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

RE: [ccd-newastro] Re: Dedicated Autoguider vs Camera/Autoguider

Expand Messages
  • Ron Wodaski
    Yes, I should have said that you can have only one camera connected via a parallel port (even if you have multiple parallel ports). The STV uses a serial port.
    Message 1 of 13 , Sep 30, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Yes, I should have said that you can have only one camera connected via a
      parallel port (even if you have multiple parallel ports). The STV uses a
      serial port.

      SBIG is continually making changes to their drivers, and I suspect it's only
      a matter of time before this changes. But right now, if one camera is
      downloading, it really hogs the system (no matter how fast your computer is,
      this is true). Two cameras simply cannot download at the same time.

      Ron Wodaski
      The New CCD Astronomy
      http://www.newastro.com

      -----Original Message-----
      From: jamminjohn1@... [mailto:jamminjohn1@...]
      Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2001 6:52 PM
      To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: Dedicated Autoguider vs Camera/Autoguider


      You mentioned the current SBIG camera drivers permit only one camera
      per computer. But what about the STV? Can you run a ST-10E for
      imaging, and an STV for guiding off the same computer?

      John Morgan



      --- In ccd-newastro@y..., "Ron Wodaski" <ronw@n...> wrote:
      > No, the current SBIG camera drivers permit only one camera per
      computer.
      > This will change in the near future, but no details are available
      yet on
      > when, how, etc.
      >
      > Ron Wodaski
      > The New CCD Astronomy
      > http://www.newastro.com
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: richardl@w... [mailto:richardl@w...]
      > Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 11:49 PM
      > To: ccd-newastro@y...
      > Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: Dedicated Autoguider vs
      Camera/Autoguider
      >
      >
      > Can't you just add a second parallel port through a PC Card?
      >
      > This is something I've wondered myself. Can I run my ST-237 and ST-
      7E
      > at the same time off a single laptop: one CCD for imaging, one CCD
      > for guiding?
      >
      > - Richard Lawler
      >
      > --- In ccd-newastro@y..., Ivor Barker <ibarker@c...> wrote:
      > > The 237 does have an additional control box.
      > > My MX7-C and my ST-237 both have a parallel connector, so I have
      > to use 2 laptops if I use the ST-237 as a guider.
      > >
      > > --Ivor
      > > At 09:36 PM 9/28/2001 -0700, you wrote:
      > > >--- Ron Wodaski <ronw@n...> wrote:
      > > >> The ST-237A has many advantages. You can see the images it is
      > taking on a
      > > >> computer (think about that -- if you use the ST-4 without a
      > computer, you
      > > >> are determining whether you have a guide star based on esoteric
      > numeric
      > > >> readouts on a 4-character display! <g>). This is a great
      > advantage in
      > > >> assessing the quality of your guide star, and in positioning it
      > well. It
      > > >> just adds a lot of convenience. Plus, the chip is physically
      > larger, so you
      > > >> have more opportunity to find guide stars. Finally, those
      > smaller pixels
      > > >> provide a high degree of accuracy, so you can use a faster
      guide
      > scope with
      > > >> a smaller aperture and get better results.
      > > >
      > > >A friend has a Celestron Pixcell 255 (ST5c) and I've been tempted
      > to borrow it
      > > >and see if the tracking improves thanks to the smaller pixels.
      > That's my one
      > > >beef with my ST4- the pixels are bigger than I'd wish, and with
      my
      > 80/910
      > > >guidescope, I'm only getting 3.4 arc-secs/pixel resolution. Even
      > if the ST4 is
      > > >guiding to 1/5th pixel accuracy (= 1 on the display), that's an
      > error of 0.68
      > > >arc-secs.
      > > >
      > > >> As far as I can see, the two things that argue in favor of the
      > ST-4 are
      > > >> price and the ability to work without a computer.
      > > >
      > > >But don't underestimate the usefulness of being able to work
      > without a
      > > >computer. I suspect the ST4's control box uses less juice than a
      > (nother)
      > > >laptop, and I'm already finding that my imaging laptop sucks a
      lot
      > of life out
      > > >of my el grande deep cycle marine battery.
      > > >
      > > >Speaking of which, does the ST237 have a separate control box,
      > like the Pixcell
      > > >255? If so, then the addition of a laptop to the array of powered
      > devices would
      > > >be a significant issue.
      > > >
      > > >Cheers,
      > > >Paul Sterngold
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >__________________________________________________
      > > >Do You Yahoo!?
      > > >Listen to your Yahoo! Mail messages from any phone.
      > > >http://phone.yahoo.com
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > > >ccd-newastro-unsubscribe@egroups.com
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > ccd-newastro-unsubscribe@egroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      ccd-newastro-unsubscribe@egroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • billypatt@aol.com
      I have followed this thread with interest and understand the connection issues. What are the toughts on using a dedicated CCD camera as a autoguider? Say
      Message 2 of 13 , Oct 1, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        I have followed this thread with interest and understand the
        connection issues. What are the toughts on using a dedicated CCD
        camera as a autoguider? Say using a ST5, ST237 or MX516 in place of
        the second chip in the St7/8. Perhaps with a 80mm wide field guide
        scope. Wouldn't this be more sensitive and offer a wider FOV than
        the guiding chip on the ST7/8? All of these camera are listed in
        Maxim as guider choices.

        Regards,
        Bill Patterson
      • Ron Wodaski
        You have it exactly right. Many imagers do use those cameras in just that way, as external guiders. As long as you take care of mounting that guide scope and
        Message 3 of 13 , Oct 1, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          You have it exactly right. Many imagers do use those cameras in just that
          way, as external guiders. As long as you take care of mounting that guide
          scope and camera very solidly, it will to a very good job.

          Ron Wodaski
          The New CCD Astronomy
          http://www.newastro.com

          -----Original Message-----
          From: billypatt@... [mailto:billypatt@...]
          Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 2:24 PM
          To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: Dedicated Autoguider vs Camera/Autoguider


          I have followed this thread with interest and understand the
          connection issues. What are the toughts on using a dedicated CCD
          camera as a autoguider? Say using a ST5, ST237 or MX516 in place of
          the second chip in the St7/8. Perhaps with a 80mm wide field guide
          scope. Wouldn't this be more sensitive and offer a wider FOV than
          the guiding chip on the ST7/8? All of these camera are listed in
          Maxim as guider choices.

          Regards,
          Bill Patterson



          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          ccd-newastro-unsubscribe@egroups.com



          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        • Ron Wodaski
          The final content for chapter nine has been posted as PDF files on the book web site. This is a LARGE chapter with many figure, and most of them are very
          Message 4 of 13 , Oct 1, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            The final content for chapter nine has been posted as PDF files on the book
            web site. This is a LARGE chapter with many figure, and most of them are
            very large. Compression helps (the uncompressed file is about 190MB!!!), but
            the standard version is still 15MB, and the lo-rez version is 4.7MB.

            I have a new web site set up for downloads, and will move material there
            this week. This thing is just so darn big in so many ways! <g>

            I have also finished the edit/proofing of chapter 1, and those changes are
            posted to the web site in the form of updated PDF files. I did some
            judicious substitutions of B&W images for some that did not need to be
            color, and the file sizes for the standard and low-rez version shrunk
            considerably. The standard version went from 15MB to 6MB, and the low-rez
            version is down to just over 1MB. Not all chapters will realize this
            benefit; the latter chapters already have this optimization.

            I know you aren't seeing a whole lot of visible progress right now, but I am
            working furiously behind the scenes to get through the production phase. If
            I underestimated the writing phase somewhat, the production phase (with
            which I am less familiar) is _really_ a lot of work. I used to complain
            because my books took 3 months to get from written to printed form; I'm
            beginning to understand why that was the case.

            I continue to make progress as fast as I can, and will continue to post
            updates here as things move along.

            Ron Wodaski
            The New CCD Astronomy
            http://www.newastro.com
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.