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

Ntech 300(small version) x1024 ex view camera

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
121 replies to this topic

#26 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1540
  • Joined: 10 May 2007

Posted 30 August 2012 - 11:26 PM

More mod pics..
Drilled hole for cable

Attached Thumbnails

  • 5395927-DSCN1529 (Medium).JPG


#27 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1540
  • Joined: 10 May 2007

Posted 30 August 2012 - 11:28 PM

wire points besides vertical pads..

Attached Thumbnails

  • 5395929-DSCN1532 (Medium).JPG


#28 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1540
  • Joined: 10 May 2007

Posted 30 August 2012 - 11:30 PM

Picture for above dwng..

Attached Thumbnails

  • 5395931-DSCN1528 (Medium).JPG


#29 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1540
  • Joined: 10 May 2007

Posted 30 August 2012 - 11:31 PM

Done fin.....All buttoned up..(lol)...
ITs done ,just add power and the video to the Monitor or pc
and works great...also the back buttons still work also.

Attached Thumbnails

  • 5395935-DSCN1533 (Medium).JPG


#30 alexaggie

alexaggie

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2012

Posted 31 August 2012 - 02:10 AM

Great work! Did you solder the cable into headers to put on there? or did you just solder the control directly on to the board? It seems that this route would greatly streamline all of the cables and things coming off the camera.

#31 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1540
  • Joined: 10 May 2007

Posted 31 August 2012 - 08:51 AM

I went to the board,there is a little more room...But you can use the header and a meter to check you have thre right solder pads. as per dwg and photo..The header is great if u can solder to it,being very very small..BTW the original switchs,video all work as b4 the mod.

#32 darethehair

darethehair

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2009

Posted 31 August 2012 - 12:12 PM

I went to the board,there is a little more room...But you can use the header and a meter to check you have thre right solder pads. as per dwg and photo..The header is great if u can solder to it,being very very small..BTW the original switchs,video all work as b4 the mod.


So now you can do the deeper evaluation/comparison that we are hoping for? :) Maybe an easy question to start off with: is it 'better' than the SCB-2000? You have already stated that it is a lot more sensitive (which sounds good to me).

#33 James Cunningham

James Cunningham

    Skylab

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

Posted 31 August 2012 - 12:13 PM

Can you post a picture of the wires once they have been connected and does it work?

#34 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1540
  • Joined: 10 May 2007

Posted 31 August 2012 - 08:10 PM

Im not saying that this camera is better than my trusty samsung 435...It does seam to be more sensetive.It seams to me that at the same 4 seconds of exposure time,the lntech 300 seams to get more exposure of the subject...This can be bad or good depending on ur use and conditions....
The moon is out now and I will hve to wait to do some deaper test.....And Yes the remote works...(Jim)..To realy understand how the wires go on you need to look at your camera(pull the 4 screws off for the back frame,as above).
This is only for a 300 type camera...The other units are different. ..If you are not able to use a ohm meter,this button option mod may not be for you..Cables may be different colors ect and should be traced out..
This was as easy as my samsung 435 buttton mod.

#35 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1540
  • Joined: 10 May 2007

Posted 02 September 2012 - 11:40 AM

Some results..from 9-1-12...M27 AT8RC x.5 reducer..
These were at x1024,,,,med agc,.6...
Adjustments of brightness and AGC are touchy....and work
together..
These 2 pics are with an Orion uv/skyglow imaging filter on.

Attached Thumbnails

  • 5399584-cap10 (Small)-2.jpg


#36 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1540
  • Joined: 10 May 2007

Posted 02 September 2012 - 11:43 AM

The SDC435 was more simpler for me to use..BUT This camera
may just be new to me...again x1024 (17 seconds)M27

At High AGC this would take much less time.

Attached Thumbnails

  • 5399589-cap14 (Small)-3.jpg


#37 alexaggie

alexaggie

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2012

Posted 03 September 2012 - 09:58 AM

Finallly got mine out last night for the first time. This is my first attempt at using a camera with my scope, but it worked pretty well I think... Got this pic of M42 early this morning...it is processed, but I was amazed at the lack of noise. [image][/image]

Attached Thumbnails

  • 5400871-FirstOrion.jpg


#38 John59

John59

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 609
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2011

Posted 03 September 2012 - 11:42 AM

Some results..from 9-1-12...M27 AT8RC x.5 reducer..
These were at x1024,,,,med agc,.6...
Adjustments of brightness and AGC are touchy....and work
together..
These 2 pics are with an Orion uv/skyglow imaging filter on.


Bob,
Great shots! I agree this one is not as simplistic as the Samsung. I think it has more potential but requires much more tweaking for every object. I was trying to put together a settings post but I have found that it is never the exactly same in almost all the settings from object to object. I am having problems getting the color to really come out. I have resorted to “Night” mode just to play with the AGC, brightness etc for now. Also to get a faster response time for initial focusing I turn off SDNR as it really slows down the response to adjustments. Glad you like the camera. I think it will be a good one once all the characteristics are mapped out. Look forward to seeing more. If you ever stream on NSN with it let me know I would like to see the results.

#39 John59

John59

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 609
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2011

Posted 03 September 2012 - 11:50 AM

Finallly got mine out last night for the first time. This is my first attempt at using a camera with my scope, but it worked pretty well I think... Got this pic of M42 early this morning...it is processed, but I was amazed at the lack of noise. [image][/image]


Alex,
Glad your first try was a good one! I think you will enjoy this camera. This will open up a whole new realm of possibilities with your telescope. Keep us posted with your results.

#40 alexaggie

alexaggie

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2012

Posted 05 September 2012 - 12:48 AM

Thanks John! hopefully when the weather gets better I will see you at the dam sometime.

#41 Teabagger

Teabagger

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2012

Posted 05 September 2012 - 03:39 PM


how did you process the image of m42?

#42 GlennLeDrew

GlennLeDrew

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15849
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008

Posted 05 September 2012 - 04:42 PM

I too was wondering about how it was 'processed', for processing is normally performed on images of dim targets having low contrast. The inner Huygenian region of M42 is just about as bright as nebulosity can get. For this reason it's a poor test target for the assessment of sensitivity and noise levels.

To me, this image simply appears like a single frame taken at a long focal ratio and/or short exposure time. The fact that this pretty near brightest of all nebulosities appears this 'dark' is by itself no great confidence builder on performance with less brilliant objects.

#43 alexaggie

alexaggie

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2012

Posted 06 September 2012 - 04:10 PM

yes, its a single frame with a short exposure....I just meant that I ran it through photoshop. It was also taken from the border of a white zone in my backyard.

#44 GlennLeDrew

GlennLeDrew

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15849
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008

Posted 06 September 2012 - 05:15 PM

And it reveals just how very bright the inner part of M42 is, whereby a nice and colorful view can be had, with still a 'black' sky, under horrid light pollution. This is why such bright targets do not make good tests for imaging equipment where sensitivity and noise characteristics are desired to know; even un-cooled, low-sensitivity, noisy cameras on warm nights can deliver good looking results. If only a *lot* more nebulae (many planetaries do, but they're almost universally tiny) had such high surface brightness!

#45 alexaggie

alexaggie

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2012

Posted 06 September 2012 - 08:27 PM

Indeed. That is my first photo EVER...taken when working out the kinks with the camera. It is through an 8" dob, so until I get my EQ platform running and can get out to a dark site I have to stick with very short exposures. I did crank it up to 512 and 1024, but as I have no tracking it was a smear across the frame. The noise, however, was not much more than in the picture I uploaded. The brightness of that nebula was blowing out the image at those speeds. The shutter setting for the picture was x8. As I am new, it seemed to me that for an exposure time that short, under those conditions, the camera will be sensitive enough for some pretty good imaging under more ideal conditions. The next time I get out to my dark site I am going to try M101 as that one is absolutely impossible to see from my house.. That should probably be a better measure of potential.

#46 James Cunningham

James Cunningham

    Skylab

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

Posted 06 September 2012 - 09:32 PM

Where is the image?

#47 scout72

scout72

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Joined: 12 May 2008

Posted 06 September 2012 - 11:36 PM

Where is the image?


About 9 posts back-

#48 rkayakr

rkayakr

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1490
  • Joined: 27 Oct 2010

Posted 07 September 2012 - 07:37 AM

What are people using for capture? I tried the EasyCAP / WXastro combo that I use with my Samsung and could not acquire an image from the Ntech.

#49 James Cunningham

James Cunningham

    Skylab

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

Posted 08 September 2012 - 06:11 PM

Did you ever figure out why the camera was only showing black and white at first?
Jim

#50 Teabagger

Teabagger

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2012

Posted 08 September 2012 - 06:45 PM

What are people using for capture? I tried the EasyCAP / WXastro combo that I use with my Samsung and could not acquire an image from the Ntech.


Im using some cheap kworld ub445 capture device(that was a real pain to get to work with win 7), and it works fine now with sharpcap. wxastro, ampcap, Videolan. It has been pouring rain since my camera arrived so I have only had a chance to set it up in house.... Really looking forward to getting it under the skies.


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