|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Richard,
Well, I personally don't consider it much information transfer on my part. I have not worked with this device, but I do know that if reasonable results are achieved that are not from Meade (no company should be trusted with what they post as results from their telescopes. Look at the ads toting the visual views through a manufacturer's telescopes! ) then they'll be posted here or there sooner or later. Whether such websites will pop up on a Google search is anyone's guess. My personal experience with Meade electronic software is that they don't do full regression testing, and I suspect they don't do a full suite of tests before releasing the software. They really need to hire a qualified test engineer to get this part of their business up to even commercial industry standards. This lack of testing has cropped up with the 216XT (which I had first hand experience with) and 416Xt cameras, and the autostar in the early days of both devices. Whether they have learned their lesson is up for debate. I don't recognize any of the names on their list of users on their website. I admit I'm not that plugged into who's who in CCD imaging among amateurs, but lack of a host of recognizable names begs for a little caution in taking the user's testimony at their value. Also, most of the images are of bright objects, but there are some fainter ones in the mix. One deception I did pick up on (the deception is subjective, but it does raise red lights in my mind). The cooling devices efficiency is not given. Usually it's 20 degrees Celsius below ambient, but in this case they don't give a figure. This makes it more difficult to judge how the camera might be performing, since sensitivity is partially determined by how low the CCD sensor is cooled. I don't trust manufacturers who don't give a precise list of the technical features of their cameras. Granted that it is prices much lower than other cameras WITH THE SAME HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL resolution, but I suspect you get what you paid for. If it were possible to economically make a camera that low in price with features of cameras many times that value, Starlight Xpress and SBIG would have produced one. They're competing quite strongly against one another, so it's not like they can rest on the laurels. Sincerely, --- Dave ------------------------------------------------- Pinprick holes in a colorless sky Let inspired figures of light pass by The Mighty Light of ten thousand suns Challenges infinity, and is soon gone "Richard Carlson" wrote in message ... Thankyou David for your post. You're the first person to answer some of my thoughts about the DSI Meade Imager. Richard |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"David Nakamoto" wrote in message news:8DOke.145$Pm3.87@trnddc08... SNIP If it were possible to economically make a camera that low in price with features of cameras many times that value, Starlight Xpress and SBIG would have produced one. They're competing quite strongly against one another, so it's not like they can rest on the laurels. Hi David, Richard Did you see Meade have now brought out a DSI Pro version which has a monochrome chip and a built in filter slide? I expect the performance of the established players offerings are still better than the DSI, but by pitching the DSI at a low price Meade will sell many more and the economies of scale mean they will probably get closer than one might otherwise expect. (Imagine how much a planetary imager which produced the sort of results the Phillips Toucam gives could have sold for!) There is lots of feedback from DSI users on the various Yahoo groups eg http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DeepSp...ger-uncensored http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DeepSkyImager http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Meade_DSI Here in the UK though, the Meade pricing policy of 1USD=1UKP tends to make "proper" alternatives like the Artemis from Steve Chambers more attractive. http://www.artemisccd.co.uk/ I have yet to take the plunge though ;-) Robin -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Robin Leadbeater 54.75N 3.24W http://www.leadbeaterhome.fsnet.co.uk/astro.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for the information Robin !
I'll probably not join the groups. I've given up on Meade, given the lack of any real test engineering and quality control in their electronics from the 216XT/416XT camera through the Autostar software, and my personal experiences with the former. I saw the Pro version when I visited the Meade website to get some information on the cameras. One thing that I wonder at is whether they're only using the heat sink to cool the CCD. If this is the case then the CCD will only cool down to ambient air temperature, at the very best. No matter what CCD they use, this will still give more dark current than cooling the CCD further using a Peltier cooler would. Of course, since it appears that they're using the power through the USB for the unit, they couldn't afford the Peltier cooler power-wise. Whether this will lower the price range on lower priced CCD cameras only time will tell. Another thing - most of the deep sky images were taken through fairly large instruments. This means the exposure times can be shorter and still give good signal to noise ratios. However, it does beg the question of how well these cameras will perform on smaller instrument in the 4 to 8 inch aperture size range. I personally operate with equipment this small, and signal to noise ratio is a problem with these instruments because not as much light gets to the sensor each second. I'm guessing that a significant portion of the people looking at this camera are also in the 8-inch or smaller instrument group. M42 doesn't count in my books - it's so bright that almost any telescope and camera can be used with success. Don't get me wrong. I believe those images were taken through the camera, and I believe it is a serviceable camera. I'm raising concerns based on my experience through more than a decade of imaging with various cameras, one of which was the Meade 216XT. My own personal view is that at that cost you ALMOST can't go wrong. The only question I have is the robustness and utility of the software, and how much image processing was done to get the images you see, something even I don't hint at with my own creations (see http://mysite.verizon.net/res07oeg/id11.html for examples). Richard, if you decide to go with this camera, keep good notes, and write an objective review on a weblog and let us know what you think, pro AND CON. This is almost the only way we're going to get objective views of any equipment, given that the manufacturers are not going to do it for obvious reasons. Good Luck ! --- Dave -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Pinprick holes in a colorless sky Let inspired figures of light pass by The Mighty Light of ten thousand suns Challenges infinity, and is soon gone "Robin Leadbeater" wrote in message ... "David Nakamoto" wrote in message news:8DOke.145$Pm3.87@trnddc08... SNIP If it were possible to economically make a camera that low in price with features of cameras many times that value, Starlight Xpress and SBIG would have produced one. They're competing quite strongly against one another, so it's not like they can rest on the laurels. Hi David, Richard Did you see Meade have now brought out a DSI Pro version which has a monochrome chip and a built in filter slide? I expect the performance of the established players offerings are still better than the DSI, but by pitching the DSI at a low price Meade will sell many more and the economies of scale mean they will probably get closer than one might otherwise expect. (Imagine how much a planetary imager which produced the sort of results the Phillips Toucam gives could have sold for!) There is lots of feedback from DSI users on the various Yahoo groups eg http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DeepSp...ger-uncensored http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DeepSkyImager http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Meade_DSI Here in the UK though, the Meade pricing policy of 1USD=1UKP tends to make "proper" alternatives like the Artemis from Steve Chambers more attractive. http://www.artemisccd.co.uk/ I have yet to take the plunge though ;-) Robin -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Robin Leadbeater 54.75N 3.24W http://www.leadbeaterhome.fsnet.co.uk/astro.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Richard, if you decide to go with this camera, keep good notes, and write an objective review on a weblog and let us know what you think, pro AND CON. This is almost the only way we're going to get objective views of any equipment, given that the manufacturers are not going to do it for obvious reasons. Good Luck ! --- Dave David, Robin, I'll keep everyone informed as I experiment more with this camera. For the $300.00 I've spent on it, I won't expect perfection. I'm sure there will be a learning curve also as I start to use it more. For me it's a starter in this CCD imaging area. If I get some good results I'll be pleasantly surprised. The two scopes as I mentioned earlier will be a 5"f/12 Mak and a 5" f/5 refractor. One will be for high magnification and the other for wide field low power imaging. Being new to this area it will be interesting to find out what I can accomplish. Richard |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Richard, it sounds like you have the same equipment, telescope-wise, that I do!
I found the Mak produces better and sharper images, thanks to the complete absence of color dispersion. But the 5-inch f/5 refractor definitely has a wider field of view, and I personally liked the color fringes on the brighter stars, but that's just me. ^_^ Try both on the deep sky stuff if you can. The longer focal ratio of the Mak will put more of a premium on tracking. And I assume you have the mounts that came with these two telescopes; probably EQ-3 Chinese rip-offs. If so, then tracking will be a problem on longer exposures. If you are using the original mounts that came with the telescopes, then beware that they might exhibit a tracking problem where some of the images the camera attempts to stack will show streaks for stars instead of points, and unless the software is smart enough to detect and reject the images they'll be stacked along with the rest, blurring the final image. Good Luck ! --- Dave -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Pinprick holes in a colorless sky Let inspired figures of light pass by The Mighty Light of ten thousand suns Challenges infinity, and is soon gone "Richard Carlson" wrote in message ... Richard, if you decide to go with this camera, keep good notes, and write an objective review on a weblog and let us know what you think, pro AND CON. This is almost the only way we're going to get objective views of any equipment, given that the manufacturers are not going to do it for obvious reasons. Good Luck ! --- Dave David, Robin, I'll keep everyone informed as I experiment more with this camera. For the $300.00 I've spent on it, I won't expect perfection. I'm sure there will be a learning curve also as I start to use it more. For me it's a starter in this CCD imaging area. If I get some good results I'll be pleasantly surprised. The two scopes as I mentioned earlier will be a 5"f/12 Mak and a 5" f/5 refractor. One will be for high magnification and the other for wide field low power imaging. Being new to this area it will be interesting to find out what I can accomplish. Richard |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
http://www.dsi-astronomie.de |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: Meade Deep Sky Imager - New ! | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | May 1st 05 06:54 AM | |
Meade 8" Schmidt-Cassegrain for sale | Keith Brown | Misc | 0 | February 12th 05 05:29 AM |
The Meade Deep Sky Imager (Revisited) | Garmachi | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | October 1st 04 04:11 PM |
New Meade Deep Sky Imager eGroup | JRGriggs01 | Misc | 0 | August 29th 04 01:35 PM |
Meade Lunar Planetary Imager with ETX-125EC? | Gilles Gravier | Misc | 4 | November 6th 03 05:23 PM |