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

Re: Digital SLR versus dedicated CCD imager?

Expand Messages
  • htrott
    Hi Danny: Thanks for the follow-up, and I also appreciate the other helpful replies to my query. I have another burning question related to my investment in a
    Message 1 of 13 , May 31, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Danny:

      Thanks for the follow-up, and I also appreciate the other
      helpful replies to my query.

      I have another burning question related to my investment
      in a new scope and imager, which I will put in a new thread.

      Thanks,
      Howard.

      --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, "dannysperry" <danny@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Howard,
      >
      > Glad I could be of some help.
      >
      > The thing about Meade mounts is that some are great and some are not
      > so great. Even with the great ones, you can expect about 20+
      > arcseconds of periodic error... which is fine for that mount. Using
      > PEC effectively will bring that down. I understand the ASII PEC
      > routines are more robust these days, too. I owned a LX200 and an
      > LX200GPS (both 10") and was able to successfully guide some of the
      > time. I was even able to take 5-minute guided images with tweaking of
      > the mount (adjusting gear mesh, regreasing, replacing the spur gears,
      > etc.).
      >
      > It's definitely not impossible but it's not usually a matter of
      > throwing the camera on the back of the scope and away you go, either
      > (but that's not usually the case with any mount, I suppose). By all
      > means don't be discouraged by anything I'm saying... I'm basing this
      > on my experience with 2 scopes and anecdotes from the users in the
      > various LX200 groups. Then there are people like Mark de Regt who
      > have had great success with Meade scopes.
      >
      > I would try it without doing anything to the mount and watch closely
      > how it responds to guiding. Then start tweaking the anti-backlash
      > settings and PEC.
      >
      > Hope that helps a little bit (more). :)
      >
      > Best,
      > Danny
    • john walton
      Thanks for the insight. BTW - first class website! Cheers Jon ... From: dannysperry To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 6:32 AM
      Message 2 of 13 , May 31, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks for the insight.

        BTW - first class website!

        Cheers Jon
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: dannysperry
        To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 6:32 AM
        Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: Digital SLR versus dedicated CCD imager?


        At this point, it would be an ST-10XME. With my local and regional
        light pollution, H-alpha is the only imaging I can effectively do
        from home... so having great sensitivity in that portion of the
        spectrum would be nice. Of course, that sensitivity across the rest
        of the spectrum would also be nice when I'm able to get under dark
        skies.

        The ST-2000XM does an OK job in H-alpha:
        http://www.californiastars.net/gallery/ngc7635_st2k_sv80s.html

        But an ST-10XME would do much better in those same 3 hours.

        Best,
        Danny
        http://www.californiastars.net/

        --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, "john walton" <johnvwalton@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > What be your choice of CCD in retrospect?
        >
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: dannysperry
        > To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 4:38 PM
        > Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: Digital SLR versus dedicated CCD
        imager?
        >
        >
        > Dean,
        >
        > That's definitely true, hence my statement about having to be
        more
        > diligent about darks with dSLRs. To some people the cooling and
        the
        > convenience/performance edge it provides is worth the extra
        $2000+
        > (comparing the 2 camera models being discussed), to others it's
        not.
        >
        > I personally feel that I will always have one of each camera...
        it's
        > just that the ST-2000XM is not necessarily the dedicated CCD
        camera I
        > would choose had I done things in a different chronology.
        >
        > Best,
        > Danny
        >
        > --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, "dean_rw" <deancrowe@> wrote:
        > >
        > > One advantage of a thermally regulated camera is that since the
        > > temperature is held steady regardless of temperature changes
        over
        > > night, your darks will closely match the temperature of your
        light
        > > frames making the darks more effective at countering thermal
        > noise.
        > >
        > > This also allows you to reuse your darks for a few months or so
        > plus
        > > you can take them at your convienience and not right before
        and/or
        > > after your imaging session as you would with a DSLR.
        > >
        > > Dean
        > >
        > > --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, "htrott" <trottier@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Hi:
        > > >
        > > > After getting some experience with digital imaging using a
        Meade
        > > DSI,
        > > > I'm looking to upgrade to a higher-end camera, and I have
        what
        > must
        > > > be a commonly asked question:
        > > >
        > > > Digital SLR versus dedicated CCD imager?
        > > >
        > > > I have my eye on an SBIG ST-2000 imager, to go with a 10"
        Meade
        > > RCX400.
        > > >
        > > > I've read Ron Wodaski's books just about from cover to cover
        (they
        > > > were a fantastic help in getting into astro-imaging by the
        way!).
        > > > He makes passing reference to a dedicated CCD camera being
        better
        > > > than a digital camera, in part because of cooling. One
        additional
        > > > reason for my interest in the SBIG is its auto-guiding
        feature.
        > > >
        > > > However, it's unclear to me just how much advantage cooling
        is
        > over
        > > > using dark frames. Digital SLRs such as the Canon Rebel also
        have
        > > > much larger chips compared to dedicated CCD imagers in a
        > comparable
        > > > price range, which is very attractive. One can also take short
        > > > exposures and stack them, so it's unclear to me how much
        advantage
        > > > there is to a cooled, autoguided imager, such as an SBIG,
        > > > compared to a cheaper, wider-field digital SLR.
        > > >
        > > > I'd really appreciate advice on this. Despite my reservations
        > > > about the cost of the SBIG ST-2000, I still feel a strong
        pull in
        > > > that direction, which I can't quite explain!
        > > >
        > > > Thanks,
        > > > Howard.
        > > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.