A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » CCD Imaging
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Meade DSI ccd Imager



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 25th 05, 12:18 AM
David Nakamoto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old May 25th 05, 11:22 AM
Robin Leadbeater
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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  
Old May 25th 05, 07:17 PM
David Nakamoto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old May 25th 05, 11:50 PM
Richard Carlson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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  
Old May 26th 05, 06:45 AM
David Nakamoto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old July 26th 05, 05:54 AM
SN2005cs SN2005cs is offline
Junior Member
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Jul 2005
Posts: 1
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Carlson
Anyone got one of these? What kind of success have you had with it? What
size scope and what is a typical stack of Images for a deep sky photos?
(i.e. 20 30-sec stack images ideal for most situations?) I've got a 5' f/5
refractor and a 5' f/12 mak. Pictures of the moon and Saturn look pretty
good a 60X with the Mak. Will need to use a 2x or 3x barlow to see what
kind of detail can be had with Saturn and Juipter. Let me know what your
impressions are of this camera and what your success rate has been
photographing various Messier objects, planets, etc. I'd be interested in
hearing from anyone on this subject. I'm new to this kind of thing and it
intrigues me.

Richard
I get one
http://www.dsi-astronomie.de
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 06:29 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 06:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.