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

New ASI 462MC camera test: First Light...Jove, Saturn & Mars.

  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#1 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14,201
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 05 July 2020 - 07:26 AM

Hi all - well, after waiting several weeks for the camera to get here due to unknown reasons (Fedex was taking over the large TNT freight company) it arrivied here last Tuesday & quite a lot of other things have happenned to us... wink.gif

 

Sam's generosity in giving this new camera to us is much appreciated waytogo.gif - this is the 7th camera now that we have been lucky enough to receive through his largess. smile.gif

 

All this culminated in us leaving on Thursday afternoon immediately after I had been laying on a dentist's chair as he wrestled for over half an hour to extract a large tooth that had split right through...I mainly kept my eye closed as he wrestled & the nurse held my head firmly..! lol.gif

 

Still taking pain-killers for it 3 days later: we got to Carrieton (400km roughly) after sunset on Thursday but knew we needed to head significanly further North to get out from under the cloud-blanket that enveloped nearly all the Southern half of South Australia...

 

Drove another 300km the next day to Copley & set the scope etc up hoping for some clear areas at least, with no real expectations of worthwhile seeing...

 

I would describe the seeing as "reasonable" trying to be the most objective: onscreen feeds were quite ok for a small window with Jove but the detail was somewhat murky & focus quite dificult to achieve, taking a good few minutes between each capture to be reasonably satisfied that it was the best achievable...

 

When the seeing dropped we switched to Saturn but surprisingly the seeing was a bit better, even though these planets are quite near to each other in the sky...

 

Mars was only just over 40° by then but we decided to get it onscreen before going inside for a warm drink - we were both extremely tired from the last few weeks etc & my eyes were getting very sore frown.gif - but when the appearance looked promising we decided to hang in for a few captures at the least, never knowing how seeing can turn despite elevation...

 

A good thing because after the early captures we went inside for over an hour to when Mars was well over 50° - the seeing had gone bottom-up & the images were rubbish..!

 

Anyway, as I said in my last thread I felt that the sensitivity of this new 462 camera was really quite noticeably evident: I have tried to make a couple of FireCapture .txt comparisons & they will appear here...unfortunately the only ASI 224MC logs were with much greater f/l's so not really comparable but I have included some ASI 290MM logs of similar f/l's - & it is of course with similar-sized sensor-pixels...

 

A bit of "apples & oranges" I appreciate, but you can see that the gain needed for similar histograms & fps is pretty darn good for the ASI 462MC... smile.gif

 

With the EFW in situ it allowed us to try some filtered captures that I'm also posting here, with an ir742nm Saturn still to be processed.

 

With the proviso that more trialling is needed & the fact that the seeing was nowhere near that at Bower a week earlier, we still believe this "first light" was a real success with this new sensor: needless to state that a mono sensor would be amazing, we all said that about the ASI 224MC also...with these machine-vision cameras it appears that colour with outstanding ir response is  what is demanded by the companies that make these cameras viable in production etc...so there's not much one can do about that but wish... wink.gif

 

I'll start with the Jovian images in this post...please appreciate that there might be some glitches in the processings due to the rushed circumstances & stress we're under to get these out - plus the fact that they're done in the field on my laptop & then transferred to Pattie's for some more adjustments before posting here. thinking1.gif shrug.gif

 

Perhaps we might get another chance in a couple of days to add to these trials - maybe even with good seeing... fingerscrossed.gif

 

j2020-07-03_14-55_rgb_dpm#2.png

 

j2020-07-03_152458etc_IR742&610&R_dpm.png


Edited by Kokatha man, 05 July 2020 - 07:40 AM.

  • TorstenEdelmann, Sunspot, Achernar and 33 others like this

#2 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14,201
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 05 July 2020 - 07:29 AM

Next the Saturn image, after posting some of the comparable .txt's of FireCapture for Jove that I mentioned above. wink.gif

 

JupCamTxts.jpg

 

Jup-ir610CamTxts.jpg

 

s2020-07-03_16-33_rgb_dpm.png

 

 


  • TorstenEdelmann, zjc26138, Achernar and 20 others like this

#3 wargrafix

wargrafix

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,743
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Trinidad

Posted 05 July 2020 - 07:32 AM

Holy smokes that looks excellent!

 

 

how does the sensitivity compare to the 224MC?

 

Is it more or less noisy?



#4 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14,201
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 05 July 2020 - 07:39 AM

Our images of Mars were in the low to mid-40°'s period...those when it had climbed to over 50° were rubbish in comparison actually. frown.gif

 

Dust appears to be evident in an area that - off the top of my head - is roughly in that region west or south-west of Noachis...or pehaps south of Margaritifer & North of Argyre: for the elevation & seeing we're quite happy with these & look forward to when we do get some good seeing, whenever that might be! fingerscrossed.gif

 

The red filter over the colour sensor - like those with Jove - produced quite decent outcomes & we extended our experimentation to using the blue filter with Mars also! wink.gif

 

mars2020-07-03_17-57_rgb_dpm.png

 

mars2020-07-03_17-45_r_dpm.png

 

mars2020-07-03_17-33_b_dpm.png

 

A "best single frame" as a screenshot of the Mars capture that produced the rgb above:

 

MarsBestFrameCopleyJuly-.jpg

 

The Mars log with a comparison to an earlier date using the ASI 290MM mono camera.

 

MarsCopleyASI462MCtxt.jpg


  • Achernar, sfugardi, Kenny V. and 16 others like this

#5 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14,201
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 05 July 2020 - 07:52 AM

Holy smokes that looks excellent!

 

 

how does the sensitivity compare to the 224MC?

 

Is it more or less noisy?

Amrit, I'd like to answer your question but all the ASI 224MC FC logs I have with us are when using significantly greater f/l's - & thus aren't really comparable...

 

I do think the noise level is meant to be significantly better in the new camera...& although it is the ir bandpasses that are meant to be the big improver in the 462MC, I'm thinking the responses within the visible bandpass are also improvements.....those graphs with their "relative responses" don't really say much therein, but then again, what exactly are they relative to - each other model - or some utterly arbitrary notion/standard..? lol.gif

 

That "best single frame" screenshot of Mars looks quite reasonable for a 621fps image imo... ;)


  • GeorgeInDallas likes this

#6 brstars

brstars

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 37
  • Joined: 05 May 2007
  • Loc: Springfield, LA

Posted 05 July 2020 - 08:09 AM

Darryl, Thanks for the images and updates on the 462... very appreciative of your time, and perseverance!!! The gain, lower noise response numbers are very encouraging!! Jupiter image at 742um looks fantastic... Looking forward to trying out... mine shipped 2 days ago per Zwo site.
Thanks again for encouraging everyone,
george Lamy, springfield, la. USA

#7 wargrafix

wargrafix

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,743
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Trinidad

Posted 05 July 2020 - 08:15 AM

621 fps......danggggg
  • RedLionNJ and kbev like this

#8 GeorgeInDallas

GeorgeInDallas

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 653
  • Joined: 15 Apr 2012
  • Loc: Dallas, Texas USA

Posted 05 July 2020 - 09:00 AM

Darryl,

 

Thanks for your and Pat's efforts in testing this new camera. The detail in the Jupiter IR images is amazing. Wow, is 621 fps some kind of a record for one of these ZWO cameras? The single Mars frame is really nice. What is the rationale for shooting with an R or B filter and a color camera? I think I will have to order one of these based on these results. Your travels and persistence to get imaging opportunities is inspiring. 

 

Good Luck,

George


Edited by GeorgeInDallas, 05 July 2020 - 09:39 AM.


#9 dcaponeii

dcaponeii

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 209
  • Joined: 01 Sep 2019

Posted 05 July 2020 - 09:39 AM

Next the Saturn image, after posting some of the comparable .txt's of FireCapture for Jove that I mentioned above. wink.gif

 

attachicon.gifJupCamTxts.jpg

 

attachicon.gifJup-ir610CamTxts.jpg

 

attachicon.gifs2020-07-03_16-33_rgb_dpm.png

I have a slightly off thread question that results from being able to review your Firecapture logs and comparing them to mine.  I notice that you have achieved an exposure of 4 ms at a Gain of 313 resulting in a capture rate of 247 fps.  With Jupiter and my ASI290MC and a Gain of 300 I must have my exposure at 15 ms to achieve a 50% histogram which of course results in a drastically reduced capture rate.  Were you using a Barlow lens in your captures?  Across the list all my log entries match up closely to yours with the exception of those noted above.  I don't understand why I'm not achieving brighter images but I think it has a great deal to do with the poorer quality images I'm generating still even after much work on collimation.



#10 phileefan

phileefan

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2013
  • Loc: Williamsport, PA

Posted 05 July 2020 - 10:04 AM

Darryl,

 

Great shots indeed! waytogo.gif  That new camera sounds promising. Like the others have commented above, 621 fps is just mind blowing! Get yourself feeling better and keep the images coming........ Clear skies! grin.gif



#11 Rouzbeh

Rouzbeh

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 675
  • Joined: 28 Jun 2006

Posted 05 July 2020 - 10:45 AM

Great Work Darryl, very interesting camera. Useful tests and info.

 

Id also be looking towards seeing the mono one.



#12 GeorgeInDallas

GeorgeInDallas

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 653
  • Joined: 15 Apr 2012
  • Loc: Dallas, Texas USA

Posted 05 July 2020 - 11:32 AM

Darryl,

 

The incredible detail in your IR Jupiter images makes me wonder if an IR image of Saturn might produce similar increase in cloud detail for bands, storms or Hex? Did you shoot any Saturn IR?

 

George



#13 Sunspot

Sunspot

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,422
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2005
  • Loc: Surprise, AZ

Posted 05 July 2020 - 01:52 PM

With the IR sensitivity, I'm wondering how a CH4 image would turn out. (I know..."I'm getting to it"...lol.gif)


  • kbev and happylimpet like this

#14 RedLionNJ

RedLionNJ

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,898
  • Joined: 29 Dec 2009
  • Loc: Red Lion, NJ, USA

Posted 05 July 2020 - 01:57 PM

150,000 frames of Mars? Wow, that 621 fps does wonders!  Must be what, around f/15?   Superb, as always from you!

 

Grant



#15 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14,201
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 05 July 2020 - 08:08 PM

Ok - some folks have been mislead by my omitting to put the ASI 290MM FireCapture .txt next to the ASI 462MC's Mars ones: but we did drive 500km to Moonta Bay in the afternoon the night before last! lol.gif

 

We capture at 621fps with the ASI 290MM also!

 

George, I'm processing the ir742nm capture of Saturn as I type - but trying to process on one laptop in the van & transfer etc to Pattie's lappy (where the keyboard plays up as well I might add! bangbang.gif  & the screen etc is radically different) all becomes a tad difficult when we are as tired as we are atm...I will post it later today! wink.gif

 

As to why we utilised the EFW & individual sensors...well, we wanted to do the near-ir's (610, 742) but I simply wanted to see how versatile it might be with r, g & b filters also...certainly the r-filter performs strongly & in fact we collimated using that at the start...

 

Paul, the graphs show that at around the methane bandpass the whole sensor is operting strongly - I don't methane-image but might try to get hold of one to demonstrate this aspect...or someone else might do so...perhaps George (brstars) might have one to use when his camera arrives. wink.gif

 

Dcaponelli - I cannot answer your question - we're using a C14 btw & you need to have a similar scope & also take note of the f/l you are operating at - ie, what sort of barlowing you employ. For convenience I used the same setup with a Televue 2x barlow's detached lens element that we use with the ASI 290MM...they do have the same 2.9uM pixel-sizing in their sensors: because the ASI 224MC has a different sizing & set-up it was rather meaningless to compare the FC .txts of that camera with the data I have atm. wink.gif

 

Hoping to get another opportunity tomorrow night/the next morning: I really should emphasize that for Jove the seeing was only "reasonable" aka "passable" - I'd say Saturn & Mars in the 40 degrees elevation was better than that: looking at the images here on Pattie's laptop they all appear too dark & sombre but I've explained the conditions & screens I've got to work on flowerred.gif  - for Jove I in fact think that the seeing really struggled to support the 3x drizzling of that...here's a brighter, smaller-scaled image with anothe processing that isn't my preferred approach bu some might prefer it...

 

j2020-07-03_14-55_rgb_dpm#2.png

 

What was very noticeable (& I have no idea how much the seeing affected this - I did describe it as "murky" at the start of this thread) was that this camera seemed to require large amounts of "Saturation & Vibrancy" in P/shop to get decent colouration...this seems to be standard for latter colour cmos cameras but doubly-so for the ASI 462MC in this first light trial...

 

Here's the Mars .txts comparing the 462MC & 290MM's red filter capture where this is enough similarities to post said... wink.gif

 

MarsASI462MC&290MMcomparisontxts.jpg

 

I'll post the 742nm Saturn & any other comments I might think of today later. smile.gif

 


  • eros312, GeorgeInDallas, AstroEthan and 3 others like this

#16 dhammy

dhammy

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 780
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2015
  • Loc: Puerto Rico

Posted 05 July 2020 - 10:03 PM

Very nice first light waytogo.gif waytogo.gif waytogo.gif  

 

The IR images look promising - very clean. Yes, I hear you about having to push the saturation and vibrance. That's something I have to do with the 224MC on Jupiter. On Saturn and Mars not so much, but on Jupiter it's needed. I'm not 100% sure why though. 

 

It would definitely be interesting to see how it compares to the 290MM by using it as a "mono cam" with the RGB filters. From the red and blue filter images you tried it with, it looks good. Honestly, I'd be really interested to see if this approach removes the need to push the Saturation and Vibrance so much in processing. 

 

Appreciate the hours you are putting into this, fingers crossed for the really good seeing! 



#17 Az Frank

Az Frank

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,294
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Tucson Arizona

Posted 05 July 2020 - 10:29 PM

Very impressive first lights Darryl! Looking forward to more images from that new cam.



#18 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14,201
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 06 July 2020 - 02:26 AM

Thanks David & Frank - all 3 planets seemed to need that strong Sat & Vib...I think transparency was an issue & the seeing didn't help, but I was still surprised how much of these applications were needed to get away from a very wan/pale colouration...much more than the ASI 224MC for instance.

 

<"It would definitely be interesting to see how it compares to the 290MM by using it as a "mono cam" with the RGB filters:>

 

I guess I should've captured a green-filter Mars & WJ'd it with the red & blue we captured lol.gif as it is something I'm interested in seeing also David - we'll image again tomorrow night if the weather permits, but plenty of time...I rushed & pushed myself to get these out so folks got some sort of initial idea, but we really need what I'd call "decent" seeing like at Bower the week before to push it hard - or something really good! grin.gif

 

Here's the iR742nm Saturn I spoke about - nothing really stands out but the Jovian iR's showed the capabilities I think...everything ran pretty flawlessly in FireCapture although we did have one instance of "tearing" (technically-speaking) or what's commonly called "split frames" - I stopped the capture & started again & that was it...sometime it happens with other cameras but pretty rare & I don't think this is an issue here btw...

 

s2020-07-03_16-58_ir_dpm.png


  • h2ologg, KpS and DMach like this

#19 Bart Declercq

Bart Declercq

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 921
  • Joined: 21 Jan 2007
  • Loc: Haaltert, Belgium

Posted 06 July 2020 - 04:01 AM


What was very noticeable (& I have no idea how much the seeing affected this - I did describe it as "murky" at the start of this thread) was that this camera seemed to require large amounts of "Saturation & Vibrancy" in P/shop to get decent colouration...this seems to be standard for latter colour cmos cameras but doubly-so for the ASI 462MC in this first light trial...

I'm pretty sure it's because there is *a lot* of overlap between the R-G-B filters on the Bayer mask (this is true for 224 and 462, actually for most Single shot colour cams) - typical astro-RGB-filters for mono cams have far more sharp delineation between the different filters, which increases colour-contrast but will decrease the amount of light detected by each filter. It's a sensible exchange for most uses of these sensors.

 

Having more overlap lets (much) more light through - it's pretty much the same exchange deepsky people do when taking LRGB images, you get better "luminosity" but somewhat worse colour. And since colour contrast is already somewhat low on Jupiter, while the colour range is large, it's most noticeable there.


  • R Botero, dhammy and Lacaille like this

#20 DMach

DMach

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,432
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2017
  • Loc: The most light-polluted country in the world :(

Posted 06 July 2020 - 05:05 AM

Impressive first light, especially considering the seeing was "passable".

 

I do often find with the 290MC that I need to give the colour a kick in the pants unless the transparency is there. (Which is very rare here in the tropics.)  That's been especially true this season, for some reason ... have been having to fiddle with gamma more than usual in Photoshop as well.

 

Only on the rare clear nights do I find colour boost is not necessary.


  • dhammy likes this

#21 Lacaille

Lacaille

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,039
  • Joined: 27 Nov 2015
  • Loc: Canberra

Posted 06 July 2020 - 07:02 AM

Superb! But I must say I think we could have sent Darryl and Pat off with a Box Brownie or a Kodak Instamatic and they would have sent back images to blow our socks off.

I have of course taken the plunge and ordered one. I am finding the RGB imaging wearisome, particularly with the current timings around midnight to 5 am in mid winter and I would like to ring the changes from time to time. I will attempt to test it with the CH4 filter as discussed above.

Regards

Mark
  • dhammy likes this

#22 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14,201
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 06 July 2020 - 07:20 PM

You're probably "on the money" there Bart...I did find each planet equally-affected however.

 

Mark, atm I'm trying to find the 2" or 1.25" nosepiece for the Box Brownie - but I don't really share your optimism..! rofl2.gif

 

Hopefully tonight in Balaklava or Owen gives us a better opportunity... fingerscrossed.gif


  • Lacaille likes this

#23 sfugardi

sfugardi

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,909
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2006
  • Loc: MA

Posted 06 July 2020 - 07:44 PM

Mo, It figures, I held out for years on the ASI290MM sticking with the 224MC and then finally bought the 290 a month ago just for Mars opposition imaging. Now the new 462MC is ready??? I knew ASI would release a new camera the minute I buy the current one... I've got my scope cleaned, focuser working again and my laptop out for repairs so hopefully I am back just in time for the super low Jupiter/Saturn opposition. Your entire image set looks great. What size hard drive are you using to collect all of that data? Thanks for posting everything including the capture details

 

Regards,

Steve



#24 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14,201
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 07 July 2020 - 03:44 AM

Hi Steve - I don't think you need worry too much about either of your current cameras & the decent seeing opportunities you get these current apparitions: my laptop (which I've had for a good few years or more now) is nominally a 500Gb SSD, but in reality holds about 450Gb.....the very few times we have filled it entirely we haven't had any problems capturing with the SSD & dumping onto an external mechanical drive at the same time...



#25 AstroEthan

AstroEthan

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,198
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2014
  • Loc: San Antonio, Texas, United States

Posted 07 July 2020 - 03:51 AM

Looks like the camera works Darryl! What I want to see is how it performs on Uranus and Neptune since that’s the cutting edge. Would’ve been concerning if it had issues on Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars. :lol:

Edited by AstroEthan, 07 July 2020 - 03:51 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