Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

17 sec (x1024) Camera Sony 960h Exview HAD CCD2

  • Please log in to reply
494 replies to this topic

#26 mclewis1

mclewis1

    Thread Killer

  • *****
  • Posts: 18678
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2006
  • Loc: New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 24 June 2012 - 02:51 PM

Yea.. It's basically a starlight 7c in auto guider form. I believe it's same chip as mallincam but not hampered with NTSC.

Then you'd believe wrong.

Mallincam's use the Sony 418/428 chips, the Starlight Express camera uses a 429 chip. The 418/428 chips have larger pixels.

#27 jbell

jbell

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 216
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2010

Posted 24 June 2012 - 07:42 PM

that's what I get for posting from my phone and not double checking... yes it's the 429ak.
http://www.sxccd.com...ar 'Colour'.pdf

thanks mark.

apology for the off topic

#28 mclewis1

mclewis1

    Thread Killer

  • *****
  • Posts: 18678
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2006
  • Loc: New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 24 June 2012 - 08:59 PM

I don't think it was too off topic. A reminder that a camera's capabilities are much more than simply one sensor vs. another is a good thing.
I find double checking stats becomes more important as time goes by ... :gramps: (personal experience) :lol:

#29 Raginar

Raginar

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9307
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Pensacola, FL

Posted 24 June 2012 - 09:18 PM

I never thought to use my lodestar autoguider as a mallincam.

Sorry for OT,

#30 ccs_hello

ccs_hello

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10243
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2004

Posted 24 June 2012 - 10:25 PM

ICX428 and ICX429 are sister CCD sensors. One is primarily designed for NTSC format and the other PAL. The pixel area difference is minimal (8.4 um x 9.8 um vs. 8.6 um x8.3 um) which is 15% more.

The European version of the videocams (and Mallincam) will simply change the sensor used from '428 to '429.

Some astroCCD imagers chose to use these CCDs originally designed for videocam due to (1) large sensor area & large per-pixel area (2) lower price due to mass production and easier to source.

Clear Skies!

ccs_hello

#31 James Cunningham

James Cunningham

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4056
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Maryland

Posted 25 June 2012 - 05:37 AM

I also wonder about the IR filter. Hopefully, it will be almost the same as taking out the IR filter on the Samsung cameras. If you attempt to take out the filter, please let us know how you did it. From the outside, almost all of these cameras look the same. Also, hopefully, it will come with an adapter to fit a 1.25 inch diagonal.

#32 WillCarney

WillCarney

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1772
  • Joined: 08 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Bloomington, ILL

Posted 25 June 2012 - 08:52 AM

Stupid question, are you guys just using a lodestar autoguider for those pictures?

Chris


I've used one for a number of different picture events.
I have used wide angle lenses 6-15mm for shooting meteors and satellites. As well as using it in the telescope as a camera. On several occasions I used a QSI as a guider and the Loadstar as the camera.

William

#33 mclewis1

mclewis1

    Thread Killer

  • *****
  • Posts: 18678
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2006
  • Loc: New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 25 June 2012 - 01:52 PM

I also wonder about the IR filter. Hopefully, it will be almost the same as taking out the IR filter on the Samsung cameras. If you attempt to take out the filter, please let us know how you did it. From the outside, almost all of these cameras look the same. Also, hopefully, it will come with an adapter to fit a 1.25 inch diagonal.

Jim,

It will not come with an adapter. It likely won't come with anything extra. It may not even come with a manual of any sort. It's a C mount box camera, designed for low light security use. The usual customers are security systems integrators who have a fair amount of experience with similar cameras (yeah I know, if you met any of these folks I may be giving them more credit here).

Because it's a day/night or low light type of camera is has settings to take advantage of these low light conditions which makes the camera of interest to us in the video astronomy side of things.

Just like a Samsung security cameras you'll need to figure out the removal of the IR filter (lets pray that with this camera that it's as easy to do as with the Samsung and not something that's well glued in place), source a C mount to 1.25" nose piece (the adapter you mentioned) - a cheaper model made from Delrin is appropriate here but you should also be able to use the one that came with your Mallincam if you choose to, and a suitable +12v power source. Note that the power connections are small screw on type so you'll need to have a cable with bare wire ends and you'll need to ensure that you always get the polarity correct. Put the wires in the wrong way and you'll likely fry the camera.

The video connection is composite only via a BNC connector ... again some of the stuff that came with your Mallincam may help out here.

Then there's the menu system which is likely to be quite different than that on the Samsungs. Nobody will know what settings are appropriate for planets or DSOs (although some educated guesses will likely get somewhat close).

Using this camera for astronomy purposes will be a real DIY project. Not a tough project for those folks with experience with the Samsungs or similar but it's definitely not a commercial plug n play type of setup. There won't be any hand holding available until a few folks have time to really work with the camera.

#34 jambi99

jambi99

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 368
  • Joined: 14 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Quebec, Canada

Posted 25 June 2012 - 09:03 PM

I just ordered one too.The thing is that i sold my scb-4000 a month ago to finance my Orion deep sky imager II hehe. However, i was planning to get a scb-2000 for quick observation and for planetary. Therefore for 75 $ (50 $ cheaper than the scb-2000) and some better specs(on paper), i think its good bet.

#35 jambi99

jambi99

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 368
  • Joined: 14 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Quebec, Canada

Posted 25 June 2012 - 09:21 PM

Do you think the 50% smaller pixel size can truly be translated to 50% loss of light gathering? This, compared to the the original exview sensor? People seem to report that the scb-2000 is actually pretty close in term of sensitivity compared to the scb-4000. Despite pixel size 40% smaller and the fact the the camera has a super had II sensor. This is why i sold my scb-4000. I don't think the difference is that much. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that integration time and focal ratio seem to have more effect on the camera sensitivity.

#36 ccs_hello

ccs_hello

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10243
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2004

Posted 25 June 2012 - 10:55 PM

jambi99,

It is a long story to tell. But a general rule of thumb is:
under the same generation of technology improvements, the per-pixel area "photon to electron" conversion factor tends to scale linearly, except toward the smaller pixel size, the line starts to go flat and even curve up until the pixel size is far too small to be worthy for that generation of technology.

Of course, long integration time and fast f-ratio is forcing more star-light to fall into the same pixel "photon bucket" thus more signal ("S" part of S/N) to help the image quality.

P.S. you might have noticed that I have been careful not to use the terms: sensitivity (fuzzy, misunderstood, misinterpreted, or even "cooked" term) and QE (multiple definitions and some are misleading).
Thus my post is dry and imprecise. Sorry about that.

Clear Skies!

ccs_hello

#37 ccs_hello

ccs_hello

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10243
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2004

Posted 25 June 2012 - 11:12 PM

To complement my previous post, let me express my personal opinion/guessing...

If that videocam mfg makes two models of the 1024x videocams, if everything are made the same except
one is using an ExviewHAD II type-1/3" high-resolution CCD, and
the other is using an ExviewHAD II type-1/3" super-high resolution (960H) CCD

I'll pick the former, if low-light performance is the main decision factor. Note that spatial resolution for that 960H version won't be that high anyway.

Clear Skies!

ccs_hello

#38 jambi99

jambi99

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 368
  • Joined: 14 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Quebec, Canada

Posted 25 June 2012 - 11:54 PM

I agree too and it think that any improvement is always good. However, my point is that the pixel size and the sensor type seems to be quit negligible with very fast f-ratio. See, we are using these cameras in a particular way. The fact that we are using these camera with really fast focal ratio is not, in fact, what they are designed for. Let me us the analogy of the water bucket. Lets say you put these buckets(bigger and smaller) under a rain fall(normal use of the CCD). Then, the bucket size will matter. However, if you put the same buckets under the niagara fall(fast f-ration), the bucket size doesn't matter anylonger. Sorry, the analogy might be a little a inaccurate, but it give you an idea of what i mean.

#39 core

core

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1604
  • Joined: 23 Feb 2008
  • Loc: Mostly in Norman, OK

Posted 26 June 2012 - 12:06 AM

See, we are using these cameras in a particular way. The fact that we are using these camera with really fast focal ratio is not, in fact, what they are designed for.


The way I'm reading it ... the original intent of these cameras are for cctv applications - most all C/CS mount lens I've seen have very larger apertures - eg, I have a 8mm f/1.6, 25mm f/1.4, 12.5mm f/1.3

#40 ccs_hello

ccs_hello

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10243
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2004

Posted 26 June 2012 - 07:11 AM

Peter,

Shorter focal length lenses are easier/cheaper to make. The Entrance pupil (or Objective lens diameter) in the above examples are just 5mm, 17.85mm, and 9.6mm respectively. A long focal length with fast f-ratio, even if the lens' output image circle size does not need to be large (just large enough to cover videocam's tiny type-1/2" sensor area), the price will be high and Chromatic Aberration will require premium optics.


jambi99,

What you are describing is known as the common imaging triads:

(a) make the exposure time longer, thus more photons can be collected
(b) make the optical system more efficient to "funnel" the incoming photon flux to the "photon detection apparatus". E.g., fast optics, better lens coating (if refractors, if typical camera lenses), better mirror coating (if reflectors).
© make the "photon detection apparatus" (e.g., an image sensor) more efficient in converting/processing/displaying an image.

For (a), requires better tracking, polar alignment, good light pollution control, and better seeing.
For (b), requires more investment on premium optics
For ©, requires more technology advancements (opto-electronics, electronics, image science & processing, etc.) and sometimes serious money.

In another word, under photon starvation shooting condition (like us the astro people), that Niagara River is just a drying stream and would require a lot of help, (a)+(b)+© incurs a lot of trade-offs.


Luckily, in this VEAA branch, at the current time, I'd say it's a golden age under these constraints:
- inexpensive long exposure videocams (re-purposed from mass-market security-industry day-night CCTV cameras) are readily available
- its low spatial resolution, (arguably some may add the word barely) good enough (NTSC video) quality, and tiny sensor area put less burdens on mount's tracking and premium optics

From this baseline, there are multiple directions to branch out. Some will say the ROI (return of investment) will not be that great any more :) :). Of course everyone is entitled to have his/her own opinions on those factors.

Clear Skies!

ccs_hello

#41 jbell

jbell

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 216
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2010

Posted 26 June 2012 - 08:00 AM

From this baseline, there are multiple directions to branch into. Some will say the ROI (return of investment) will not be that great any more :) :). Of course everyone is entitled to have his/her own opinions on those factors.

Clear Skies!

ccs_hello


I couldn't agree more... a balanced approach ends up with a better overall result. Balancing scope to mount to camera.

I spent a year trying to figure that one out.

One of the things that would make a great sticky for those just trying to dive in, would be a low, medium,high (price) "standard" for hardware for real time imaging.

maybe something like a ioptron refractor/samsung... a C8 or LT6 with a DSI III (or something like it) and a bigger meade/celestron with a mallen..

just thinking a few cookie cutter "it's all been figured out before" options might help folks.

#42 scout72

scout72

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Joined: 12 May 2008
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 26 June 2012 - 10:47 AM


SDC-435/SCB-2000:
Pixel Size
NTSC 6.35um * 7.4um
PAL 6.5um * 6.25um

Lntech Cam:
NTSC 5um * 7.4um
PAL 5um * 6.25um

Sony measured sensivity @f5.6 (standard sensitivity test)

Sdc-435/SCB2000 Superhad II:
NTSC 2250mv
PAL 2250mv

Lntech Cam Exview II:
NTSC 2450mv
PAL 2400mv

The sensitivity charts are interesting too for the 960h exview chip- more red sensitivity.


Brian

#43 scout72

scout72

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Joined: 12 May 2008
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 26 June 2012 - 11:04 AM


Be advised- this camera may not have full manual shutter/sens-up- won't be able to confirm until I test the camera in person-

I did get a response back form the seller with more details on the DSP menus - but have not gotten confirmation that it is mechanical/sliding filter- but from the menu information I have seen I am not sure that this camera has full manual shutter control.

#44 Hemmi

Hemmi

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 283
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 26 June 2012 - 02:30 PM

Brian can you share what you have found?

#45 scout72

scout72

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Joined: 12 May 2008
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 26 June 2012 - 03:38 PM

Yep- true ICR- so should be mechanical IR filter which is good news:

Attached Thumbnails

  • 5290449-day night.jpg


#46 scout72

scout72

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Joined: 12 May 2008
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 26 June 2012 - 03:39 PM

more files:

Attached Files



#47 scout72

scout72

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Joined: 12 May 2008
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 26 June 2012 - 03:40 PM

more

Attached Files



#48 Hemmi

Hemmi

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 283
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 26 June 2012 - 03:53 PM

I noticed the Menu usage page also states a max of x256 on exposure menu. So who knows whats really there. Did you ever find out what DSP this thing uses?

#49 scout72

scout72

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Joined: 12 May 2008
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 26 June 2012 - 04:57 PM

I did ask that question about the x256 in the example - guy said that was only because it is a generic manual sheet from an earliuer version of the camera- he said it absolutely does sens-up x1024

No answer on the dsp

Attached Thumbnails

  • 5290493-LNTech CCTV Camera .jpg


#50 scout72

scout72

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Joined: 12 May 2008
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 26 June 2012 - 05:03 PM

lAST ONE:

Attached Thumbnails

  • 5290498-1.jpg



CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics