10 replies to this topic

[Pete Gorczynski]

These results are way beyond my expectations. Seeing was bad (1/5). Good transparency. It was quite windy. Each channel utilized a 2.5 millisecond exposure per frame. 3 minutes of data were captured for each channel. The minimum frame rate was 383 frames per second! Only 2% of captured data was used for each channel.

 

I used a 200x200 ROI for capture. I previously determined that 390fps was the limit for this configuration. I attributed the slightly reduced frame rate to the fact that Firecapture re-centered the ROI quite often due to the awful conditions. I would have liked to use a smaller ROI, but Mars was just moving around too much. I did manage to get an IR capture of Castor using a 160x160 ROI and a 2 millisecond exposure. The frame rate was a smokin' 462 fps! And yes...the Castor image shows the collimation may off by a hair. But with the conditions so bad, I wouldn't dare try to make an adjustment.

 

I have to say that the 678 camera is definitely an upgrade from the 290.

 

Pete G.

 

 

 

[pj_thomas]

These results are way beyond my expectations. Seeing was bad (1/5). Good transparency. It was quite windy. Each channel utilized a 2.5 millisecond exposure per frame. 3 minutes of data were captured for each channel. The minimum frame rate was 383 frames per second! Only 2% of captured data was used for each channel.

 

I used a 200x200 ROI for capture. I previously determined that 390fps was the limit for this configuration. I attributed the slightly reduced frame rate to the fact that Firecapture re-centered the ROI quite often due to the awful conditions. I would have liked to use a smaller ROI, but Mars was just moving around too much. I did manage to get an IR capture of Castor using a 160x160 ROI and a 2 millisecond exposure. The frame rate was a smokin' 462 fps! And yes...the Castor image shows the collimation may off by a hair. But with the conditions so bad, I wouldn't dare try to make an adjustment.

 

I have to say that the 678 camera is definitely an upgrade from the 290.

 

Pete G.

 

Mars-2024-11-12-1.jpg

 

2024-11-12-0742_4-PG-IR685-Castor_lapl3_ap3_Drizzle15.jpg

Very nice.  I've never seen been able to see diffraction rings in camera images.  Of course I only have a Sony A6000 and 6 ACF.  Kudos!

[gleng2041]

The actual topic is above my pay scale, love the images...Well past a WOW

glen

[dcaponeii]

These results are way beyond my expectations. Seeing was bad (1/5). Good transparency. It was quite windy. Each channel utilized a 2.5 millisecond exposure per frame. 3 minutes of data were captured for each channel. The minimum frame rate was 383 frames per second! Only 2% of captured data was used for each channel.

 

I used a 200x200 ROI for capture. I previously determined that 390fps was the limit for this configuration. I attributed the slightly reduced frame rate to the fact that Firecapture re-centered the ROI quite often due to the awful conditions. I would have liked to use a smaller ROI, but Mars was just moving around too much. I did manage to get an IR capture of Castor using a 160x160 ROI and a 2 millisecond exposure. The frame rate was a smokin' 462 fps! And yes...the Castor image shows the collimation may off by a hair. But with the conditions so bad, I wouldn't dare try to make an adjustment.

 

I have to say that the 678 camera is definitely an upgrade from the 290.

 

Pete G.

 

Mars-2024-11-12-1.jpg

 

2024-11-12-0742_4-PG-IR685-Castor_lapl3_ap3_Drizzle15.jpg

The colors on the ASI676MC are another improvement over the 678 if you get the urge I highly recommend it.  Plenty of blue channel so dropping the green isn't even needed were you ever tempted to do that (Con said once it's not a good idea to ever use that -G control in FC)
 

[SandyHouTex]

These results are way beyond my expectations. Seeing was bad (1/5). Good transparency. It was quite windy. Each channel utilized a 2.5 millisecond exposure per frame. 3 minutes of data were captured for each channel. The minimum frame rate was 383 frames per second! Only 2% of captured data was used for each channel.

 

I used a 200x200 ROI for capture. I previously determined that 390fps was the limit for this configuration. I attributed the slightly reduced frame rate to the fact that Firecapture re-centered the ROI quite often due to the awful conditions. I would have liked to use a smaller ROI, but Mars was just moving around too much. I did manage to get an IR capture of Castor using a 160x160 ROI and a 2 millisecond exposure. The frame rate was a smokin' 462 fps! And yes...the Castor image shows the collimation may off by a hair. But with the conditions so bad, I wouldn't dare try to make an adjustment.

 

I have to say that the 678 camera is definitely an upgrade from the 290.

 

Pete G.

 

Mars-2024-11-12-1.jpg

 

2024-11-12-0742_4-PG-IR685-Castor_lapl3_ap3_Drizzle15.jpg

Very nice.

[sfugardi]

Pete, excellent image set considering the bad seeing! You're a brave soul imaging in 1/5 seeing. Your collimation looks text book perfect. Weds night is looking better, 3/5. Thanks for posting.

 

Regards,

Steve

[John Boudreau]

The colors on the ASI676MC are another improvement over the 678 if you get the urge I highly recommend it.  Plenty of blue channel so dropping the green isn't even needed were you ever tempted to do that (Con said once it's not a good idea to ever use that -G control in FC)
 

Pete was using a mono 678 with RGB filters. While a mono IMX676 is now available from Sony, nobody currently makes a cam with one.

[John Boudreau]

Fine result in less than 'good' conditions Pete! The fact that Mars has most of it's visible features in R and G is why some view Mars as somewhat resistant to poor seeing. The soft seeing may have softened the edge rind too.

 

The last couple of weeks I've only bothered checking the seeing naked eye --- every time since then I've seen the stars twinkling even near the zenith! 

[Pete Gorczynski]

Fine result in less than 'good' conditions Pete! The fact that Mars has most of it's visible features in R and G is why some view Mars as somewhat resistant to poor seeing. The soft seeing may have softened the edge rind too.

 

The last couple of weeks I've only bothered checking the seeing naked eye --- every time since then I've seen the stars twinkling even near the zenith! 

I have made the same observation about the rind as well. It only seem to be troublesome when the seeing is good.

 

Pete G.

[azure1961p]

Fine result in less than 'good' conditions Pete! The fact that Mars has most of it's visible features in R and G is why some view Mars as somewhat resistant to poor seeing. The soft seeing may have softened the edge rind too.

 

The last couple of weeks I've only bothered checking the seeing naked eye --- every time since then I've seen the stars twinkling even near the zenith! 

That's an interesting point John.  Looking back on it , and not considered it, Mars does seem to withstand lower Pickering values better than say, Saturn. Maybe those reds just scatter less on the way in through the sky?

 

Interesting points.

 

Pete

[azure1961p]

Pete they look great, and Castor!!!  I'm all jelly about not seeing Mars yet and that generous blueish polar hood!

 

Pete