Jump to content


Photo

Another (better!) Jupiter from ASI120MM cam-150%!

  • Please log in to reply
70 replies to this topic

#51 DesertRat

DesertRat

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5226
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Valley of the Sun

Posted 05 December 2012 - 06:54 PM

Thanks Ed. I see that to, but to be clear I'm asking is the binning done on the chip or is it done at the driver level? Obviously at the application level binning is simply addition, but you are adding the A/D noise 4 times instead of once (also at the driver level - hence I said software).

Glenn

#52 edsplace

edsplace

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 353
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2011

Posted 05 December 2012 - 07:46 PM

I have looked on the site of the company who makes the sensor, Aptina, and as I say it looks like it is chip based and not driver. http://www.aptina.co...ument.do?id=876

#53 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6937
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 05 December 2012 - 08:38 PM

A lot of your last question is really beyond my (very limited) knowledge Glenn but I'll try to answer the binning one anyway!!! :question: :shocked: :grin: - and of course the thread is T2 as per the website and your comments.....that bit about "C" type was obviously "brain-fade" (or worse!) but I didn't have any neurons engaged at the very least! :lol:

Just for clarification for others reading some of my drivel, this thread (T2) is the common fitting as in on the back of Atik/Orion EFW's etc and a host of other accesories.....

Binning was something I felt wasn't a "most-wanted" feature when we were testing (probably because personally I have never really had a lot of success using this feature in my planetary captures.....although I appreciate others have an opposite opinion) so in my communications with Sam when we were really kick-starting the whole FireCapture compatibility I was more interested in useable framerates apropos resolution ranges.....aspects such as the comments you've canvassed weren't really thoroughly investigated by me personally at the time but in my defence I also seem to recollect that binning was only ever able to be initiated on 1 or 2 of the resolutions. (I think it was the largest)

Also I was pushing Sam very hard to get a good capture program (FireCapture) working - it just did't work back then - and I assisted by also approaching Torsten in the matter - Sam and I had quite a bit of fun at times trying to understand what each was saying.....although I was constantly reminding him that his English was perfect in comparison to my Mandarin!!!

The whole period was very "full on" and the amount of communicating between Sam, me and Torsten (and then Emil when he could start testing) was enormous.....and although I'm sure once the camera is "out there" more with more users Sam will continue to refine and adjust aspects of the system.....having a dedicated AA'er/planetary imager like Sam as a camera developer and builder is a real luxury imho..! :waytogo: :waytogo: :waytogo:

I'm a bit "under the weather" here atm as we've had a power blackout this morning and the temperatures inside the van have gone ballistic - the Power Supply company say it'll be down for hours so we may have to sit in the car with the aircon running soon! :()

So what I say should be taken with a grain of salt but from the updates etc and choices we went for that Sam enabled I would take a stab and guess it is actually "driver" initiated.

Sam should come in on this sometime and he's obviously the person to give the facts.....in the meantime I thought (before I melt!) I'd possibly supply more BS..! :lol:

#54 wenjha

wenjha

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 733
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008
  • Loc: SuZhou China

Posted 05 December 2012 - 09:03 PM

Thanks Ed. I see that to, but to be clear I'm asking is the binning done on the chip or is it done at the driver level? Obviously at the application level binning is simply addition, but you are adding the A/D noise 4 times instead of once (also at the driver level - hence I said software).

Glenn


Hi Glenn
you are correct,the binning is implemented in software level.
the chip did has a bin function.
but works not nice. So I didn't use it

#55 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6937
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:42 AM

Thanks Ed. I see that to, but to be clear I'm asking is the binning done on the chip or is it done at the driver level? Obviously at the application level binning is simply addition, but you are adding the A/D noise 4 times instead of once (also at the driver level - hence I said software).

Glenn


Hi Glenn
you are correct,the binning is implemented in software level.
the chip did has a bin function.
but works not nice. So I didn't use it


.....so it's driver-based as I said: hoped that interpretation was correct (and I remember us discussing these matters Sam :grin:).....that'd give me 1 out of 2 comments right at least ! :lol:

#56 wenjha

wenjha

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 733
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008
  • Loc: SuZhou China

Posted 06 December 2012 - 08:37 AM

Thanks Ed. I see that to, but to be clear I'm asking is the binning done on the chip or is it done at the driver level? Obviously at the application level binning is simply addition, but you are adding the A/D noise 4 times instead of once (also at the driver level - hence I said software).

Glenn


Hi Glenn
you are correct,the binning is implemented in software level.
the chip did has a bin function.
but works not nice. So I didn't use it


.....so it's driver-based as I said: hoped that interpretation was correct (and I remember us discussing these matters Sam :grin:).....that'd give me 1 out of 2 comments right at least ! :lol:

yes Darryl you are right. you really have a good memory :)I belive that you are only 36 :roflmao:

#57 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6937
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 06 December 2012 - 12:08 PM

Thanks Ed. I see that to, but to be clear I'm asking is the binning done on the chip or is it done at the driver level? Obviously at the application level binning is simply addition, but you are adding the A/D noise 4 times instead of once (also at the driver level - hence I said software).

Glenn


Hi Glenn
you are correct,the binning is implemented in software level.
the chip did has a bin function.
but works not nice. So I didn't use it


.....so it's driver-based as I said: hoped that interpretation was correct (and I remember us discussing these matters Sam :grin:).....that'd give me 1 out of 2 comments right at least ! :lol:

yes Darryl you are right. you really have a good memory :)I belive that you are only 36 :roflmao:


- not likely Sam..!!! :shakecane: :shakecane: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

#58 edsplace

edsplace

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 353
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2011

Posted 06 December 2012 - 01:03 PM

Thanks Ed. I see that to, but to be clear I'm asking is the binning done on the chip or is it done at the driver level? Obviously at the application level binning is simply addition, but you are adding the A/D noise 4 times instead of once (also at the driver level - hence I said software).

Glenn


Hi Glenn
you are correct,the binning is implemented in software level.
the chip did has a bin function.
but works not nice. So I didn't use it


.....so it's driver-based as I said: hoped that interpretation was correct (and I remember us discussing these matters Sam :grin:).....that'd give me 1 out of 2 comments right at least ! :lol:

yes Darryl you are right. you really have a good memory :)I belive that you are only 36 :roflmao:


Sorry to but in on that conversation. I see what I get for assuming I knew something :-0

#59 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6937
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:44 PM

Ha-ha Ed, after my stupid comment about "C" type and "T2" I can't comment about what anyone else says - and your observations about the various fittings the camera offers opened my eyes about a unit I've had for longer than anyone else outside of China I believe! :rainbow: :)

#60 DesertRat

DesertRat

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5226
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Valley of the Sun

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:58 PM

Don't feel bad Darryl! I've often felt that the T and C and so on designations open to confusion. Much better to state actual dia and thread in my view. I find vernier calipers handy when I'm going thru a box of unmarked adapters!

Glenn

#61 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6937
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 07 December 2012 - 12:35 AM

Don't feel bad Darryl! I've often felt that the T and C and so on designations open to confusion. Much better to state actual dia and thread in my view. I find vernier calipers handy when I'm going thru a box of unmarked adapters!
Glenn


Heh-hee Glenn - as I sad in one of Ed's threads, I'll claim part-redemption by presuming his gamma was low re the camera "artefacts" (I haven't really had any problems whatsoever with this camera so far, and I think I'm starting to rack up a few miles on it now. :))

The most idiotic thing about that thread-type business is that when I checked the adaptor I'd originally used as my reference it actually has "T2" written on it in (small) white lettering....! :foreheadslap: :lol:

#62 Hillbrad

Hillbrad

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 999
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Nashville, Tennessee

Posted 08 December 2012 - 01:59 AM

Hey Darryl I just finally saw this thread...and great job with the captures! Did you hop on a plane and fly up to the states? haha But yeah I'm glad you got some "keeper" images with Jupiter being so low. That camera looks like a solid performer...and for that price I think we all should get one.

#63 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6937
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 08 December 2012 - 11:02 AM

Hey Darryl I just finally saw this thread...and great job with the captures! Did you hop on a plane and fly up to the states? haha But yeah I'm glad you got some "keeper" images with Jupiter being so low. That camera looks like a solid performer...and for that price I think we all should get one.


.....must be why my eyes are about to pack up Brad - jetlag from all that flying..! :lol:

Thanks, all the travelling and heat has some balm when you pull some good images.....but we've had a good night tonight and tomorrow night we'll just sleep (for ages!!! :sleepy:) and head home the next morning... :grin:

#64 GreatGigInTheSky

GreatGigInTheSky

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2011
  • Loc: Santa Clara, California

Posted 08 December 2012 - 05:24 PM

Great thread Darryl -- thanks for all the information on the new cam. I'm just catching up here. I'm wondering about this model you have vs. the ASI130MM, and whether there is a reason to choose your ASI120MM over it. Seems the larger 5.2micron pixels of the 130 may make things a bit more similar in setup for us folks who have been using TIS or PGR cams with 5.6micron pixels. I'm very interested at these prices, and see myself going mono soon!

#65 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6937
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 08 December 2012 - 07:23 PM

"Apples & oranges" Jeff - 2 different cameras with different sensors etc.....the ASI120MM is a high QE unit that excells at planetary imaging, but also has the resolution available to make it a very viable Lunar imager - it's sensitivity and low noise has also seen it being used on DSO's - Emil did a stack from a few hundred r. g & b takes of the core of M42 each (I think) about 1 second exposures.....the detail both in resolving stars and also the gas clouds deep within that area had to be seen to be believed: this all sounds a bit like "best thing since sliced bread" spiel but at just under $300 and being so fexible and only usb2, my Flea3 is unlikely to see much action - if any at all - from now on..!

It also has me looking at one of the latest CS Samyang wide angle lenses for some "sky play." :)

I can see cmos sensor cameras rising to the fore over the next few years and hopefully Sam will continue his practise of keeping abreast with the latest chips available and implementing them into his range, so that another model in a few years might take things even further..!

#66 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6937
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 08 December 2012 - 07:28 PM

ps: the smaller-sized pixels are more a problem in long f/l scopes like the C14 - but I have solved that for myself and have a couple of thoughts on making it even more flexible for said scopes...will post on that down the track! :grin:

#67 GreatGigInTheSky

GreatGigInTheSky

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2011
  • Loc: Santa Clara, California

Posted 08 December 2012 - 11:31 PM

Well I can read the specs, Darryl -- I can see they're different sensors. And I can see from the detailed info you've posted that the ASI120MM is a very capable cam. But if Sam's marketing material on his site is to be believed, then the ASI130MM is intended for planetary, solar and lunar imaging also, and has a fast frame rate (even faster than the 120), high QE (55% peak), as well as the same resolution as the 120.

I can look at the images posted on the site. The ones taken with the ASI130MM aren't quite competing with the ones posted there from you and Emil taken with the 120, but I can't tell if this is due to a difference in the suitability of the cameras, or a difference in the skills of the imagers. Knowing the work of a couple of the gents involved, however, I can make some semi-educated guesses. There are Saturns from ZZ on both pages, but not knowing anything about the conditions they were taken under, the processing, etc., other than being able to say that they're of roughly the same quality, I can't judge much.

What I was hoping for is to get some kind of idea of why you are working with the 120 instead of the 130. Maybe the 130 was only available later so it wasn't an option at the time in any case? Or perhaps you had a choice, and could inform us of what went into the decision. Ideally some objective comparison would be great, but if that's not possible, then I would appreciate reading your views on what the differences between the two might be if you care to share them, as I value your opinion. Or maybe Sam could provide some information.

I'm just thinking that with the investment I have in barlows, etc. that the larger pixels of the 130 would be a better fit for my existing setup. Also, all other parameters being equal (which they may not be) larger pixels are going to mean less noise.

#68 zAmbonii

zAmbonii

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2420
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2008
  • Loc: Ypsilanti, MI

Posted 09 December 2012 - 01:19 AM

I was kinda interested in the comparison between the 120MM and the 130MM also (just for curiosity's sake and learning more).

The ASI130MM apparently has the same sensor that is in the QHY5 guide cam, and it isn't noted as a good planetary camera. Doing a search for the ASI130MM and two things that jumped out in some of the pages were "noise" and "pattern noise".

From here (under the help tab)...

The ASI 130MM camera although great in many respects does suffer from noise that becomes more intrusive the more we increase gain and reduce exposure time. Sadly these settings are precisely what is required for capturing planetary images.....



and they show a method of trying to help get rid of the pattern noise...I believe through dark subtraction.

I quit searching after I found these images in which I thought the SPC900NC images looked better.

Almost looks like they tried to take a proven guide camera chip and adapt it for planetary use, and the electronics just wasn't up to the job. On the other hand, we have seen some examples of the 120MM and it looks good on the planetary front.

#69 GreatGigInTheSky

GreatGigInTheSky

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2011
  • Loc: Santa Clara, California

Posted 09 December 2012 - 02:13 AM

Good find, z -- thanks. I'm convinced. But contrary to the description above, the long exposure images are far worse on pattern noise than the planetary shots. So hello ASI120MM! And as far as the Philips webcam images looking better, well, yeah, YOUR Philips webcam images... ;) I can't say mine ever looked better than that!

#70 wenjha

wenjha

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 733
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008
  • Loc: SuZhou China

Posted 09 December 2012 - 05:11 AM

Hello Jeff
z is correct. the most difference between ASI130MM and ASI120MM is that ASI130MM has more noise and lower QE.
the color version of 120 ASI120MC has the same brightness of ASI130MM.So you must know how sensetive 120 is now

#71 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6937
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 09 December 2012 - 08:27 AM

.....yes, sorry if my answer didn't really address your questions Jeff (apart from me stating they are 2 quite different cameras! :grin:)

And the question didn't really arise as to which I would have chosen and why: I was just very fortunate in that Sam sent me this camera (and the colour version, the ASI120MC! :grin: :grin:) to test and assist him getting it the most "user-friendly" and we were most fortunate in that Torsten worked wonders with FireCapture builds to do said (and also Sam, who conversely kept making constant driver revisions).....and you can also see from the specs and Sam's response the QE etc of the ASI120MM is quite superior.....

As I've said, it has supplanted the Flea3 almost completely for me - it is so easy and flexible in its' use.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics