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

Revolution Imager R2

  • Please log in to reply
834 replies to this topic

#26 Censustaker

Censustaker

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1250
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2014
  • Loc: Utah

Posted 18 May 2016 - 01:44 PM

That's what i'm thinking, i know they are the same sensor and the effects of scopes, reducers and filters. I'll try and do some side-by-side when the weather cooperates. i'm probably just imagining it :D



#27 Kaikul

Kaikul

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1713
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2014

Posted 18 May 2016 - 01:46 PM

R2-D2 series? ....  :ohgeeze:

 

:lol:

 

Brainstorming here guys.... Could this be a future version of a future product based on this second version...?  :question:

 

AHA!!! A camera configured for solar - henceforth, Daytime - observing kinda like the PST. But it got so popular beyond it's stock, another camera needed to be found! Buuuuuuut, don't let Disney hear about it.  ;)



#28 Censustaker

Censustaker

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1250
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2014
  • Loc: Utah

Posted 18 May 2016 - 02:02 PM

i could paint one white and blue for you if you want.. it'll be Censustaker's free Revolution Imager R2-D2 upgrade service. out of the kindness of my heart. 


  • barbarosa, BinoGuy and Spacefreak1974 like this

#29 Spacefreak1974

Spacefreak1974

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4316
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2015
  • Loc: Indianapolis, IN

Posted 18 May 2016 - 02:31 PM

So is the overall feeling about the new camera that it's more favorable in all aspects than the previous one? I'm curious has anyone used a Vixen or similar flip mirror diagonal with the Revolution Imager. Sure would be cool to have both visual and EAA without changing the diagonal

#30 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8151
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003
  • Loc: OC, CA, USA

Posted 18 May 2016 - 03:00 PM

So is the overall feeling about the new camera that it's more favorable in all aspects than the previous one? I'm curious has anyone used a Vixen or similar flip mirror diagonal with the Revolution Imager. Sure would be cool to have both visual and EAA without changing the diagonal


Mike at OCT should be able to give us feedback on this as he might have such a scope in stock at his store.

#31 mclewis1

mclewis1

    Thread Killer

  • *****
  • Posts: 18679
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2006
  • Loc: New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 18 May 2016 - 04:04 PM

"more favorable in all aspects"

 

I'm not sure I'd say that yet. The R2 doesn't have as long an exposure capability. Can you compensate for that? Perhaps to some degree, perhaps entirely with external live stacking. The menu system sure looks easier to navigate and some of the controls appear more capable.

 

Overall I'd say compared to the R1 the R2 is slightly different and more refined but also effective for EAA work. Just how effective? Well watch this space ... the direct comparisons will likely be coming soon and should be very interesting.



#32 Kaikul

Kaikul

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1713
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2014

Posted 18 May 2016 - 04:29 PM

i could paint one white and blue for you if you want.. it'll be Censustaker's free Revolution Imager R2-D2 upgrade service. out of the kindness of my heart. 

 

 

Gotta be done in secret, or else the (Disney) Empire Strikes Back (via copyright lawyers). :grin:



#33 Kaikul

Kaikul

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1713
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2014

Posted 18 May 2016 - 04:35 PM

 

Overall I'd say compared to the R1 the R2 is slightly different and more refined but also effective for EAA work. Just how effective? Well watch this space ... the direct comparisons will likely be coming soon and should be very interesting.

 

 Not sure what you meant there by "refined" but it'll be interesting to see the comparison as you said. Popcorn ready.  :gotpopcorn:



#34 mclewis1

mclewis1

    Thread Killer

  • *****
  • Posts: 18679
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2006
  • Loc: New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 18 May 2016 - 08:53 PM

I was thinking about the menus being a bit clearer (or refined) compared to the R1. Pass the  :gotpopcorn:



#35 CA Curtis 17

CA Curtis 17

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 802
  • Joined: 13 Feb 2012
  • Loc: California

Posted 18 May 2016 - 09:54 PM

Jon (Spacefreak),

 

I see nothing so far that would lead me to conclude that the R2 is more favorable than the original Revolution Imager, call it R1.  Some have suggested tighter stars, but as far as I read the comments, it is only a suggestion.  Mark suggests the Menu is easier to navigate which I think depends upon your point of view.  Look here to see many of the menu screens for the R2 and judge for yourself: http://www.revolutio.../pages/menus-r2.  I'm not so sure that it is easier myself.  As Mark also said the max exposure is 5sec compared to 20sec.  I'd say too soon to tell performance differences between the two.

 

 

Also, my intent for this OP was not a comparison between R1 and R2 but I suppose that is inevitable.  I don't own the R1 but I do have the Lntech 300 PAL which is the same camera, so eventually I can compare the two.  But I really need to spend sufficient time with the R2 to get to know how to get the best out of it that I can.  Then I suppose I will post a comparison.  Others will probably get there faster that I will.

 

In the meantime, I will work with this camera when the skies allow and report back what I find in this post.

 

Best Regards,

Curtis



#36 Censustaker

Censustaker

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1250
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2014
  • Loc: Utah

Posted 18 May 2016 - 11:41 PM

I figured it out. There is a sharpness setting in the PICT ADJUST menu that defaults to 8. I don't believe I ever used the sharpness on my LN300s. I turned it down to 3 and got a more familiar image. see below.

 

 

sharpness 8:

21_36_17.png


  • trujillosct likes this

#37 Censustaker

Censustaker

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1250
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2014
  • Loc: Utah

Posted 18 May 2016 - 11:42 PM

sharpness 3:

 

21_40_59.png

 

scope: es ar102 achromat 102mm

focal reducer: the revolution imager bundled

filter: celestron red #29

exposure mode: FIX, x256, 12db gain.


  • ghostboo likes this

#38 Censustaker

Censustaker

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1250
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2014
  • Loc: Utah

Posted 18 May 2016 - 11:43 PM

oh and DNR: 2



#39 Giorgos

Giorgos

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 322
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Athens, Greece

Posted 19 May 2016 - 02:52 AM

So is the overall feeling about the new camera that it's more favorable in all aspects than the previous one? I'm curious has anyone used a Vixen or similar flip mirror diagonal with the Revolution Imager. Sure would be cool to have both visual and EAA without changing the diagonal

I do all the time with my Skywatcher 102/500 and LN300 camera. Keep in mind that with the Vixen flip mirror in place a 32 mm Erfle eyepiece can be focused at the same time with the camera if inserted only about 1cm into the diagonal. Also looking at bright monitors you are not dark adapted so only relatively bright objects are visible through the eyepiece. The Vixen flip mirror is also cheaply made it's not  perfectly collimated and lacks collimation adjustment. It just came with my Vixen A80ss refractor and I had it in hand. Regarding the Revolution 2 camera I wonder which one it is. I already have cables, adapters, filters, grabber etc and I don't see any reason to buy a complete package. I guess it is just a cheap cctv camera.


Edited by Giorgos, 19 May 2016 - 02:53 AM.


#40 Dom543

Dom543

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1099
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2011

Posted 19 May 2016 - 02:56 AM

So is the overall feeling about the new camera that it's more favorable in all aspects than the previous one? I'm curious has anyone used a Vixen or similar flip mirror diagonal with the Revolution Imager. Sure would be cool to have both visual and EAA without changing the diagonal

 

Not with a revolution but I have used this Vixen flip diagonal with my Sammy and now with the Lodestar x2 and other cameras. Here you see it on the Meade 10".

 

VixenFlip_50%.jpg

 

The Vixen flip diagonal has a 2" nosepiece and is about 100mm long. I put the lenses from a Meade 6.3 focal reducer inside of its nosepiece and so the focal reducer and the flip mirror share the same back focus. The camera gets the faster focal ratio light and the eyepiece is getting a wider angle view through the reducer lens. The ep is a 25mm crosshair and offers a 3-4x wider view than the camera, Helpful to find and center objects and to provide an alternative view to that of the camera. In as sense, it shows the object on the sensor in its wider context. The flip mirror also makes it very easy to take darks. All one needs to do is to flip the mirror in the eyepiece position.

 

Clear Skies!

--Dom



#41 Dragon Man

Dragon Man

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3381
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Snake Valley, Australia

Posted 19 May 2016 - 07:58 AM

I am waiting for my R2 to arrive and I will do a comparison between the models again.  :)


  • Relativist, bcloud, StarMike8SE and 1 other like this

#42 OleCuss

OleCuss

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2279
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2010

Posted 19 May 2016 - 08:05 AM

So is the overall feeling about the new camera that it's more favorable in all aspects than the previous one? I'm curious has anyone used a Vixen or similar flip mirror diagonal with the Revolution Imager. Sure would be cool to have both visual and EAA without changing the diagonal

 

I'm really not at all sure about that.

 

Note that we don't really know the specifications of the camera and that they switched from one camera to the other when they could no longer get the LN300.  You also cannot do as long an exposure as you could do with the LN300 which implies that the camera is not optimized for use under dark skies.

 

Upshot is that I don't know why this particular camera is being sold.  I'm not even sure that the sensor is generally available anymore which might mean that this camera was available really inexpensively because it was being liquidated  I'd note this does not imply that it is not a worthy camera, just that it may have been unwanted inventory.  Having bought a bunch of used equipment I have no problem with good stuff purchased cheaply because others don't want it.

 

But I speculate.  All I really know at this time is that it is a camera which is making some people happy and it appears to be an Effio-A using some version of an 811 sensor.  Somewhat hobbled by only being able to do X256 but in heavily light-polluted skies this may not be an issue?

 

It'd be nice to know exactly what sensor is in the thing.  There have been several versions of the ICX811 so knowing that it is some sort of 811 doesn't precisely tell us what it is.

 

But others may not care.



#43 CA Curtis 17

CA Curtis 17

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 802
  • Joined: 13 Feb 2012
  • Loc: California

Posted 19 May 2016 - 08:36 AM

OleCuss,

 

I only know of the  Sony ICX811AKA and ICX811DKV versions of the 811 CCDs.  Looking at the data sheets for both, the only difference Sony mentions between the two is the smaller mount package of the DKV.  They are both Super HAD CCD II sensors and the number of pixels, both total and effective, pixel sizes, sensitivities, saturation signals and smear are identical between the two.  Unfortunately, I cannot find the sensitivity versus wavelength curves for both to compare.  However, there is nothing in what I see that would say that the sensors have any different performance other than the packaging size.

 

I would be interested if you or anyone else knows of another documented difference between the two sensors or of any other versions of these 811 CCDs.

 

There is of course a difference in the DSPs as was pointed out previously which also shows in the differences in the menus.

 

Best Regards,

Curtis



#44 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8151
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003
  • Loc: OC, CA, USA

Posted 19 May 2016 - 08:53 AM

What I think should be investigated is the gain setting, that has the potential to impact the output significantly.

#45 OleCuss

OleCuss

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2279
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2010

Posted 19 May 2016 - 09:02 AM

OleCuss,

 

I only know of the  Sony ICX811AKA and ICX811DKV versions of the 811 CCDs.  Looking at the data sheets for both, the only difference Sony mentions between the two is the smaller mount package of the DKV.  They are both Super HAD CCD II sensors and the number of pixels, both total and effective, pixel sizes, sensitivities, saturation signals and smear are identical between the two.  Unfortunately, I cannot find the sensitivity versus wavelength curves for both to compare.  However, there is nothing in what I see that would say that the sensors have any different performance other than the packaging size.

 

I would be interested if you or anyone else knows of another documented difference between the two sensors or of any other versions of these 811 CCDs.

 

There is of course a difference in the DSPs as was pointed out previously which also shows in the differences in the menus.

 

Best Regards,

Curtis

 

The ICX811 versions you noted are the only ones I know of as well.  That doesn't mean there aren't others.  Given that there are different versions I'd assume that there is some difference worthy of a distinction but I don't know what the difference is or if it is significant/insignificant.

 

Ah, well.  Not sure it really matters too much from my perspective - more interesting than relevant.  I suspect that those who have the previous version and thought it is/was good won't really see any reason to buy this one.  And others happy with their current cameras won't see a need for this either.  It should probably be those without cameras who should want the specs.

 

I'm hoping to try out a pre-production Watec in the next week or two.  Not yet released and I haven't gotten the specs on it as of yet.  Supposed to be HD but that's about all I know.  Not entirely sure if/when I'll get to see it.


Edited by OleCuss, 19 May 2016 - 09:03 AM.


#46 David B in NM

David B in NM

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1027
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2010

Posted 19 May 2016 - 09:16 AM

OleCuss,

 

 

I would be interested if you or anyone else knows of another documented difference between the two sensors or of any other versions of these 811 CCDs.

 

Best Regards,

Curtis

 

The ICX811DKV is a ceramic packaged CCD.  The AKA is a plastic packaged CCD.

 

David B in NM



#47 CA Curtis 17

CA Curtis 17

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 802
  • Joined: 13 Feb 2012
  • Loc: California

Posted 19 May 2016 - 09:16 AM

 

OleCuss,

 

I only know of the  Sony ICX811AKA and ICX811DKV versions of the 811 CCDs.  Looking at the data sheets for both, the only difference Sony mentions between the two is the smaller mount package of the DKV.  They are both Super HAD CCD II sensors and the number of pixels, both total and effective, pixel sizes, sensitivities, saturation signals and smear are identical between the two.  Unfortunately, I cannot find the sensitivity versus wavelength curves for both to compare.  However, there is nothing in what I see that would say that the sensors have any different performance other than the packaging size.

 

I would be interested if you or anyone else knows of another documented difference between the two sensors or of any other versions of these 811 CCDs.

 

There is of course a difference in the DSPs as was pointed out previously which also shows in the differences in the menus.

 

Best Regards,

Curtis

 

The ICX811 versions you noted are the only ones I know of as well.  That doesn't mean there aren't others.  Given that there are different versions I'd assume that there is some difference worthy of a distinction but I don't know what the difference is or if it is significant/insignificant.

 

 

According to Sony the only difference is in the packaging.  So that will not impact performance.  Performance differences then have to be explained by the DSP and firmware.  As to other versions, I am open to hearing about them, but my search on the internet only showed the two I mentioned.

 

I would be interested in your results with the Watec and its cost.

 

Regards,

Curtis


  • OleCuss likes this

#48 David B in NM

David B in NM

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1027
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2010

Posted 19 May 2016 - 09:22 AM

What I think should be investigated is the gain setting, that has the potential to impact the output significantly.

 

Curtis,

 

You are correct.  The Effio Gain and DNR is a very powerful combo.  I've spoken here in this forum in the past and stated this.  The LN300 is much easier to use than the Effio cams.  However, with time and tweaking, the Effio cams can yield the same results. 

 

Effio cams do not have x1024.  I found one P-model that had x512.  However, not all P-models have x512 even if they use the same DSP.

 

I suggest people experiment with the gain and DNR in the R2.  IMHO it will be a very nice camera coupled with Sharpcap or another stacking program.

 

I've found one can almost max out gain on the Effio with the DNR max'd out and still obtain very nice results.

 

David B in NM


Edited by David B in NM, 19 May 2016 - 09:24 AM.


#49 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8151
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003
  • Loc: OC, CA, USA

Posted 19 May 2016 - 09:29 AM

Max gain is music to my ears, can't wait to try it!
  • Censustaker likes this

#50 OleCuss

OleCuss

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2279
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2010

Posted 19 May 2016 - 09:44 AM


 

 

According to Sony the only difference is in the packaging.  So that will not impact performance.  Performance differences then have to be explained by the DSP and firmware.  As to other versions, I am open to hearing about them, but my search on the internet only showed the two I mentioned.

 

I would be interested in your results with the Watec and its cost.

 

Regards,

Curtis

 

 

Thank you for that.

 

Not at all sure what that Watec will be or that it will be suitable for astronomical purposes.  It seems to be an IP camera with all that implies, but Watec makes some really nice and reliable cameras.

 

Price is going to actually be iffy for me.  The friend who is getting it is a Watec dealer and would sell it to me at cost and he tends to sell cheaper than a lot of his competition so the costs I'd be getting might not have much to do with the retail market.  He doesn't normally sell stuff to the public - virtually no online presence and a virtual guarantee that you haven't heard of his company.  It's an odd situation but works for me!

 

If it turns out to be a seriously interesting camera for astronomy I might push to see if he'd be willing to sell to the astronomy market or if he'd do a group buy through me.  But we are not his market and I doubt it will happen.  The benefit to the forum is that I may be able to check it out and if it is remarkably good I can clue people in that they may be able to get one from a Watec dealer even if he isn't going to go after the astronomy market.

 

As I said, it is kind of an odd situation.


Edited by OleCuss, 19 May 2016 - 09:47 AM.



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