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

RE: [lx90] Re: Digital Cameras vs CCD's

Expand Messages
  • Gregory A. Pruden
    The Sony S75 has 3.45 micron per side pixel and about 3.15 million effective pixels. The S85 has a smaller pixel than this and an effective pixels of 3.9
    Message 1 of 19 , Oct 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      The Sony S75 has 3.45 micron per side pixel and about 3.15 million effective
      pixels. The S85 has a smaller pixel than this and an effective pixels of
      3.9 million. The resolution of both is much better than the SBIG camera.
      The first big difference with the consumer still digital cameras is that
      most cannot remove the lens, for primary focus astrophotography and are
      stuck being used afocally. The second is that the astronomical ccd camera
      is cooled to allow longer exposures.

      The Nikon DS1 and others can remove the lens and be used for prime focus but
      still have trouble with exposures over 20 seconds. My old shop teacher used
      to warn about using the wrong tool for the job. Digital still cameras are
      the wrong tool for the job when it comes to deep sky objects but the moon
      and planets are far better than astronomical cameras. Having said this, my
      interest is in using digital still cameras for DSOS and I didn't like that
      shop teacher much anyway.

      I bought the Nikon Coolpix 995 for its full manual mode, its bulb setting
      (60 seconds), its ISO 100 to 800 setting, its threaded lens, and its quality
      during its day job. Also, there is an eyepiece made specifically for this
      camera which has matching threads and is optically matched. It is made by
      William Optics and allows for vignette free photos almost over the entire
      zoom range (the very widest zoom has a some vignetting in the corners).
      Using this combination I get 40' x 30' fov in the widest setting and 10' x
      8' fov in telephoto and in a 10' arcminute photo I get .3 arcseconds per
      pixel.

      Here is an animation of the moon using the Nikon 995 full zoom range 8.2 -
      31mm
      http://velatron.com/dca/misc/moonzoom.gif
      <http://velatron.com/dca/misc/moonzoom.gif>

      Here is a good site for information about digital cameras which also allows
      for side by side comparison
      http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp
      <http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp>

      Here is a FAQ regarding digital camera astrophotography
      http://www.erols.com/szykman/Astro/AstroDigiCamFAQ.html
      <http://www.erols.com/szykman/Astro/AstroDigiCamFAQ.html>

      Here is a site that I made that calculates various things about afocal
      photography
      <http://velatron.com/dca/formulae/english>
      http://velatron.com/dca/formulae/english

      Here is a yahoo group dedicated to digital camera astrophotography with lots
      of information in the bookmarks, files, and photos section
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_astro/
      <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_astro/>

      Hope this helps,
      Gregory

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Dennis Persyk [mailto:dpersyk@...]
      Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 12:05 AM
      To: lx90@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [lx90] Re: Digital Cameras vs CCD's


      I've ordered a Casio QV2900UX based on DSO pictures through C8s that
      impressed me.

      The Sony 4 megapixel camera has effectively 1.3 megapixels -- the
      marketing folks count each color, R, G, and B, as a seperate pixel.

      I think you will find that the angular resolution (pixel size) of the
      SBIG unit is better than that of the megapixel camera. I know you
      will find the QE (equates to imaging time or sensitivity) of the SBIG
      device to be a factor of 3 to 4 higher than that of the mp camera.
      Finally, the SBIG device is thermoelectrically cooled so you can
      expose for longer than 60 seconds.

      Dennis Persyk
      Hampshire, IL

      --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
      > Hello Everyone,
      >
      > We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just general
      use but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have to
      wonder why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4
      megapixel camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4
      the resolution?
      >
      > More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with their
      > LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for DSO's?
      >
      > Thanks,
      > -Roger Rigby
      > Midlothian, VA



      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

      ADVERTISEMENT


      <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_top.gif>
      <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_photo.jpg>

      <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_starthere.gif>


      Height:
      3 4 5 6 7 8ft 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11in
      Weight:



      <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/clear.gif>
      <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/clear.gif>
      <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_dslogo.gif>

      <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/clear.gif>

      <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=210544.1579876.3135161.1261774/D=egroupmai
      l/S=1705082806:HM/A=792401/rand=224795637>

      To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      lx90-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
      <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Ray Porter
      Nice shot of Saturn, Bill. I have a C3000 and the Scopetronix Digi-t that I plan on trying out once the gas giants are rising early enough. Would you mind
      Message 2 of 19 , Oct 1, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Nice shot of Saturn, Bill. I have a C3000 and the Scopetronix Digi-t that I
        plan on trying out once the gas giants are rising early enough. Would you
        mind sharing how you set the camera up, etc.?

        Thanks,
        Ray Porter

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Bill Bauer" <bbauer@...>
        To: <lx90@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 12:10 AM
        Subject: [lx90] Re: Digital Cameras vs CCD's


        > We're talking quality of CCD here. The digital camera CCDs are not in
        > the same (upper) class as ones made for astrophotography. Digital
        > cameras take GREAT photos with normal use, but the pixels reveal
        > their shortcomings on long exposures (hot spots, saturation). I'm
        > sure someone can explain in more detail, as well as give more reasons
        > for the difference.
        >
        > Love my Olympus C3000 camera. I highly recommend it and its siblings
        > (C3030,3040,4xxx). Got a picture of Saturn posted here in the
        > Photos...Misc Solar System section. You should see some of the
        > non-astronomical photos I've got from that camera!
        >
        > --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
        > > I have to wonder
        > > why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4 megapixel
        > > camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4 the
        > > resolution?
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com
        >
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > lx90-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
        >
      • reim58@yahoo.com
        For one thing SBIG just makes a lot of money off of their cameras. Making it cooled does increase the cost but the other main factor is volume of sales .
        Message 3 of 19 , Oct 1, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          For one thing SBIG just makes a lot of money off of their cameras.
          Making it cooled does increase the cost but the other main factor
          is "volume of sales". They don't sell enough when compaired to
          digital cameras. Also some of the SBIG CCD chips use larger pixels
          which "the bottom line" cost more, you are paying for silicon size.
          Some cooled CCD cameras use generic CCD chips which were found in
          normal CCTV cameras. The only difference was the thermo electric
          cooling device (and the machining of the housing) which adds cost.
          At one time I was looking at developing a low cost CCD camera but the
          above mention facts makes it an expensive camera. You could make
          some custom tooling and get a custom CCD or CMOS chip made (from
          Tower semiconductor) and get the price way down (I looked into
          this). However you will need $$$$ for the tools and NRE cost. You
          need the have the volume to justify it.

          --- In lx90@y..., "Bill Bauer" <bbauer@s...> wrote:
          > We're talking quality of CCD here. The digital camera CCDs are not
          in
          > the same (upper) class as ones made for astrophotography. Digital
          > cameras take GREAT photos with normal use, but the pixels reveal
          > their shortcomings on long exposures (hot spots, saturation). I'm
          > sure someone can explain in more detail, as well as give more
          reasons
          > for the difference.
          >
          > Love my Olympus C3000 camera. I highly recommend it and its
          siblings
          > (C3030,3040,4xxx). Got a picture of Saturn posted here in the
          > Photos...Misc Solar System section. You should see some of the
          > non-astronomical photos I've got from that camera!
          >
          > --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
          > > I have to wonder
          > > why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4
          megapixel
          > > camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4 the
          > > resolution?
        • Dennis Persyk
          Thanks, Gregory, for the information. I stand corrected on pixel count and size. These consumer devices are getting pretty darn good! I am also rethinking my
          Message 4 of 19 , Oct 1, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Thanks, Gregory, for the information. I stand corrected on pixel
            count and size. These consumer devices are getting pretty darn good!

            I am also rethinking my statement about QE (quantum efficiency –
            sensitivity) being much better for the SBIG devices. I guess to
            fairly compare an SBIG camera to a mp camera, one should image the
            same target at the same image size for the same image acquisition
            time and compare S/N ratios.

            However, the SBIG camera requires three exposures, one for each
            color. I suspect the SBIG camera still wins out in sensitivity, but I
            really don't know by how much. The biggest factor still seems to be
            cooling.

            Dennis Persyk
            Hampshire, IL

            --- In lx90@y..., "Gregory A. Pruden" <gregory@i...> wrote:
            > The Sony S75 has 3.45 micron per side pixel and about 3.15 million
            effective pixels. The S85 has a smaller pixel than this and an
            effective pixels of 3.9 million. The resolution of both is much
            better than the SBIG camera.
            > The first big difference with the consumer still digital cameras is
            that most cannot remove the lens, for primary focus astrophotography
            and are stuck being used afocally. The second is that the
            astronomical ccd camera is cooled to allow longer exposures.
            >
            > The Nikon DS1 and others can remove the lens and be used for prime
            focus but still have trouble with exposures over 20 seconds. My old
            shop teacher used to warn about using the wrong tool for the job.
            Digital still cameras are the wrong tool for the job when it comes to
            deep sky objects but the moon and planets are far better than
            astronomical cameras. Having said this, my interest is in using
            digital still cameras for DSOS and I didn't like that shop teacher
            much anyway.
            >
            > I bought the Nikon Coolpix 995 for its full manual mode, its bulb
            setting (60 seconds), its ISO 100 to 800 setting, its threaded lens,
            and its quality during its day job. Also, there is an eyepiece made
            specifically for this camera which has matching threads and is
            optically matched. It is made by William Optics and allows for
            vignette free photos almost over the entire zoom range (the very
            widest zoom has a some vignetting in the corners).
            > Using this combination I get 40' x 30' fov in the widest setting
            and 10' x 8' fov in telephoto and in a 10' arcminute photo I get .3
            arcseconds per pixel.
            >
            > Here is an animation of the moon using the Nikon 995 full zoom
            range 8.2 -
            > 31mm
            > http://velatron.com/dca/misc/moonzoom.gif
            > <http://velatron.com/dca/misc/moonzoom.gif>
            >
            > Here is a good site for information about digital cameras which
            also allows
            > for side by side comparison
            > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp
            > <http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp>
            >
            > Here is a FAQ regarding digital camera astrophotography
            > http://www.erols.com/szykman/Astro/AstroDigiCamFAQ.html
            > <http://www.erols.com/szykman/Astro/AstroDigiCamFAQ.html>
            >
            > Here is a site that I made that calculates various things about
            afocal
            > photography
            > <http://velatron.com/dca/formulae/english>
            > http://velatron.com/dca/formulae/english
            >
            > Here is a yahoo group dedicated to digital camera astrophotography
            with lots
            > of information in the bookmarks, files, and photos section
            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_astro/
            > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_astro/>
            >
            > Hope this helps,
            > Gregory
            >
            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: Dennis Persyk [mailto:dpersyk@a...]
            > Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 12:05 AM
            > To: lx90@y...
            > Subject: [lx90] Re: Digital Cameras vs CCD's
            >
            >
            > I've ordered a Casio QV2900UX based on DSO pictures through C8s
            that impressed me.
            >
            > The Sony 4 megapixel camera has effectively 1.3 megapixels -- the
            > marketing folks count each color, R, G, and B, as a seperate pixel.
            >
            > I think you will find that the angular resolution (pixel size) of
            the SBIG unit is better than that of the megapixel camera. I know you
            > will find the QE (equates to imaging time or sensitivity) of the
            SBIG device to be a factor of 3 to 4 higher than that of the mp
            camera.
            > Finally, the SBIG device is thermoelectrically cooled so you can
            > expose for longer than 60 seconds.
            >
            > Dennis Persyk
            > Hampshire, IL
            >
            > --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
            > > Hello Everyone,
            > >
            > > We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just general
            > use but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have to
            > wonder why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4
            > megapixel camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for
            1/4 the resolution?
            > >
            > > More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with
            their LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for
            DSO's?
            > >
            > > Thanks,
            > > -Roger Rigby
            > > Midlothian, VA
            >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            >
            > ADVERTISEMENT
            >
            >
            >
            <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_top.gif>

            >
            <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_photo.jpg>
            >
            >
            <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_starthere.g
            if>
            >
            >
            > Height:
            > 3 4 5 6 7 8ft 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11in
            > Weight:
            >
            >
            >
            > <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/clear.gif>
            > <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/clear.gif>
            >
            <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_dslogo.gif>
            >
            > <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/clear.gif>

            >
            > <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?
            M=210544.1579876.3135161.1261774/D=egroupmai
            > l/S=1705082806:HM/A=792401/rand=224795637>
            >
            > To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com
            >
            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > lx90-unsubscribe@y...
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
            > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • ezra@laplaza.org
            Been gone a while but I was wondering the same thing...or close to it... Do all digitial cameras work with the LX-90, and taking pictures from there? Or do you
            Message 5 of 19 , Oct 1, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              Been gone a while but I was wondering the same thing...or close to
              it...

              Do all digitial cameras work with the LX-90, and taking pictures from
              there? Or do you need to look at some sort of spec that will let you
              know whether or not they are compatible? e.g.-I noticed that the
              Olympus C-700 does not seem to have CCD specs, but I can't tell why
              not? How can one tell?

              Thanks

              Ezra
              --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
              > Hello Everyone,
              >
              > We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just general
              use
              > but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have to
              wonder
              > why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4 megapixel
              > camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4 the
              > resolution?
              >
              > More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with their
              > LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for DSO's?
              >
              > Thanks,
              > -Roger Rigby
              > Midlothian, VA
            • ezra@laplaza.org
              I was wondering a similar thing...although I have been gone for a while....do all digitial cameras work with CCD imagin/LX90 s? I cant quite figure this one
              Message 6 of 19 , Oct 1, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                I was wondering a similar thing...although I have been gone for a
                while....do all digitial cameras work with CCD imagin/LX90's? I cant
                quite figure this one out. For example, I was looking at the Olympus
                C-700, but it did not have CCD specs. Are there certain things to
                look for in a digital camera to make sure it could work down the road
                with an LX90?

                thanks

                Ezra

                --- In lx90@y..., reim58@y... wrote:
                >
                > For one thing SBIG just makes a lot of money off of their cameras.
                > Making it cooled does increase the cost but the other main factor
                > is "volume of sales". They don't sell enough when compaired to
                > digital cameras. Also some of the SBIG CCD chips use larger pixels
                > which "the bottom line" cost more, you are paying for silicon
                size.
                > Some cooled CCD cameras use generic CCD chips which were found in
                > normal CCTV cameras. The only difference was the thermo electric
                > cooling device (and the machining of the housing) which adds cost.
                > At one time I was looking at developing a low cost CCD camera but
                the
                > above mention facts makes it an expensive camera. You could make
                > some custom tooling and get a custom CCD or CMOS chip made (from
                > Tower semiconductor) and get the price way down (I looked into
                > this). However you will need $$$$ for the tools and NRE cost. You
                > need the have the volume to justify it.
                >
                > --- In lx90@y..., "Bill Bauer" <bbauer@s...> wrote:
                > > We're talking quality of CCD here. The digital camera CCDs are
                not
                > in
                > > the same (upper) class as ones made for astrophotography.
                Digital
                > > cameras take GREAT photos with normal use, but the pixels reveal
                > > their shortcomings on long exposures (hot spots, saturation).
                I'm
                > > sure someone can explain in more detail, as well as give more
                > reasons
                > > for the difference.
                > >
                > > Love my Olympus C3000 camera. I highly recommend it and its
                > siblings
                > > (C3030,3040,4xxx). Got a picture of Saturn posted here in the
                > > Photos...Misc Solar System section. You should see some of the
                > > non-astronomical photos I've got from that camera!
                > >
                > > --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
                > > > I have to wonder
                > > > why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4
                > megapixel
                > > > camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4 the
                > > > resolution?
              • Ken Hayes
                Ezra, First make sure the digital camera has a threaded lens assembly so you can attach it to the LX90 s eyepiece. You can get adapters for many popular
                Message 7 of 19 , Oct 1, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  Ezra,

                  First make sure the digital camera has a threaded lens assembly so you can
                  attach it to the LX90's eyepiece. You can get adapters for many popular
                  camera at www.ckcpower.com or www.scopetronix.com.

                  Next get a camera with full manual exposure options (manual control of
                  aperture, exposure time, focus, etc.). Automatic exposure settings often do
                  not work well on celestial objects.

                  For photographing dimmer objects/DSOs it helps to have a wide aperture
                  setting to reduce exposure time. Cameras usually come in the range of f1.8
                  to f3.2 (f1.8 being the widest/best). The Olympus C2040/3040/4040 cameras
                  have f1.8 capability.

                  It's best to get as long a maximum exposure time as possible. Most cameras
                  can only go to 8 sec max, the Olympus' go to 16 sec, and most Casios and
                  some Nikons go up to 64 sec. With long exposures, you will get hot pixels.
                  Many of the Casio cameras will automatically subtract a 'dark frame' which
                  greatly reduces the hot pixels. Or you can use photo editing software to do
                  the same thing.

                  Finally, the more optical zoom, the better. Get at least 3X optical zoom
                  (on most cameras). Many of the Casios go up to 8X.

                  Hope that helps a bit.

                  Ken

                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: <ezra@...>
                  To: <lx90@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 6:25 PM
                  Subject: [lx90] Re: Digital Cameras vs CCD's


                  > I was wondering a similar thing...although I have been gone for a
                  > while....do all digitial cameras work with CCD imagin/LX90's? I cant
                  > quite figure this one out. For example, I was looking at the Olympus
                  > C-700, but it did not have CCD specs. Are there certain things to
                  > look for in a digital camera to make sure it could work down the road
                  > with an LX90?
                  >
                  > thanks
                  >
                  > Ezra
                  >
                • cwmenard@worldnet.att.net
                  I m also wondering what people are starting to use now? I m starting to see up to 64 sec. exposure times with these Casios, 2040Z, etc. models. Is anyone
                  Message 8 of 19 , Oct 2, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I'm also wondering what people are starting to use now?
                    I'm starting to see up to 64 sec. exposure times with
                    these Casios, 2040Z, etc. models. Is anyone taking some
                    decent DSO pictures with these? It looks like these are starting
                    to appear on sites(?). I guess that would be an alternative
                    instead of getting a more expensive, cooled CCD such as
                    the Meade for $500 or $700, but then the $500 model does
                    not have the expandability for color later where as the
                    $700 model does, but that would cost another $700. And
                    then, one needs a PC or laptop to connect to those
                    to collect the images. So, if getting a commercial
                    Casio, in the neighborhood of $400 or less that could
                    collect the images and then download to the PC later,
                    that wouldn't be bad. I guess these digital cameras
                    are getting there!?! Any more comments?

                    Chuck


                    --- In lx90@y..., ezra@l... wrote:
                    > Been gone a while but I was wondering the same thing...or close to
                    > it...
                    >
                    > Do all digitial cameras work with the LX-90, and taking pictures
                    from
                    > there? Or do you need to look at some sort of spec that will let
                    you
                    > know whether or not they are compatible? e.g.-I noticed that the
                    > Olympus C-700 does not seem to have CCD specs, but I can't tell why
                    > not? How can one tell?
                    >
                    > Thanks
                    >
                    > Ezra
                    > --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
                    > > Hello Everyone,
                    > >
                    > > We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just general
                    > use
                    > > but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have to
                    > wonder
                    > > why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4
                    megapixel
                    > > camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4 the
                    > > resolution?
                    > >
                    > > More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with
                    their
                    > > LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for DSO's?
                    > >
                    > > Thanks,
                    > > -Roger Rigby
                    > > Midlothian, VA
                  • Joe Swanberg
                    I m not quite ready to get into astro photog just yet, but am waiting to see the results and and input from Dennis on the Casio QX2900UX that he has ordered.
                    Message 9 of 19 , Oct 2, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I'm not quite ready to get into astro photog just yet, but am waiting to see
                      the results and and input from Dennis on the Casio QX2900UX that he has
                      ordered.
                      Joe WB6IJO
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: <cwmenard@...>
                      To: <lx90@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 10:03 AM
                      Subject: [lx90] Re: Digital Cameras vs CCD's


                      > I'm also wondering what people are starting to use now?
                      > I'm starting to see up to 64 sec. exposure times with
                      > these Casios, 2040Z, etc. models. Is anyone taking some
                      > decent DSO pictures with these? It looks like these are starting
                      > to appear on sites(?). I guess that would be an alternative
                      > instead of getting a more expensive, cooled CCD such as
                      > the Meade for $500 or $700, but then the $500 model does
                      > not have the expandability for color later where as the
                      > $700 model does, but that would cost another $700. And
                      > then, one needs a PC or laptop to connect to those
                      > to collect the images. So, if getting a commercial
                      > Casio, in the neighborhood of $400 or less that could
                      > collect the images and then download to the PC later,
                      > that wouldn't be bad. I guess these digital cameras
                      > are getting there!?! Any more comments?
                      >
                      > Chuck
                      >
                      >
                      > --- In lx90@y..., ezra@l... wrote:
                      > > Been gone a while but I was wondering the same thing...or close to
                      > > it...
                      > >
                      > > Do all digitial cameras work with the LX-90, and taking pictures
                      > from
                      > > there? Or do you need to look at some sort of spec that will let
                      > you
                      > > know whether or not they are compatible? e.g.-I noticed that the
                      > > Olympus C-700 does not seem to have CCD specs, but I can't tell why
                      > > not? How can one tell?
                      > >
                      > > Thanks
                      > >
                      > > Ezra
                      > > --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
                      > > > Hello Everyone,
                      > > >
                      > > > We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just general
                      > > use
                      > > > but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have to
                      > > wonder
                      > > > why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4
                      > megapixel
                      > > > camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4 the
                      > > > resolution?
                      > > >
                      > > > More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with
                      > their
                      > > > LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for DSO's?
                      > > >
                      > > > Thanks,
                      > > > -Roger Rigby
                      > > > Midlothian, VA
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com
                      >
                      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      > lx90-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      >
                      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      >
                      >
                    • cwmenard@worldnet.att.net
                      You mean the Q V 2900UX right for about $400? Maybe the QX models are outdated now. ... waiting to see ... has ... to ... why ... general ... the ... DSO s?
                      Message 10 of 19 , Oct 2, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        You mean the Q V 2900UX right for about $400? Maybe
                        the QX models are outdated now.


                        --- In lx90@y..., "Joe Swanberg" <swaney@c...> wrote:
                        > I'm not quite ready to get into astro photog just yet, but am
                        waiting to see
                        > the results and and input from Dennis on the Casio QX2900UX that he
                        has
                        > ordered.
                        > Joe WB6IJO
                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > From: <cwmenard@w...>
                        > To: <lx90@y...>
                        > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 10:03 AM
                        > Subject: [lx90] Re: Digital Cameras vs CCD's
                        >
                        >
                        > > I'm also wondering what people are starting to use now?
                        > > I'm starting to see up to 64 sec. exposure times with
                        > > these Casios, 2040Z, etc. models. Is anyone taking some
                        > > decent DSO pictures with these? It looks like these are starting
                        > > to appear on sites(?). I guess that would be an alternative
                        > > instead of getting a more expensive, cooled CCD such as
                        > > the Meade for $500 or $700, but then the $500 model does
                        > > not have the expandability for color later where as the
                        > > $700 model does, but that would cost another $700. And
                        > > then, one needs a PC or laptop to connect to those
                        > > to collect the images. So, if getting a commercial
                        > > Casio, in the neighborhood of $400 or less that could
                        > > collect the images and then download to the PC later,
                        > > that wouldn't be bad. I guess these digital cameras
                        > > are getting there!?! Any more comments?
                        > >
                        > > Chuck
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > --- In lx90@y..., ezra@l... wrote:
                        > > > Been gone a while but I was wondering the same thing...or close
                        to
                        > > > it...
                        > > >
                        > > > Do all digitial cameras work with the LX-90, and taking pictures
                        > > from
                        > > > there? Or do you need to look at some sort of spec that will let
                        > > you
                        > > > know whether or not they are compatible? e.g.-I noticed that the
                        > > > Olympus C-700 does not seem to have CCD specs, but I can't tell
                        why
                        > > > not? How can one tell?
                        > > >
                        > > > Thanks
                        > > >
                        > > > Ezra
                        > > > --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
                        > > > > Hello Everyone,
                        > > > >
                        > > > > We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just
                        general
                        > > > use
                        > > > > but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have to
                        > > > wonder
                        > > > > why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4
                        > > megapixel
                        > > > > camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4
                        the
                        > > > > resolution?
                        > > > >
                        > > > > More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with
                        > > their
                        > > > > LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for
                        DSO's?
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Thanks,
                        > > > > -Roger Rigby
                        > > > > Midlothian, VA
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com
                        > >
                        > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        > > lx90-unsubscribe@y...
                        > >
                        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        > >
                        > >
                      • Gary Hoyles
                        I bought a Nikon Coolpix 995 for Astro work. I managed to find a screw on adaptor for the scope and it seems to take reasonable pictures of the planets and the
                        Message 11 of 19 , Oct 2, 2001
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I bought a Nikon Coolpix 995 for Astro work. I managed to find a screw on adaptor for the scope and it seems to take reasonable pictures of the planets and the moon. I have also tried M57 (Ring nebular). I am still very inexperienced at astrophotography but it turned out to be not so bad. When I have had time to try some more DSO's I will post them if you want. With the 60 second exposure,NR and stacking I hope to be able to produce some good results. The only thing that is bothering me now is the weather and focus. I may need to collimate!

                          I would have purchased a Good Astro CCD camera, but I could not justify the cost. When I could buy coolpix for every day use as well as use it for astrophotography.

                          Gary
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: Roger Rigby
                          To: lx90@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 3:02 AM
                          Subject: [lx90] Digital Cameras vs CCD's


                          Hello Everyone,

                          We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just general use
                          but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have to wonder
                          why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4 megapixel
                          camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4 the
                          resolution?

                          More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with their
                          LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for DSO's?

                          Thanks,
                          -Roger Rigby
                          Midlothian, VA


                          Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

                          Start here...

                          Height:
                          345678 ft 01234567891011in

                          Weight:
                          lbs. kg.








                          To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com

                          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                          lx90-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Bill Bauer
                          Just because it has a CCD, doesn t mean they are all equal. Astro CCD imagers have much higher quality chips, come in front & back illuminated , with
                          Message 12 of 19 , Oct 2, 2001
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Just because it has a CCD, doesn't mean they are all equal. Astro CCD
                            imagers have much higher quality chips, come in front & back
                            "illuminated", with different sensitivities to different
                            wavelengths....

                            Good info on this would be the November S&T, as well as:

                            http://www.skypub.com/imaging/ccd/optimize.html
                            http://www.skypub.com/imaging/ccd/startout.html
                            http://www.skypub.com/imaging/imaging.shtml

                            --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
                            > Hello Everyone,
                            >
                            > We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just general use
                            > but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have to
                            wonder
                            > why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4 megapixel
                            > camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4 the
                            > resolution?
                            >
                            > More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with their
                            > LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for DSO's?
                            >
                            > Thanks,
                            > -Roger Rigby
                            > Midlothian, VA
                          • Joe Swanberg
                            Your right ! QV2900UX ... From: To: Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 11:34 AM Subject: [lx90] Re: Digital
                            Message 13 of 19 , Oct 2, 2001
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Your right ! QV2900UX
                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: <cwmenard@...>
                              To: <lx90@yahoogroups.com>
                              Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 11:34 AM
                              Subject: [lx90] Re: Digital Cameras vs CCD's


                              > You mean the Q V 2900UX right for about $400? Maybe
                              > the QX models are outdated now.
                              >
                              >
                              > --- In lx90@y..., "Joe Swanberg" <swaney@c...> wrote:
                              > > I'm not quite ready to get into astro photog just yet, but am
                              > waiting to see
                              > > the results and and input from Dennis on the Casio QX2900UX that he
                              > has
                              > > ordered.
                              > > Joe WB6IJO
                              > > ----- Original Message -----
                              > > From: <cwmenard@w...>
                              > > To: <lx90@y...>
                              > > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 10:03 AM
                              > > Subject: [lx90] Re: Digital Cameras vs CCD's
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > > I'm also wondering what people are starting to use now?
                              > > > I'm starting to see up to 64 sec. exposure times with
                              > > > these Casios, 2040Z, etc. models. Is anyone taking some
                              > > > decent DSO pictures with these? It looks like these are starting
                              > > > to appear on sites(?). I guess that would be an alternative
                              > > > instead of getting a more expensive, cooled CCD such as
                              > > > the Meade for $500 or $700, but then the $500 model does
                              > > > not have the expandability for color later where as the
                              > > > $700 model does, but that would cost another $700. And
                              > > > then, one needs a PC or laptop to connect to those
                              > > > to collect the images. So, if getting a commercial
                              > > > Casio, in the neighborhood of $400 or less that could
                              > > > collect the images and then download to the PC later,
                              > > > that wouldn't be bad. I guess these digital cameras
                              > > > are getting there!?! Any more comments?
                              > > >
                              > > > Chuck
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > > --- In lx90@y..., ezra@l... wrote:
                              > > > > Been gone a while but I was wondering the same thing...or close
                              > to
                              > > > > it...
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Do all digitial cameras work with the LX-90, and taking pictures
                              > > > from
                              > > > > there? Or do you need to look at some sort of spec that will let
                              > > > you
                              > > > > know whether or not they are compatible? e.g.-I noticed that the
                              > > > > Olympus C-700 does not seem to have CCD specs, but I can't tell
                              > why
                              > > > > not? How can one tell?
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Thanks
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Ezra
                              > > > > --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
                              > > > > > Hello Everyone,
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just
                              > general
                              > > > > use
                              > > > > > but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have to
                              > > > > wonder
                              > > > > > why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4
                              > > > megapixel
                              > > > > > camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4
                              > the
                              > > > > > resolution?
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with
                              > > > their
                              > > > > > LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for
                              > DSO's?
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > Thanks,
                              > > > > > -Roger Rigby
                              > > > > > Midlothian, VA
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > > To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com
                              > > >
                              > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              > > > lx90-unsubscribe@y...
                              > > >
                              > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                              > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com
                              >
                              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              > lx90-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                              >
                              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                              >
                              >
                              >
                            • cwmenard@worldnet.att.net
                              Dennis and all, These pictures that impressed you with the QV2900UX: Are they posted on the web? Chuck ... good! ... I ... be ... million ... is ...
                              Message 14 of 19 , Oct 2, 2001
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Dennis and all,

                                These pictures that impressed you with the QV2900UX:
                                Are they posted on the web?

                                Chuck


                                --- In lx90@y..., "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk@a...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Thanks, Gregory, for the information. I stand corrected on pixel
                                > count and size. These consumer devices are getting pretty darn
                                good!
                                >
                                > I am also rethinking my statement about QE (quantum efficiency –
                                > sensitivity) being much better for the SBIG devices. I guess to
                                > fairly compare an SBIG camera to a mp camera, one should image the
                                > same target at the same image size for the same image acquisition
                                > time and compare S/N ratios.
                                >
                                > However, the SBIG camera requires three exposures, one for each
                                > color. I suspect the SBIG camera still wins out in sensitivity, but
                                I
                                > really don't know by how much. The biggest factor still seems to
                                be
                                > cooling.
                                >
                                > Dennis Persyk
                                > Hampshire, IL
                                >
                                > --- In lx90@y..., "Gregory A. Pruden" <gregory@i...> wrote:
                                > > The Sony S75 has 3.45 micron per side pixel and about 3.15
                                million
                                > effective pixels. The S85 has a smaller pixel than this and an
                                > effective pixels of 3.9 million. The resolution of both is much
                                > better than the SBIG camera.
                                > > The first big difference with the consumer still digital cameras
                                is
                                > that most cannot remove the lens, for primary focus
                                astrophotography
                                > and are stuck being used afocally. The second is that the
                                > astronomical ccd camera is cooled to allow longer exposures.
                                > >
                                > > The Nikon DS1 and others can remove the lens and be used for
                                prime
                                > focus but still have trouble with exposures over 20 seconds. My
                                old
                                > shop teacher used to warn about using the wrong tool for the job.
                                > Digital still cameras are the wrong tool for the job when it comes
                                to
                                > deep sky objects but the moon and planets are far better than
                                > astronomical cameras. Having said this, my interest is in using
                                > digital still cameras for DSOS and I didn't like that shop teacher
                                > much anyway.
                                > >
                                > > I bought the Nikon Coolpix 995 for its full manual mode, its bulb
                                > setting (60 seconds), its ISO 100 to 800 setting, its threaded
                                lens,
                                > and its quality during its day job. Also, there is an eyepiece
                                made
                                > specifically for this camera which has matching threads and is
                                > optically matched. It is made by William Optics and allows for
                                > vignette free photos almost over the entire zoom range (the very
                                > widest zoom has a some vignetting in the corners).
                                > > Using this combination I get 40' x 30' fov in the widest setting
                                > and 10' x 8' fov in telephoto and in a 10' arcminute photo I get .3
                                > arcseconds per pixel.
                                > >
                                > > Here is an animation of the moon using the Nikon 995 full zoom
                                > range 8.2 -
                                > > 31mm
                                > > http://velatron.com/dca/misc/moonzoom.gif
                                > > <http://velatron.com/dca/misc/moonzoom.gif>
                                > >
                                > > Here is a good site for information about digital cameras which
                                > also allows
                                > > for side by side comparison
                                > > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp
                                > > <http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp>
                                > >
                                > > Here is a FAQ regarding digital camera astrophotography
                                > > http://www.erols.com/szykman/Astro/AstroDigiCamFAQ.html
                                > > <http://www.erols.com/szykman/Astro/AstroDigiCamFAQ.html>
                                > >
                                > > Here is a site that I made that calculates various things about
                                > afocal
                                > > photography
                                > > <http://velatron.com/dca/formulae/english>
                                > > http://velatron.com/dca/formulae/english
                                > >
                                > > Here is a yahoo group dedicated to digital camera
                                astrophotography
                                > with lots
                                > > of information in the bookmarks, files, and photos section
                                > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_astro/
                                > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_astro/>
                                > >
                                > > Hope this helps,
                                > > Gregory
                                > >
                                > > -----Original Message-----
                                > > From: Dennis Persyk [mailto:dpersyk@a...]
                                > > Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 12:05 AM
                                > > To: lx90@y...
                                > > Subject: [lx90] Re: Digital Cameras vs CCD's
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > I've ordered a Casio QV2900UX based on DSO pictures through C8s
                                > that impressed me.
                                > >
                                > > The Sony 4 megapixel camera has effectively 1.3 megapixels -- the
                                > > marketing folks count each color, R, G, and B, as a seperate
                                pixel.
                                > >
                                > > I think you will find that the angular resolution (pixel size) of
                                > the SBIG unit is better than that of the megapixel camera. I know
                                you
                                > > will find the QE (equates to imaging time or sensitivity) of the
                                > SBIG device to be a factor of 3 to 4 higher than that of the mp
                                > camera.
                                > > Finally, the SBIG device is thermoelectrically cooled so you can
                                > > expose for longer than 60 seconds.
                                > >
                                > > Dennis Persyk
                                > > Hampshire, IL
                                > >
                                > > --- In lx90@y..., "Roger Rigby" <mobilecad@e...> wrote:
                                > > > Hello Everyone,
                                > > >
                                > > > We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just
                                general
                                > > use but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have
                                to
                                > > wonder why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4
                                > > megapixel camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for
                                > 1/4 the resolution?
                                > > >
                                > > > More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with
                                > their LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for
                                > DSO's?
                                > > >
                                > > > Thanks,
                                > > > -Roger Rigby
                                > > > Midlothian, VA
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                > >
                                > > ADVERTISEMENT
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_top.gif>
                                >
                                > >
                                >
                                <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_photo.jpg>
                                > >
                                > >
                                >
                                <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_starthere.g
                                > if>
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > Height:
                                > > 3 4 5 6 7 8ft 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11in
                                > > Weight:
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/clear.gif>
                                > > <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/clear.gif>

                                > >
                                >
                                <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/blueswim_dslogo.gif>
                                > >
                                > > <http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/di/dietsmart/clear.gif>
                                >
                                > >
                                > > <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?
                                > M=210544.1579876.3135161.1261774/D=egroupmai
                                > > l/S=1705082806:HM/A=792401/rand=224795637>
                                > >
                                > > To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com
                                > >
                                > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                > > lx90-unsubscribe@y...
                                > >
                                > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                                Service
                                > > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Shabowski, Bob
                                Gary, If you haven t yet, try a Hartmann Mask to help you focus. I just started experimenting with one and it seems to work well. Here is a link that I got
                                Message 15 of 19 , Oct 3, 2001
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Gary,

                                  If you haven't yet, try a Hartmann Mask to help you focus. I just started
                                  experimenting with one and it seems to work well. Here is a link that I got
                                  off of the digital_astro group that may help:

                                  http://www.incessant.com/gap/astrophotography/Coolpix/diyhm/

                                  I would really like to see your DSO pictures. I am using a Nikon 990 and I
                                  have not had any luck with DSOs yet.

                                  Good luck and clear skies,

                                  Bob Shabowski,
                                  Geneva, IL



                                  -----Original Message-----
                                  From: Gary Hoyles [mailto:ghoyles@...]
                                  Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 5:01 PM
                                  To: lx90@yahoogroups.com
                                  Subject: Re: [lx90] Digital Cameras vs CCD's


                                  I bought a Nikon Coolpix 995 for Astro work. I managed to find a screw on
                                  adaptor for the scope and it seems to take reasonable pictures of the
                                  planets and the moon. I have also tried M57 (Ring nebular). I am still very
                                  inexperienced at astrophotography but it turned out to be not so bad. When I
                                  have had time to try some more DSO's I will post them if you want. With the
                                  60 second exposure,NR and stacking I hope to be able to produce some good
                                  results. The only thing that is bothering me now is the weather and focus. I
                                  may need to collimate!

                                  I would have purchased a Good Astro CCD camera, but I could not justify the
                                  cost. When I could buy coolpix for every day use as well as use it for
                                  astrophotography.

                                  Gary
                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  From: Roger Rigby
                                  To: lx90@yahoogroups.com
                                  Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 3:02 AM
                                  Subject: [lx90] Digital Cameras vs CCD's


                                  Hello Everyone,

                                  We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just general use
                                  but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have to wonder
                                  why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4 megapixel
                                  camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4 the
                                  resolution?

                                  More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with their
                                  LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for DSO's?

                                  Thanks,
                                  -Roger Rigby
                                  Midlothian, VA


                                  Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

                                  Start here...

                                  Height:
                                  345678 ft 01234567891011in

                                  Weight:
                                  lbs. kg.








                                  To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com

                                  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  lx90-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                                  To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com

                                  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  lx90-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                • Gary Hoyles
                                  Hi Bob, I use the mask, but i think the main problem is bad seeing ! Gary ... From: Shabowski, Bob To: lx90@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Oct 3, 2001
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Hi Bob, I use the mask, but i think the main problem is bad seeing !

                                    Gary
                                    ----- Original Message -----
                                    From: Shabowski, Bob
                                    To: 'lx90@yahoogroups.com'
                                    Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 12:35 PM
                                    Subject: RE: [lx90] Digital Cameras vs CCD's


                                    Gary,

                                    If you haven't yet, try a Hartmann Mask to help you focus. I just started
                                    experimenting with one and it seems to work well. Here is a link that I got
                                    off of the digital_astro group that may help:

                                    http://www.incessant.com/gap/astrophotography/Coolpix/diyhm/

                                    I would really like to see your DSO pictures. I am using a Nikon 990 and I
                                    have not had any luck with DSOs yet.

                                    Good luck and clear skies,

                                    Bob Shabowski,
                                    Geneva, IL



                                    -----Original Message-----
                                    From: Gary Hoyles [mailto:ghoyles@...]
                                    Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 5:01 PM
                                    To: lx90@yahoogroups.com
                                    Subject: Re: [lx90] Digital Cameras vs CCD's


                                    I bought a Nikon Coolpix 995 for Astro work. I managed to find a screw on
                                    adaptor for the scope and it seems to take reasonable pictures of the
                                    planets and the moon. I have also tried M57 (Ring nebular). I am still very
                                    inexperienced at astrophotography but it turned out to be not so bad. When I
                                    have had time to try some more DSO's I will post them if you want. With the
                                    60 second exposure,NR and stacking I hope to be able to produce some good
                                    results. The only thing that is bothering me now is the weather and focus. I
                                    may need to collimate!

                                    I would have purchased a Good Astro CCD camera, but I could not justify the
                                    cost. When I could buy coolpix for every day use as well as use it for
                                    astrophotography.

                                    Gary
                                    ----- Original Message -----
                                    From: Roger Rigby
                                    To: lx90@yahoogroups.com
                                    Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 3:02 AM
                                    Subject: [lx90] Digital Cameras vs CCD's


                                    Hello Everyone,

                                    We are starting to look hard at digital cameras for just general use
                                    but I have an eye for using it for astrophotography. I have to wonder
                                    why is a 1 megapixel SBIG CCD cost $6,000 while a Sony 4 megapixel
                                    camera costs $600. What am I missing? 10X the price for 1/4 the
                                    resolution?

                                    More specifically does anyone use a Sony DSC-S85 or -S75 with their
                                    LX-90? Or do you have a favorite camera that might work for DSO's?

                                    Thanks,
                                    -Roger Rigby
                                    Midlothian, VA


                                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

                                    Start here...

                                    Height:
                                    345678 ft 01234567891011in

                                    Weight:
                                    lbs. kg.








                                    To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com

                                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    lx90-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                                    To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com

                                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    lx90-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

                                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                    ADVERTISEMENT




                                    To view the LX90 Online FAQ, visit: www.ibida.com

                                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    lx90-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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