0.00
#...
·
 |
|---|
| I want to buy a Lunt pressure tuned double stacked solar scope but I want to get the right camera for it, what would be the best mono astronomy camera for this? I also would like to know which Lunt is the best scope for time lapses. no budget just want the best results. |
0.00
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
I have a Lunt 80mm MT and use a 178mm for the whole disc and a 174 for zoomed in details or animations. The 174 is faster but for the surface it gives much better resolution. Originally I used a 174mm for everything but then noticed that folk with a 60mm Lunt were getting better images than mine and so moved to the 178. With the 60mm Lunt the 178 will cover the whole disc but unfortunately does nor quite do so and so have to stitch two images together. It is worth that as the image quality is so much better. For the full frame, I get around 60 frames per second with the 178 but just over 100 frames per second with the 174. I hope that helps Dave |
0.00
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| I use a ZWO 174mm camera for solar imaging, I get a frame rate of up to 60 fps. I can't say it is the 'best' camera but it works well for my needs when I am solar imaging. |
1.81
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
This provides a rather thorough answer to your question and then some - specific examples with Lunt telescopes https://youtu.be/8xrX1wqZmGc?si=xTp05wWt9GbzSQ7N |
0.00
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
I use the 174mm connected to my M3 MacBook, and get the advertised 128fps at 12bit <7.5ms exposure, or 164fps at 10 bit <6ms exposure. At 12bit this gets me ~2400 frames in 30 seconds, then I leave a 30 second gap, then shoot again. I use Firecapture on the Mac to record. Make sure you go into settings and turn on the RAM Buffer, set the allocated memory to be above each run, I find that 6Gb is enough, then restart that app to apply. The AutoRun feature will take care of this sequencing for you. |
|
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
| Thank you all I appreciate it |
1.20
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| I have an LS80 DS and use both an ASI1600MM and an ASI178MM for solar work. I've used the 178 for some good time lapses and the 1600 for full disc. Can't go wrong with that scope! It's awesome! |
1.20
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
I did the most solar imaging with the ASI432MM. For me it was the ultimate solar imaging camera, fast and extreme low noise, high FW depth, very sensitive. I am taking a long break now from solar - need more time for my family. But I will do it again. |
1.43
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
|
I would say that you should consider imx432 or imx174 based mono cameras (ZWO or PlayerOne) if you'd be using a Quark. For Lunt full disk one could e.g. use imx178/183 or similar. And more detailed work maybe imx533 or those imx432 based sensors. Imx174 is fast but definitely more noisier than imx432. For animations you should get something with high frame rate especially if you are "zooming in". I use my asi174mm and typically record animation material with my setup (Quark based system) around 160 fps. It makes all the difference compared to 30-60 fps. What scope is the best? Depends on your budget but mostly your seeing. Here in Finland I am using 102 mm scope, maybe I could use also 130 mm but not bigger - the atmosphere will not allow it. But people are doing amazing stuff with 60 mm Lunt ( @rigel123 as an example here in AstroBin, using nowadays imx533 based sensor). And I wish that someday I could own a Lunt 60 mm DS for full disks, too. So take a look on your daytime seeing data as that basically sets the "largest usable scope" limit. Then go with your budget for the scope (if it is "what ever it costs", then go with a model that takes most of your seeing but not bigger as then you will basically pay for nothing). When you know that, select suitable camera for your needs. Oh, forgot to say that people do recommend full aperture front mounted etalons if you budget allows that. Plenty of information available for the reasons. So even if you use a pressure tuned Lunt, you most likely get better results with double stacking via front mounted DS etalon. |
|
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
| I appreciate your response now in gonna go spend $4,000 lol |
7.56
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
You need to match your camera to your telescope. And most likely you will always be aperture (resolving power) limited or seeing limited, so the idea is to grab something that will provide as close of a pixel scale as your theoretical resolvable detail. For instance im shooting with a Lunt80 that has a resolving limit of 1.45" and with my IMX533 sensor without a barlow im already at good sampling at 1.38"/px (which is beyond the telescope resolving power) however quite slow in terms of FPS. Now I just got an Apollo M Max that gives me almost the same sampling with a 2x barlow but I can shoot 100FPS at RAW 16. By any means try to get ur sampling right. |
18.84
#...
·
|
|---|
|
I read a lot of recommendations, which are actually not very well suited for solar imaging. A global shutter read out mode is mandatory when using high fps. First, the 174 has global shutter as well as the newer 432. All other have a rolling shutter. Second you need high full-well, if you want to catch the solar disk and flares in one shut. Otherwise you have to take both separately. Third, some of the chips produce a nasty pattern, which is really tedious to flatten out. conclusion: in the moment the 174 (old but proven to work excellently) and 432 (newer) are the most suitable ones. The drawback is the comparable low resolution. Of course others will also produce images, but with some draw backs. CS Rüdiger |
|
1.20
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Ruediger: There is not really a drawback. Theoretical yes, but IRL with the 174 and the 432 you are producing extremely low noise images with high SNR, so there is plenty of room for drizzle at stacking. I even did 3x drizzle with the 432, and noise-levels are very moderate and easy to handle. |
|
18.84
#...
·
|
|---|
Walter Leonhard Schramböck:Ruediger: Very valid point. Thanks for adding. I am also considering to get the 432 in addition to my 174. Looking forward to seeing your next results. 👍 |
