Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Microscope] Re: KODAK MDS100

Expand Messages
  • Gordon Couger
    Jay, The Kodak is CCD and the Logitech is CMOS. COMS is a lot nosier. C mount lenses are a great advantage because you can use a wide array of lens and
    Message 1 of 18 , Aug 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Jay,

      The Kodak is CCD and the Logitech is CMOS. COMS is a lot nosier. C mount
      lenses are a great advantage because you can use a wide array of lens and
      extension rings for macro photography. Twice the resolution is a lot of
      increase. It is more than 4 times the camera for 4 times the money at $191.
      I just ordered one.

      The down side to the Kodak is there is not likely to ever be any third
      party software for it. With them being sold off by surplus outlets I doubt
      that they will be any more manufactured and no new development is going on
      with them. The later models will fall in price to fill the $500 price range
      very soon.

      That said you are getting very good results with the 50 dollar camera. If
      one gets to chasing quality money spends like water. If it suits you it is
      good enough.

      Gordon

      Gordon Couger
      Stillwater, OK
      www.couger.com/gcouger
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Jay Stanley" <jstanley@...>
      To: <Microscope@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 11:30 PM
      Subject: Re: [Microscope] Re: KODAK MDS100


      > I can't debate the Kodak interline transfer, progressive scan CCD with
      > square
      > pixels is a distinct advantage because I don't have that info on the
      > Logitech. All I'm pointing out is that to some of us the $495.00 is more
      > than some of us spent on our scopes, and the going Ebay price of $195.00
      or
      > so could be spent on other goodies, and still get very reasonable pics
      with
      > a few mods to a webcam for under $50.00.
      > I've just started this hobby so gorgive my ingnorance if this seems
      > argumentative, but I've been very happy with the images I've made, and
      hope
      > to be even more excited once I get the darn lens off :)
      > Best to you and yours
      > Jay
      > PS..I've posted some pics at the group site and some at my home page
      > http://home.mmcable.com/ndo , just look for "Microscopy another hobby"
      link.
      > the vignetting issue should be cured when the lens is removed.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
    • Jay Stanley
      Gordon, I d be interested in seeing some of the images from the Kodak once you have it up and running (the pics at the Kodak website for the MDS didn t do much
      Message 2 of 18 , Aug 1, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Gordon,
        I'd be interested in seeing some of the images from the Kodak once you have
        it up and running (the pics at the Kodak website for the MDS didn't do much
        for me), and thanks for setting the record straight. I'll post some more
        results when I have my QuickCam mods done.
        I've got to put in an electric fence for my mother-in-law today so mods will
        be tomorrow, I hope.
        Beat the Heat
        Jay
      • larryrichardk@yahoo.com
        Jay, maybe I ll try that for MY mother-in-law. Thanks for the tip ;) Larry ... mods will
        Message 3 of 18 , Aug 1, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Jay, maybe I'll try that for MY mother-in-law. Thanks for the tip ;)

          Larry

          --- In Microscope@y..., "Jay Stanley" <jstanley@m...> wrote:

          > I've got to put in an electric fence for my mother-in-law today so
          mods will
          > be tomorrow, I hope.
          > Beat the Heat
          > Jay
        • larryrichardk@yahoo.com
          I might try that for MY mother-in-law. Thanks for the tip ;) Larry Richard ... mods will
          Message 4 of 18 , Aug 1, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            I might try that for MY mother-in-law. Thanks for the tip ;)

            Larry Richard


            --- In Microscope@y..., "Jay Stanley" <jstanley@m...> wrote:

            > I've got to put in an electric fence for my mother-in-law today so
            mods will
            > be tomorrow, I hope.
            > Beat the Heat
            > Jay
          • Chas. M. Bee
            ... Y know, I almost said that...
            Message 5 of 18 , Aug 1, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              larryrichardk@... wrote:
              >
              > Jay, maybe I'll try that for MY mother-in-law. Thanks for the tip ;)
              >
              > Larry

              Y'know, I almost said that...
            • Krupptus
              At 12:02 AM 8/1/01 -0700, you wrote: At 02:57 AM 8/1/01 +0000, you wrote:Please fill me in, what does chilling the CCD chip achieve? I am aware of chilling
              Message 6 of 18 , Aug 1, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                At 12:02 AM 8/1/01 -0700, you wrote:
                >At 02:57 AM 8/1/01 +0000, you wrote:

                Please fill me in, what does chilling the CCD chip achieve? I am aware of
                chilling CPU's, to be able to push the chip to higher speeds as I still
                have a 366a over clocked to 550. I know you are gaining performance from
                the chip some how, please explain a little bit what this achieves. Thanks,
                Kruppt

                <<SNIP>>
                >CCD Peltier chilled (as a tinkerer's project). I see the C-mount lens as an
                >advantage, too.
                <<SNIP>>
                >Michael


                _________________________________________________________
                Do You Yahoo!?
                Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com
              • Krupptus
                I do beleive the Logitech QuickCam Pro has a CCD sensor. Some of the cheaper web cams do have the CMOS, But the particular cam Jay has brought to the attention
                Message 7 of 18 , Aug 1, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  I do beleive the Logitech QuickCam Pro has a CCD sensor.
                  Some of the cheaper web cams do have the CMOS, But the particular cam Jay has
                  brought to the attention of this group does have a CCD sensor.

                  http://www.everythingusb.com/hardware/index/Logitech_QuickCam_Pro.htm

                  <SNIPPED>
                  Logitech QuickCam Pro
                  New PC Video Camera Sets New Standards
                  The newly designed camera features a high-resolution 640 x 480 (VGA) CCD
                  sensor.
                  <SNIPPED>

                  At 04:46 AM 8/1/01 -0500, you wrote:
                  >Jay,
                  >
                  >The Kodak is CCD and the Logitech is CMOS. COMS is a lot nosier. C mount
                  >lenses are a great advantage because you can use a wide array of lens and
                  >extension rings for macro photography. Twice the resolution is a lot of
                  >increase. It is more than 4 times the camera for 4 times the money at $191.
                  >I just ordered one.
                  >
                  >The down side to the Kodak is there is not likely to ever be any third
                  >party software for it. With them being sold off by surplus outlets I doubt
                  >that they will be any more manufactured and no new development is going on
                  >with them. The later models will fall in price to fill the $500 price range
                  >very soon.
                  >
                  >That said you are getting very good results with the 50 dollar camera. If
                  >one gets to chasing quality money spends like water. If it suits you it is
                  >good enough.
                  >
                  >Gordon
                  >
                  >Gordon Couger
                  >Stillwater, OK
                  >www.couger.com/gcouger
                  >----- Original Message -----
                  >From: "Jay Stanley" <jstanley@...>
                  >To: <Microscope@yahoogroups.com>
                  >Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 11:30 PM
                  >Subject: Re: [Microscope] Re: KODAK MDS100
                  >
                  >
                  >> I can't debate the Kodak interline transfer, progressive scan CCD with
                  >> square
                  >> pixels is a distinct advantage because I don't have that info on the
                  >> Logitech. All I'm pointing out is that to some of us the $495.00 is more
                  >> than some of us spent on our scopes, and the going Ebay price of $195.00
                  >or
                  >> so could be spent on other goodies, and still get very reasonable pics
                  >with
                  >> a few mods to a webcam for under $50.00.
                  >> I've just started this hobby so gorgive my ingnorance if this seems
                  >> argumentative, but I've been very happy with the images I've made, and
                  >hope
                  >> to be even more excited once I get the darn lens off :)
                  >> Best to you and yours
                  >> Jay
                  >> PS..I've posted some pics at the group site and some at my home page
                  >> http://home.mmcable.com/ndo , just look for "Microscopy another hobby"
                  >link.
                  >> the vignetting issue should be cured when the lens is removed.
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  >
                  >

                  _________________________________________________________
                  Do You Yahoo!?
                  Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com
                • David Sykes
                  ... In CCD s photons of light dislodge electrons which are then collected in a bucket for a set length of time. In modern cameras, this exposure time is
                  Message 8 of 18 , Aug 1, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In Microscope@y..., Krupptus <krupptus@y...> wrote:


                    > Please fill me in, what does chilling the CCD chip achieve?

                    In CCD's photons of light dislodge electrons which are then collected
                    in a 'bucket' for a set length of time. In modern cameras, this
                    exposure time is varied so that the 'bucket' does not 'overflow'as
                    the light intensity varies over a wide range. Very low levels of
                    light barely produce a perceptible level in the bucket so
                    in 'special' cameras the shutter is left open longer to gather-up
                    more photons. Unfortunately, electrons are also generated purely by
                    temperature effects and at room temperature could be more numerous
                    than those forming the image, leading to an overall 'fog' and no
                    visible image. By cooling the sensor these rogue electrons are
                    reduced and long exposure times are then possible for Astronomy and
                    low-light microscopy such as fluorescence (did I spell that
                    correctly?).

                    As local calls in the UK are not free, I am about to be cut off at 8
                    a.m.!

                    Regards,

                    David
                  • Krupptus
                    Thanks David, That is what I needed to know, excellent explanation, very informative and I do appreciate the response.At 06:57 AM 8/2/01 -0000, you wrote:
                    Message 9 of 18 , Aug 2, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Thanks David, That is what I needed to know, excellent explanation, very
                      informative and I do appreciate the response.



                      At 06:57 AM 8/2/01 -0000, you wrote:
                      >--- In Microscope@y..., Krupptus <krupptus@y...> wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      >> Please fill me in, what does chilling the CCD chip achieve?
                      >
                      >In CCD's photons of light dislodge electrons which are then collected
                      >in a 'bucket' for a set length of time. In modern cameras, this
                      >exposure time is varied so that the 'bucket' does not 'overflow'as
                      >the light intensity varies over a wide range. Very low levels of
                      >light barely produce a perceptible level in the bucket so
                      >in 'special' cameras the shutter is left open longer to gather-up
                      >more photons. Unfortunately, electrons are also generated purely by
                      >temperature effects and at room temperature could be more numerous
                      >than those forming the image, leading to an overall 'fog' and no
                      >visible image. By cooling the sensor these rogue electrons are
                      >reduced and long exposure times are then possible for Astronomy and
                      >low-light microscopy such as fluorescence (did I spell that
                      >correctly?).
                      >
                      >As local calls in the UK are not free, I am about to be cut off at 8
                      >a.m.!
                      >
                      >Regards,
                      >
                      > David


                      _________________________________________________________
                      Do You Yahoo!?
                      Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.