs to be aligned with the North Pole, some mounts are better. The new PoleMaster makes this less of a concern. The mount is a computer that can GOTO your targets automatically, some mounts do that amend. With more than and more than people using platesolving for pointing, that too is less of import.
Obviously mounts can exist larger or smaller, for different weight chapters.
The bottom line is that this is hard to evaluate. There are a lot of variables, and few (no?) side by side comparisons. The saving grace is that you by and large get what you pay for, price is a pretty reliable guide to quality.
All of which explains why the usual advice is to go the best you can afford and bear. <smile>
Edited by bobzeq25, 07 September 2017 - x:06 AM.
#15
Posted 07 September 2017 - 02:52 PM
Sorry for asking and so many questions just I am pouring the elevation of the pier this weekend and want to brand the selection on a mounting interface that will work with a refractor.
Bob,
The iOptron CEM60 appears to be a expert mount. I looked at it at just over $2k
Soyez,
The Mach 1 GTO is what you are using. This appeared quite a scrap more than.
With the mounts what are the virtually important items that you feel makes the mount?... Or what sold y'all on the mount choice. Lets assume information technology is for a 4 or five" refractor.
Thanks,
Sikaman
Hi--get-go, FYI, the name of the poster is *to a higher place* the post (to the left), so "Soyuz" is only an indicator CN adds as to how many posts one has made, and my name is Stelios. 
The Mach1 GTO is an expensive premium mount. I chose it for diverse reasons: Proven (early versions accept been out for at to the lowest degree xx years although they've evolved to go on upwards with advances), consistency for tracking, depression periodic error (correctable), *very lightweight for its load-bearing capacity* (especially important to me), through-the-mountain cabling (important for AP), built-in WiFi, ability to balance extremely well, very accurate alt-az controls for polar alignment, superb lifetime back up, high resale value.
I wouldn't recommend such an expensive mountain, however, unless you are both comfy with the expense and committed to the hobby. There are other "sub-premium" mounts (this doesn't hateful 2nd-rate) for less than one-half the price which should be more than than good enough to begin. This is a very expensive hobby (mountain, telescope, reducers, auto-focusers (and focuser upgrades usually), guiding arrangement, camera, filter wheel, filters, calculator, cabling, software... so it's good to budget wisely.
For your load (4" to 5" refractor) your best options are:
Mass-market best: Skywatcher EQ6-R-pro (heavy head if mobile)
Sub-premium all-time: iOptron CEM-60 and Losmandy GM811G or Losmandy G11
Premium: Mach1 GTO or Paramount MyT or Avalon Linear.
#16
Posted 07 September 2017 - 05:30 PM
Bob, Stelios,
Thanks for letting me know almost the poster name vs the existent proper name. A Newbie thing... I only put my picture of the "Sky Farmer Observatory" that I am working on. It is in n side of the field.
I have had the best luck in purchasing the better or best equipment in the past and volition follow that pb.
The computer specs I am thinking of are a I7 processor, 16 MB Ram and a 512 SSD hardrive. Do you have any experience for what is needed to download images fast from the CCD Camera?
And.. what exercise yous look for in a CCD Camera? pixel size? self guiding? speed of processing?
#17
Posted 07 September 2017 - 05:51 PM
If you are not imaging with video, your capture pc does non need to be anything special. I have 2 mounts and both are run with basic mini pcs that I login remotely to control. One mount is run with a $190 minux and the other a $350 compute stick.
I sit down in bed and monitor my gear and then go to sleep and allow the little computers run everything all night long. :-)
If you plan to do a lot of video, ameliorate specs are helpful, just if you lot download an image every 60 seconds or 5 minutes... It doesn't require much horsepower.
#18
Posted 07 September 2017 - 09:32 PM
Bob, Stelios,
Thanks for letting me know about the affiche name vs the real proper name. A Newbie thing... I just put my picture of the "Sky Farmer Observatory" that I am working on. Information technology is in n side of the field.
I have had the best luck in purchasing the improve or best equipment in the past and will follow that lead.
The computer specs I am thinking of are a I7 processor, xvi MB Ram and a 512 SSD hardrive. Do you have any feel for what is needed to download images fast from the CCD Camera?
And.. what do you look for in a CCD Camera? pixel size? cocky guiding? speed of processing?
As has been said, a data acquisition figurer doesn't demand much. Processing (at to the lowest degree half the game) is a different story. Extremely reckoner intensive. Most of us accept an inexpensive data acquisition laptop or similar, and a high ability desktop for processing.
For the CCD photographic camera. Qualities are: Image scale with your scope. Divide the focal length past 200. Dissever the pixel size past the result. 1-2 arc sec per pixel is a skillful range. I usually image betwixt 0.65 and ii.4. Lower numbers are but useful in skillful seeing.
Field of view. This will simulate views of various objects.
https://astronomy.to.../field_of_view/
Low read noise.
A few people use self guiding CCDs. Most prefer to carve up those functions. Otherwise your choice of camera is very limited.
Speed is meaningless for DSOs, crucial for planetary.
And, of grade, cost.
Edited by bobzeq25, 07 September 2017 - 09:33 PM.
#19
Posted 07 September 2017 - 11:42 PM
Bob, Stelios,
Cheers for letting me know about the poster proper noun vs the real proper noun. A Newbie thing... I just put my film of the "Heaven Farmer Observatory" that I am working on. It is in northward side of the field.
I take had the best luck in purchasing the better or best equipment in the past and volition follow that atomic number 82.
The reckoner specs I am thinking of are a I7 processor, 16 MB Ram and a 512 SSD hardrive. Exercise you accept whatever experience for what is needed to download images fast from the CCD Camera?
And.. what do y'all look for in a CCD Camera? pixel size? self guiding? speed of processing?
You tin can't become wrong with premium mounts. And they do agree their value well.
For *acquisition* (getting the pictures) you lot basically demand a few USB ports, including at least ane USB3. Speed of processor and quantity of RAM are unimportant. I wouldn't want less than 500GB HD. If you volition go to star parties (just fifty-fifty from home), I propose a *red backlit keyboard*.
For *processing* y'all'd desire an i7 and (ideally) 32GB RAM and an SSD. Especially if you'll use Pixinsight which is the most avant-garde processing software. You'll also desire to support high-res (4K and to a higher place) monitors.
Most people have different computers for acquisition and processing. It'south cheaper to go great power in a desktop than a laptop.
For photographic camera... if you have big pockets, information technology'due south very difficult. The sky (literally) is the limit. The absolute top brands are FLI and Apogee, and they take cameras that accomplish well into the 5 figures. Just below is QSI. There are a lot of parameters, not least of which is the sensor size. Pixel size relates very much to what scope you accept and what type of object you will image. Read near image scale (the Deep Sky Imaging Primer is a skilful book that covers that).
I would *strongly* suggest that you lot don't *showtime* at the elevation. Your desires volition evolve. At that place's not a single "all-time." A very good introductory packet is offered past ZWO (ASI1600MM-Cooled with EFW8 (8-position Electronic Filter Cycle) *and* filters). This is though hard to recommend to someone starting because of the complication. A good selection for a starting color camera is the ZWO ASI071 ($i,380), a *cooled* photographic camera which reduces dissonance a lot, with APS-C (DSLR-sized) format. A DSLR is another option, just the lack of cooling makes them suboptimal. If yous have one, specially a Canon or Nikon, they're ideal for learning.
The above are for DSO imaging, for which download speed is a non-issue. For planetary, you want something like the ASI-224MC, a small-sensor camera with a high frame rate using USB3. DSLR's tin likewise be used for planetary equally long as they tin can take videos (which are stacked via software).
Other than the mountain, the just recommendation that makes sense is to read and learn earlier you spend too much coin. If I was starting again but with deeper pockets, I would have got a Stellarvue 80mm triplet, a flattener for it, some sort of guidescope with a QHY-5LII camera, and for a camera the ASI071MC-Cool mentioned already. It would take quite some time to outgrow this arrangement, coupled with a decent mount. Sprinkle as well a high-performance focuser (Moonlite or Feathertouch) with a stepper motor, for the actress touch of perfect.
#20
Posted 08 September 2017 - 08:50 AM
Guys,
Thank you for your specifically focused information. This is what I have been looking for. I will read the books that bob listed, I promise they come up in soon. I will review all the equipment that each of you have and the ones mentioned in your responses. I take computers that volition fit the *acquisition* requirements and some slower desktops that will suffice for now for *processing*.
I will exist reviewing the CCD cameras , refractors and a solid mounts. The advice of a refractor for DSO AP seems to be somewhat counter intuitive to my original thoughts, where more light is e'er amend so this advice is priceless. Give me some time to digest this info. I expect forwards to talking to you all once more once I get up to speed.
The forum people at Cloudy Nights are splendid. I cannot wait for my showtime pictures.
Cheers Once again,
Sikaman
#21
Posted 08 September 2017 - 02:38 PM
Guys,
Thanks for your specifically focused information. This is what I take been looking for. I will read the books that bob listed, I hope they come up in presently. I volition review all the equipment that each of you accept and the ones mentioned in your responses. I accept computers that will fit the *acquisition* requirements and some slower desktops that will suffice for now for *processing*.
I will be reviewing the CCD cameras , refractors and a solid mounts. The advice of a refractor for DSO AP seems to exist somewhat counter intuitive to my original thoughts, where more light is e'er amend so this advice is priceless. Give me some fourth dimension to digest this info. I look forrad to talking to you all once more once I go up to speed.
The forum people at Cloudy Nights are excellent. I cannot wait for my first pictures.
Thanks Again,
Sikaman
Only a brief guide to future thinking. This is counterintuitive. And extraordinarily complicated, part of the charm for many of united states. You could never run out of things to learn.
Information technology'southward not that aperture itself is bad. It's the side effects due to longer focal length and more weight are bad, for learning the difficult art of astrophotography. They make a difficult task more difficult, and you don't want to do that.
And it is true that aperture is substantially less of import than information technology is in visual. Your eyes have a brusque fixed exposure, and need lots of light very fast. The photographic camera can largely compensate past merely increasing the exposure. Long exposures are the source of the amazing pictures, They're broken downwardly into subexposures, merely the longer the full imaging time, the better. That's how the magic happens. <smile>
Edited by bobzeq25, 08 September 2017 - 02:forty PM.
#22
Posted xxx September 2017 - 10:25 AM
If it's a longer focal length you are looking for I would consider the EdgeHD line of scopes for what fits your upkeep. Gives you the pick of longer focal length, or going hyperstar for wider field F/2 imaging. Aye this is a more than complicated setup to learn on, it isn't incommunicable. Only realize yous have a lot more obstacles to overcome with longer focal length SCT imaging, and it's not ideal to showtime off with. If your prepared for a lot of time spent calibrating, precision guiding, testing, and experimenting, along with losing a lot of subs in the procedure of learning due to guiding errors and such until you work that out, then you can certainly starting time with an SCT.
I did information technology, and with much less of a mountain at that, and nevertheless produced several pictures I thought were simply fantastic for what I had to work with. It made imaging with an APO much easier when I eventually picked ane up. Like yous withal, I am not completely satisfied with it'due south wider FOV. I recently discovered however that a mono photographic camera and narrowband filter setup will open your broad field imaging possibilities upward 100x. I do adopt to paradigm galaxy however, so I will exist picking up an 8 or 9.25" SCT to supplant my six" in the near futurity, and have both an SCT and APO to paradigm with.
#23
Posted 30 September 2017 - 11:23 AM
Sikaman,
I've very much enjoyed reading your thread as I'one thousand at a similar stage in my arroyo to astrophotography. Having simply invested a pregnant portion of our own budget in a Mach1GTO mountain, and seeing that you are preparing for a fixed mount in a dedicated observatory, I would definitely recommend this over any of the alternatives discussed so far. The just significant drawback is the cost, but since y'all are already committing to pouring concrete, I just wanted to share my impression that it is a solid investment.
-Stuart
#24
Posted 05 Oct 2017 - 04:56 PM
Stuwart,
Solid investment with a solid foundation. The Mach1 GTO Mount is non out of range. I will review what is out there in the next few months and/or just see if it is but ameliorate to buy new. I have been on the Astro-Physics website. I would like a mount that tin can be used for both a iv to 5 " refractor and a C14.
How do you like the ZWO Camera and guider? Correct now I am spreading out the outlay in a number of directions just a photographic camera is in the nearly future.
I am also a male parent girl team with a younger son that may also pick it up, he is very competitive. Information technology volition take us a few more than months on the building and equipment before I recall we will see results. Getting set up for winter clearer skies.
Cheers for your input.
Sikaman
#25
Posted 05 October 2017 - 06:31 PM
Sean13,'
Thanks for your input also. I cannot expect for my pier plates from Dans Piers. Information technology should be here soon. I will be setting upwards the scopes I have for now and volition invest in a good refractor in the future. The pier is so solid it would exist a shame not to put one of the best quality mounts on it. The Mach1 GTO looks swell but having difficulty on quantifying the needed extras... more research. I have read that the mono ccd photographic camera may be the way to go.
Sikaman
Source: https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/590758-ccd-camera-and-the-computer/
Posted by: thompsonwhirds.blogspot.com
0 Response to "How To Use Ccd Camera With Pc"
Post a Comment