Post by BillW on May 30, 2015 15:35:52 GMT
The weather improved for a few hours and I had the qhy5 running.
Didn't catch any meteors although I caught a few cosmic rays so it seems to have run fine for about 4 hours.
It is surprising how bright the sky was but the frames look dark!
I've attached a full size original and a stretched version from 012800UT this morning. I've got a dead row of pixels close to the top of the frame, this actually just touches the cosmic ray that triggered the capture. (~1/3 way in from left)
Without a grating it's getting down to mag +4.6 at 75ms exposure, 12.5 fps. At this level of stretching the vertical banding many early users of these cameras suffered can be seen. It's vastly better than the first generation though.
At the lower frame rate and adjusting the before and after frame count the actual video file size can be kept down to a level similar to the PAL size at 25 fps.
It's definitely got potential. Even if it doesn't work as hoped it'll make a good all sky fireball rig with a cheap board cam lens on it.
Cheers,
Bill.
Didn't catch any meteors although I caught a few cosmic rays so it seems to have run fine for about 4 hours.
It is surprising how bright the sky was but the frames look dark!
I've attached a full size original and a stretched version from 012800UT this morning. I've got a dead row of pixels close to the top of the frame, this actually just touches the cosmic ray that triggered the capture. (~1/3 way in from left)
Without a grating it's getting down to mag +4.6 at 75ms exposure, 12.5 fps. At this level of stretching the vertical banding many early users of these cameras suffered can be seen. It's vastly better than the first generation though.
At the lower frame rate and adjusting the before and after frame count the actual video file size can be kept down to a level similar to the PAL size at 25 fps.
It's definitely got potential. Even if it doesn't work as hoped it'll make a good all sky fireball rig with a cheap board cam lens on it.
Cheers,
Bill.
