Thanks a lot for all your comment, my observatory isn't finish yet, I hope to
use satelite tracker software...

--- In satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Shaw" <cshaw77072@...> wrote:
>
> Ian,
>
> Most impressive with only 5 images stacked!
>
> Well done!
>
> Chuck
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Ian
>   To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 7:08 AM
>   Subject: [satellitetracker] Re: My best iss
>
>
>
>   Hi,
>
>   I started a 3000 images .avi at 5h01 PM, but on 300 frame , only 40 iss
visible images because my tracking was manual with 9x59 finder scope. I selected
5 best image of the 40 to stack with Registax. The exposure time was 1ms and 28
% gain with the QHY5.
>
>   Thanks, for your comment, Ian Mercier
>
>   --- In satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Shaw" <cshaw77072@> wrote:
>   >
>   > Excellent image Ian!
>   >
>   > How long of an integration for the image?
>   >
>   > Chuck
>   >
>   >
>   > ----- Original Message -----
>   > From: Ian
>   > To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
>   > Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 4:30 PM
>   > Subject: [satellitetracker] My best iss
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > Hi, you can look at my best iss image taken on November 13. 254/1200
Newtonian on EQ6, QHY5 camera with IRcut filter.
>   >
>   > Thanks, Ian Mercier
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>   >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Ian,

Most impressive with only 5 images stacked!

Well done!

Chuck
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Ian
   To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 7:08 AM
   Subject: [satellitetracker] Re: My best iss



   Hi,

   I started a 3000 images .avi at 5h01 PM, but on 300 frame , only 40 iss
visible images because my tracking was manual with 9x59 finder scope. I selected
5 best image of the 40 to stack with Registax. The exposure time was 1ms and 28
% gain with the QHY5.

   Thanks, for your comment, Ian Mercier

   --- In satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Shaw" <cshaw77072@...> wrote:
   >
   > Excellent image Ian!
   >
   > How long of an integration for the image?
   >
   > Chuck
   >
   >
   > ----- Original Message -----
   > From: Ian
   > To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
   > Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 4:30 PM
   > Subject: [satellitetracker] My best iss
   >
   >
   >
   > Hi, you can look at my best iss image taken on November 13. 254/1200
Newtonian on EQ6, QHY5 camera with IRcut filter.
   >
   > Thanks, Ian Mercier
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >





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

At 06:07 PM 11/16/2009 +0000, you wrote:
>
>
>Great catch! Nice detail an exposure.
>I'm still waiting (again!) for a clear night in Seattle, but the ISS may
>not line up with the clearing either.
>Just spending my time processing old data, and looking at other people's
>work.
>
>Tom


I, too have had little luck with good passes lately. I'm at 40 north. I
think there is aybe one for the entire month of November. I've burned up a
lot of clear nights with no passes, it's going to rain most of the week now.

I wonder if the Shuttle with boost it's orbit at all.....



I've got  nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/

Great catch!  Nice detail an exposure.
I'm still waiting (again!) for a clear night in Seattle, but the ISS may not
line up with the clearing either.
Just spending my time processing old data, and looking at other people's work.

Tom

--- In satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com, "Ian" <anne-mariegirard@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, you can look at my best iss image taken on November 13. 254/1200 Newtonian
on EQ6, QHY5 camera with IRcut filter.
>
> Thanks, Ian Mercier
>

---  "Ian" <anne-mariegirard@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, you can look at my best iss image taken on November 13. 254/1200 Newtonian
on EQ6, QHY5 camera with IRcut filter.
>

Found it in Photos. Excellent image, interesting 1024 wide pixel camera.

Leo Taylor

Hi,

I started a 3000 images .avi at 5h01 PM, but on 300 frame , only 40 iss visible
images because my tracking was manual with 9x59 finder scope. I selected 5 best
image of the 40 to stack with Registax.  The exposure time was 1ms and 28 % gain
with the QHY5.


Thanks, for your comment, Ian Mercier

--- In satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Shaw" <cshaw77072@...> wrote:
>
> Excellent image Ian!
>
> How long of an integration for the image?
>
> Chuck
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Ian
>   To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 4:30 PM
>   Subject: [satellitetracker] My best iss
>
>
>
>   Hi, you can look at my best iss image taken on November 13. 254/1200
Newtonian on EQ6, QHY5 camera with IRcut filter.
>
>   Thanks, Ian Mercier
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Excellent image Ian!

How long of an integration for the image?

Chuck


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Ian
   To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 4:30 PM
   Subject: [satellitetracker] My best iss



   Hi, you can look at my best iss image taken on November 13. 254/1200 Newtonian
on EQ6, QHY5 camera with IRcut filter.

   Thanks, Ian Mercier





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

At 10:30 PM 11/15/2009 +0000, you wrote:
>
>
>Hi, you can look at my best iss image taken on November 13. 254/1200
>Newtonian on EQ6, QHY5 camera with IRcut filter.
>
>Thanks, Ian Mercier
>
>_


Very, very nice photo. Thanks for sharing.



I've got  nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/

Hi Bill
I've been somewhat of a "lurker" myself until just recently as I'm exploring
different cams & what they can & can't do. The  ScoprTek DCM does sound
intriguing & if you do get a chance to try it on a telescope please report back
your findings!

Jim










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

Hi, you can look at my best iss image taken on November 13. 254/1200 Newtonian
on EQ6, QHY5 camera with IRcut filter.

Thanks, Ian Mercier

Hi all!  I'm a "lurker" with a Meade classic 8".

I regularly use a microscope camera at work.  "ScoprTek DCM300".  3
megapixel, USB2, color.  Just google "DCM300" & you'll get as much
information as you can use.

Some day I'll borrow the imager from the microscope at the office &
try to hook it up to my telescope.  Haven't done that yet, so I can't
tell you if this little gem would work well on a telescope.

All I can tell you is that once you get its kind of quirky software
figured out, it is an excellent tool on a microscope.

-Bill

Make that "scopetek.com".  Sorry.

Hi all!  I'm a "lurker" with a Meade classic 8".

I regularly use a microscope camera at work.  "ScoprTek DCM300".  3
megapixel, USB2, color.  Just google "DCM300" & you'll get as much
information as you can use.

Some day I'll borrow the imager from the microscope at the office &
try to hook it up to my telescope.  Haven't done that yet, so I can't
tell you if this little gem would work well on a telescope.

All I can tell you is that once you get its kind of quirky software
figured out, it is an excellent tool on a microscope.

-Bill

Thanks once again Darwin! I didn't want anyone else nor myself trying to do
something with these units they just can't do. I just couldn't recall which were
"go" & which were " no go".
I gotta print this out & put it in my project folder.

Jim


On Nov 15, 2009, at 4:35 AM, Darwin Teague <darwin-t@...> wrote:

At 08:13 PM 11/14/2009 -0800, you wrote:
>
>
>Yes that is a good tutorial & that one is the one that got me started
>looking at this cam & it's possibilities. Hopefully more folks will jump
>on board & provide some tips, info & feedback.
>
>I Seem to recall there are two types of the fusion & one of them doesn't
>work well at all for astro work. I found a webpage a while back at work &
>I wish I would have bookmarked it so I could be sure it was the fusion.
>Pretty sure it was-I almost bought one until I found the webpage with the
>mod info. Seems most out there for sale are the wrong version (ver 2?)
>I'll have to search for it again.
>
>Jim

http://ghonis2.ho8.com/fusionmod.html

Please Note: There are two versions of the Fusion being sold. The version
labeled with "RightLight Technolgy" is the one modified here and the only
version that is capable of taking long exposures. The version labeled with
""RightLight Technolgy2" is not capable of long exposures. Also, the
Logitech Quickcam software needs to be Version 9.0, not later versions.

I was trying to use mine on Jupiter and the Moon, using the Logitech
software, VirtualDub and K3CCD.

I've got nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/




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

At 08:13 PM 11/14/2009 -0800, you wrote:
>
>
>Yes that is a good tutorial & that one is the one that got me started
>looking at this cam & it's possibilities. Hopefully more folks will jump
>on board & provide some tips, info & feedback.
>
>I Seem to recall there are two types of the fusion & one of them doesn't
>work well at all for astro work. I found a webpage a while back at work &
>I wish I would have bookmarked it so I could be sure it was the fusion.
>Pretty sure it was-I almost bought one until I found the webpage with the
>mod info. Seems most out there for sale are the wrong version (ver 2?)
>I'll have to search for it again.
>
>Jim

http://ghonis2.ho8.com/fusionmod.html

Please Note: There are two versions of the Fusion being sold. The version
labeled with "RightLight Technolgy" is the one modified here and the only
version that is capable of taking long exposures. The version labeled with
""RightLight Technolgy2" is not capable of long exposures. Also, the
Logitech Quickcam software needs to be Version 9.0, not later versions.

I was trying to use mine on Jupiter and the Moon, using the Logitech
software, VirtualDub and K3CCD.


I've got  nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/

Both seem to be good choices!   I suspect the DFK 41's IR filter will allow
it better color rendition than the DBK 41 that does not have one.?

Chuck

From: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Darwin Teague
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 3:35 PM
To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [satellitetracker] Re: cam


That's the Holy Grail we're all looking for, isn't it? A cam with a larger
chip and USB 2 for faster frame rates.

I think the reason that you haven't found a list is because nobody has
found a newer cam that is up to the task.

I have tried a few, including the Logitech Fusion with no luck, even though
I had found a website that showed that it worked well.

As for color or B/W, I would definitely go for color. Most of the photos of
the ISS you've seen were taken with 640 x 480 cams. If you can find a cam
with a bigger chip and higher resolution, one could assume it would give
better results.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I've given up and am going to try to
buy one of these:

http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=13954
<http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=13954&kw=PL-131C&st=2>
&kw=PL-131C&st=2

If I had the money, I'd buy one of these:

http://www.astronomycameras.com/en/products/usb-cameras/colorir/dfk41au02as/

That's their top of the line. They have others starting at 640 x 480 mono
and color and go up from there. The advantages of these cameras is USB 2
and their high quality

I've got nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/



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

Yes that is a good tutorial & that one is the one that got me started looking at
this cam & it's possibilities. Hopefully more folks will jump on board & provide
some tips, info & feedback.

I Seem to recall there are two types of the fusion & one of them doesn't work
well at all for astro work. I found a webpage a while back at work & I wish I
would have bookmarked it so I could be sure it was the fusion. Pretty sure it
was-I almost bought one until I found the webpage with the mod info. Seems most
out there for sale are the wrong version (ver 2?)  I'll have to search for it
again.

Jim


On Nov 14, 2009, at 6:30 PM, Darwin Teague <darwin-t@...> wrote:

At 12:40 PM 11/14/2009 -0800, you wrote:
>
>
>Chuck,
>Yes the mono type was one of my main "wants" since I recently purchased an
>Ha filter to go in my wheel & having seen so many inspiring
>Ha shot recently I can't wait til I can finally get out of this darn bed
>I've been stuck in to give it a try in one form or another. On the bright
>side this recoup time has allowed me plenty of astro-research time without
>feeling guilty of stealing time from other "duties"!
>
>Jim

A person on another mailing list has been experimenting with a cam

http://ghonis2.ho8.com/lifecam/lifecam1.html

It looks good. He got good results with a Logitech Fusion and I never did.
I don't know what I did wrong.

I've got nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/




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

At 12:40 PM 11/14/2009 -0800, you wrote:
>
>
>Chuck,
>Yes the mono type was one of my main "wants" since I recently purchased an
>Ha filter to go in my wheel & having seen so many inspiring
>Ha shot recently I can't wait til I can finally get out of this darn bed
>I've been stuck in to give it a try in one form or another. On the bright
>side this recoup time has allowed me plenty of astro-research time without
>feeling guilty of stealing time from other "duties"!
>
>Jim


A person on another mailing list has been experimenting with a cam

http://ghonis2.ho8.com/lifecam/lifecam1.html

It looks good. He got good results with a Logitech Fusion and I never did.
I don't know what I did wrong.





I've got  nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/

That's the Holy Grail we're all looking for, isn't it? A cam with a larger
chip and USB 2 for faster frame rates.

I think the reason that you haven't found a list is because nobody has
found a newer cam that is up to the task.

I have tried a few, including the Logitech Fusion with no luck, even though
I had found a website that showed that it worked well.

As for color or B/W, I would definitely go for color. Most of the photos of
the ISS you've seen were taken with 640 x 480 cams. If you can find a cam
with a bigger chip and higher resolution, one could assume it would give
better results.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I've given up and am going to try to
buy one of these:

http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=13954&kw=PL-131C&st=2

If I had the money, I'd buy one of these:

http://www.astronomycameras.com/en/products/usb-cameras/colorir/dfk41au02as/

That's their top of the line. They have others starting at 640 x 480 mono
and color and go up from there. The advantages of these cameras is USB 2
and their high quality





I've got  nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/

Chuck,
Yes the mono type was one of my main "wants" since I recently purchased an Ha
filter to go in my wheel & having seen so many inspiring
Ha shot recently I can't wait til I can finally get out of this darn bed I've
been stuck in to give it a try in one form or another. On the bright side this
recoup time has allowed me plenty of astro-research time without feeling guilty
of stealing time from other "duties"!

Jim

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 14, 2009, at 12:03 PM, "Chuck Shaw" <cshaw77072@...> wrote:

Jim,

Looks like a lot of performance for not many $$’s……

The other question I have is whether to get a color camera or a B/W. I am
leaning towards a color camera, but it won’t have the resolution of a
monochrome camera (nor the hassle of changing filters, even though I do have a
motorized filter wheel I can use with it)

Chuck

From: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com [mailto:satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Jim Jewell Ii
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 1:40 PM
To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [satellitetracker] Re: cam


Chuck,
Thanks for putting up the list request. I've had & am going to have a lot of
flat on my butt time recouping from a leg surgery & haven't found a truly
comprehensive list of this type either. I would really like to see one as well
that includes the up to date latest cams. I do have to say from what I've read &
seen the MS LifeCam Cinema HD looks very promising. I'm on the edge of
purchasing one & doing a mini mod to give it a try. I'm just waiting in the
weeds to see how others do & how they did it (mod, its use/settings etc.)

Jim

On Nov 14, 2009, at 11:26 AM, "Chuck Shaw" <cshaw77072@...
<mailto:cshaw77072%40earthlink.net> > wrote:

This is a really good thread, thanks for starting it Darwin!

I have a Phillips PCVC680 that I have had a lot of fun with through the
years, but am looking for a higher resolution and larger chip camera for ISS
imaging and the Mars apparition coming up.

The larger chip size is not really required for planetary imaging, but will
come in VERY handy when tracking the ISS since it will be easier to keep it
in the FOV based on my visual tracking (which is a hoot, but..)

I have a lot of experience with deep sky imaging using cooled monochrome CCD
cameras, and my current camera is a Starlightexpress SXVF-H9 which I love.
But, I think a video camera is a lot more user friendly for the fast paced
satellite tracking imaging, and also provides excellent results using
Registax for planetary imaging (based on my experiences anyway).

So, does anyone know if someone put together a list of cameras to use and
their pros and cons and recommendations? I have looked for a list, but not
found one. So can folks add to this thread with their current (and also
"dream" satellite imaging camera), and why you like it/them?

Thanks!!!

Chuck

From: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:satellitetracker%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:satellitetracker%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Darwin Teague
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 6:14 PM
To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com <mailto:satellitetracker%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [satellitetracker] Re: cam

At 07:45 PM 11/4/2009 +0000, you wrote:
>
>
>--- Darwin Teague wrote:
> >
> > I saw this link on another list. It look pretty good - a 1/2" chip and
> lots of other features.
> > The fastest shutter speed is 1 ms - is that 1/1000?
> >
>
>Hi Darwin,
>
>Interesting camera but at $289 with shipping it is a bit more than I'd
>want to spend for a video cam. From the Wiki Chart you posted a, "half
>inch" sensor is only 8mm wide (as Chris pointed out, the video people have
>odd ideas about size). If you take 5.3 micrometer * 1280 pixels wide you
>get 6.7 mm, just about 1/4 inch. Add in some overhead between cells and
>you are still a long way from a half inch.
>
>Yes, 1 msec = 1/1000 sec.
>
>Leo

I assumed (possible incorrectly) that the 640 x 480 webcam like the Philips
SPC 900N use a 1/4" chip.

The 1/4" chip is 3.6mm x 2.7mm. The area is listed as 9.72. The article
says many web cams use a 1/6" chip, which is 2.4 x 1.8 with an area of only
4.32

The 1/2" chip is 6.4mm x 4.8 mm and an area of 30.7. That is 3.15 times
larger than a 1/4" chip and 7.1 times larger than a 1/6" chip..

A big plus for me is USB 2.

Does anyone know of a USB 2 webcam that works well for planets, the Moon
and ISS? I haven't found one and this camera is less than half the cost of
what I looked at before - $570. I want faster frame rates and a larger chip
to make it easier to get the ISS on it and keep it there.

I have looked at some planetary cameras, but none had a fast enough shutter
speed.

BTW, all of my experiments with the other cameras I talked about a while
back failed miserably - about what I expected, really.

I've got nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/

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

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

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




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

Jim,

Looks like a lot of performance for not many $$’s……

The other question I have is whether to get a color camera or a B/W.   I am
leaning towards a color camera, but it won’t have the resolution of a
monochrome camera (nor the hassle of changing filters, even though I do have a
motorized filter wheel I can use with it)

Chuck

From: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com [mailto:satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Jim Jewell Ii
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 1:40 PM
To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [satellitetracker] Re: cam


Chuck,
Thanks for putting up the list request. I've had & am going to have a lot of
flat on my butt time recouping from a leg surgery & haven't found a truly
comprehensive list of this type either. I would really like to see one as well
that includes the up to date latest cams. I do have to say from what I've read &
seen the MS LifeCam Cinema HD looks very promising. I'm on the edge of
purchasing one & doing a mini mod to give it a try. I'm just waiting in the
weeds to see how others do & how they did it (mod, its use/settings etc.)

Jim

On Nov 14, 2009, at 11:26 AM, "Chuck Shaw" <cshaw77072@...
<mailto:cshaw77072%40earthlink.net> > wrote:

This is a really good thread, thanks for starting it Darwin!

I have a Phillips PCVC680 that I have had a lot of fun with through the
years, but am looking for a higher resolution and larger chip camera for ISS
imaging and the Mars apparition coming up.

The larger chip size is not really required for planetary imaging, but will
come in VERY handy when tracking the ISS since it will be easier to keep it
in the FOV based on my visual tracking (which is a hoot, but..)

I have a lot of experience with deep sky imaging using cooled monochrome CCD
cameras, and my current camera is a Starlightexpress SXVF-H9 which I love.
But, I think a video camera is a lot more user friendly for the fast paced
satellite tracking imaging, and also provides excellent results using
Registax for planetary imaging (based on my experiences anyway).

So, does anyone know if someone put together a list of cameras to use and
their pros and cons and recommendations? I have looked for a list, but not
found one. So can folks add to this thread with their current (and also
"dream" satellite imaging camera), and why you like it/them?

Thanks!!!

Chuck

From: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:satellitetracker%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:satellitetracker%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Darwin Teague
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 6:14 PM
To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com <mailto:satellitetracker%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [satellitetracker] Re: cam

At 07:45 PM 11/4/2009 +0000, you wrote:
>
>
>--- Darwin Teague wrote:
> >
> > I saw this link on another list. It look pretty good - a 1/2" chip and
> lots of other features.
> > The fastest shutter speed is 1 ms - is that 1/1000?
> >
>
>Hi Darwin,
>
>Interesting camera but at $289 with shipping it is a bit more than I'd
>want to spend for a video cam. From the Wiki Chart you posted a, "half
>inch" sensor is only 8mm wide (as Chris pointed out, the video people have
>odd ideas about size). If you take 5.3 micrometer * 1280 pixels wide you
>get 6.7 mm, just about 1/4 inch. Add in some overhead between cells and
>you are still a long way from a half inch.
>
>Yes, 1 msec = 1/1000 sec.
>
>Leo

I assumed (possible incorrectly) that the 640 x 480 webcam like the Philips
SPC 900N use a 1/4" chip.

The 1/4" chip is 3.6mm x 2.7mm. The area is listed as 9.72. The article
says many web cams use a 1/6" chip, which is 2.4 x 1.8 with an area of only
4.32

The 1/2" chip is 6.4mm x 4.8 mm and an area of 30.7. That is 3.15 times
larger than a 1/4" chip and 7.1 times larger than a 1/6" chip..

A big plus for me is USB 2.

Does anyone know of a USB 2 webcam that works well for planets, the Moon
and ISS? I haven't found one and this camera is less than half the cost of
what I looked at before - $570. I want faster frame rates and a larger chip
to make it easier to get the ISS on it and keep it there.

I have looked at some planetary cameras, but none had a fast enough shutter
speed.

BTW, all of my experiments with the other cameras I talked about a while
back failed miserably - about what I expected, really.

I've got nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/

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

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



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

Chuck,
Thanks for putting up the list request. I've had & am going to have a lot of
flat on my butt time recouping from a leg surgery & haven't found a truly
comprehensive list of this type either. I would really like to see one as well
that includes the up to date latest cams. I do have to say from what I've read &
seen the MS LifeCam Cinema HD looks very promising. I'm on the edge of
purchasing one & doing a mini mod to give it a try. I'm just waiting in the
weeds to see how others do & how they did it (mod, its use/settings etc.)

Jim



On Nov 14, 2009, at 11:26 AM, "Chuck Shaw" <cshaw77072@...> wrote:

This is a really good thread, thanks for starting it Darwin!

I have a Phillips PCVC680 that I have had a lot of fun with through the
years, but am looking for a higher resolution and larger chip camera for ISS
imaging and the Mars apparition coming up.

The larger chip size is not really required for planetary imaging, but will
come in VERY handy when tracking the ISS since it will be easier to keep it
in the FOV based on my visual tracking (which is a hoot, but..)

I have a lot of experience with deep sky imaging using cooled monochrome CCD
cameras, and my current camera is a Starlightexpress SXVF-H9 which I love.
But, I think a video camera is a lot more user friendly for the fast paced
satellite tracking imaging, and also provides excellent results using
Registax for planetary imaging (based on my experiences anyway).

So, does anyone know if someone put together a list of cameras to use and
their pros and cons and recommendations? I have looked for a list, but not
found one. So can folks add to this thread with their current (and also
"dream" satellite imaging camera), and why you like it/them?

Thanks!!!

Chuck

From: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Darwin Teague
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 6:14 PM
To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [satellitetracker] Re: cam


At 07:45 PM 11/4/2009 +0000, you wrote:
>
>
>--- Darwin Teague wrote:
> >
> > I saw this link on another list. It look pretty good - a 1/2" chip and
> lots of other features.
> > The fastest shutter speed is 1 ms - is that 1/1000?
> >
>
>Hi Darwin,
>
>Interesting camera but at $289 with shipping it is a bit more than I'd
>want to spend for a video cam. From the Wiki Chart you posted a, "half
>inch" sensor is only 8mm wide (as Chris pointed out, the video people have
>odd ideas about size). If you take 5.3 micrometer * 1280 pixels wide you
>get 6.7 mm, just about 1/4 inch. Add in some overhead between cells and
>you are still a long way from a half inch.
>
>Yes, 1 msec = 1/1000 sec.
>
>Leo

I assumed (possible incorrectly) that the 640 x 480 webcam like the Philips
SPC 900N use a 1/4" chip.

The 1/4" chip is 3.6mm x 2.7mm. The area is listed as 9.72. The article
says many web cams use a 1/6" chip, which is 2.4 x 1.8 with an area of only
4.32

The 1/2" chip is 6.4mm x 4.8 mm and an area of 30.7. That is 3.15 times
larger than a 1/4" chip and 7.1 times larger than a 1/6" chip..

A big plus for me is USB 2.

Does anyone know of a USB 2 webcam that works well for planets, the Moon
and ISS? I haven't found one and this camera is less than half the cost of
what I looked at before - $570. I want faster frame rates and a larger chip
to make it easier to get the ISS on it and keep it there.

I have looked at some planetary cameras, but none had a fast enough shutter
speed.

BTW, all of my experiments with the other cameras I talked about a while
back failed miserably - about what I expected, really.

I've got nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/

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




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

This is a really good thread, thanks for starting it Darwin!

I have a Phillips PCVC680 that I have had a lot of fun with through the
years, but am looking for a higher resolution and larger chip camera for ISS
imaging and the Mars apparition coming up.

The larger chip size is not really required for planetary imaging, but will
come in VERY handy when tracking the ISS since it will be easier to keep it
in the FOV based on my visual tracking (which is a hoot, but..)

I have a lot of experience with deep sky imaging using cooled monochrome CCD
cameras, and my current camera is a Starlightexpress SXVF-H9 which I love.
But, I think a video camera is a lot more user friendly for the fast paced
satellite tracking imaging, and also provides excellent results using
Registax for planetary imaging (based on my experiences anyway).

So, does anyone know if someone put together a list of cameras to use and
their pros and cons and recommendations?  I have looked for a list, but not
found one.  So can folks add to this thread with their current (and also
"dream" satellite imaging camera), and why you like it/them?

Thanks!!!

Chuck

From: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Darwin Teague
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 6:14 PM
To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [satellitetracker] Re: cam


At 07:45 PM 11/4/2009 +0000, you wrote:
>
>
>--- Darwin Teague wrote:
> >
> > I saw this link on another list. It look pretty good - a 1/2" chip and
> lots of other features.
> > The fastest shutter speed is 1 ms - is that 1/1000?
> >
>
>Hi Darwin,
>
>Interesting camera but at $289 with shipping it is a bit more than I'd
>want to spend for a video cam. From the Wiki Chart you posted a, "half
>inch" sensor is only 8mm wide (as Chris pointed out, the video people have
>odd ideas about size). If you take 5.3 micrometer * 1280 pixels wide you
>get 6.7 mm, just about 1/4 inch. Add in some overhead between cells and
>you are still a long way from a half inch.
>
>Yes, 1 msec = 1/1000 sec.
>
>Leo

I assumed (possible incorrectly) that the 640 x 480 webcam like the Philips
SPC 900N use a 1/4" chip.

The 1/4" chip is 3.6mm x 2.7mm. The area is listed as 9.72. The article
says many web cams use a 1/6" chip, which is 2.4 x 1.8 with an area of only
4.32

The 1/2" chip is 6.4mm x 4.8 mm and an area of 30.7. That is 3.15 times
larger than a 1/4" chip and 7.1 times larger than a 1/6" chip..

A big plus for me is USB 2.

Does anyone know of a USB 2 webcam that works well for planets, the Moon
and ISS? I haven't found one and this camera is less than half the cost of
what I looked at before - $570. I want faster frame rates and a larger chip
to make it easier to get the ISS on it and keep it there.

I have looked at some planetary cameras, but none had a fast enough shutter
speed.

BTW, all of my experiments with the other cameras I talked about a while
back failed miserably - about what I expected, really.

I've got nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/



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

Hi,

We just updated our website and added a "News" page. Please check our website
for the latest updates on Optic Tracker.

http://www.optictracker.com

In the mean time, we created a channel on YouTube to host our videos.

http://www.youtube.com/user/optictracker

Thank you again for your support!

PS: cshaw77062 and autostaretx, thank you very much for the advice! Supporting
more telescopes will be on the top of our todo list once we finish releasing
this first version.

I too think your new s/w is interesting!

You might be able to include a lot more mounts by simply making your software
ASCOM compatible rather than trying to build different modules for different
mounts yourself (thats the whole idea of the ASCOM initiative anyway).

Cheers!

Chuck


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: machenwei
   To: satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 4:08 AM
   Subject: [satellitetracker] Re: New tracking software launching



   Thank you all for your response.
   It looks like compatibility is the major concern here. We do plan on
supporting more telescopes. We will have to add a module to support Meade
telescopes. For Celestron telescopes other than SE series, they actually already
support the serial commands that Optic Tracker use, we just need to run some
test on them so that we can be sure they don't have any model specific design
compromises that will impact Optic Tracker's performance.





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

The Meade LX200gps (and RCX400) have the ability to control the
slew speed of each axis independently (:RA and :RE commands).
SatelliteTracker uses those for its smooth tracking.

There is also a firmware patch for the 497 Autostar providing
the same commands, so it is now possible to give it "fine"
control, too.  That gives you the full line of ETX-, LX90,
and LXD- scopes as platforms.

An alternative for rapid expansion of number of mounts supported
would be to provide an ASCOM-compatible face/plug-in to your
program.  Then you could generically say "slew up at 1.2345 deg/sec"
and let the ASCOM driver generate the mount-appropriate serial
commands.  (you'd first -ask- the driver if it can do that).

have fun
--dick


--- In satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com, "machenwei" <machenwei@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you all for your response.
> It looks like compatibility is the major concern here. We do plan on
supporting more telescopes. We will have to add a module to support Meade
telescopes. For Celestron telescopes other than SE series, they actually already
support the serial commands that Optic Tracker use, we just need to run some
test on them so that we can be sure they don't have any model specific design
compromises that will impact Optic Tracker's performance.
>

Thank you all for your response.
It looks like compatibility is the major concern here. We do plan on supporting
more telescopes. We will have to add a module to support Meade telescopes. For
Celestron telescopes other than SE series, they actually already support the
serial commands that Optic Tracker use, we just need to run some test on them so
that we can be sure they don't have any model specific design compromises that
will impact Optic Tracker's performance.

--- In satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com, "machenwei" <machenwei@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Guys, we've been building a software to visually track a moving target with
a telescope. Our web site just went on-line today and we are going to release
the BETA software soon. We really look forward to hearing what you guys think
about it. Please visit www.optictracker.com
>
I own an 8SE,I've seen that program before...It's pretty cool looking,it's like
your in a F-16 fighter.As for deep space satellite searching..it's way to shakey
for phototagraphy,video might be ok if theres saturation an gamma ray
settings.I'm sticking with sat-tracker, it has Way more information on the
passes an precise controls,i'll faverit that website though..Thanks

        Bozo

I'll add myself to the "looks interesting!" list, but I have a LX200 classic, so
I'm out of luck on tracking for now also.
I bookmarked your page so I can keep track of what's new with it.  I just wonder
how we could track the ISS with that since it will be a very difficult thing to
even get in the field of view and start tracking.  I have no idea How I would do
that I have enough trouble just getting a few good frames when recording with a
webcam and aiming "blind" with the Telrad finder.

Tom



--- In satellitetracker@yahoogroups.com, Darwin Teague <darwin-t@...> wrote:
>
> At 07:27 AM 11/8/2009 +0000, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >Hi Guys, we've been building a software to visually track a moving target
> >with a telescope. Our web site just went on-line today and we are going to
> >release the BETA software soon. We really look forward to hearing what you
> >guys think about it. Please visit www.optictracker.com
>
>
> It looks very promising. I have a Celestron CPC1100, so it looks like I'm
> out of luck at the moment. Have you tried it on the ISS yet?
>
> Do you have a ballpark figure on a price yet?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> I've got  nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
> http://negligentdischarge.com
> http://loadmastervideos.com
> http://darwinsastroworld.com/
>

At 07:27 AM 11/8/2009 +0000, you wrote:
>
>
>Hi Guys, we've been building a software to visually track a moving target
>with a telescope. Our web site just went on-line today and we are going to
>release the BETA software soon. We really look forward to hearing what you
>guys think about it. Please visit www.optictracker.com


It looks very promising. I have a Celestron CPC1100, so it looks like I'm
out of luck at the moment. Have you tried it on the ISS yet?

Do you have a ballpark figure on a price yet?

Thanks.



I've got  nothin' to do and all day to do it. I'm retired.
http://negligentdischarge.com
http://loadmastervideos.com
http://darwinsastroworld.com/