From: "Tim" <tjp314@pacbell.net>

Date: November 28, 2007 5:11:43 PM MST

To: Astro_IIDC@yahoogroups.com

Subject: Re: New Flea2 models

--- In Astro_IIDC@yahoogroups.com, Milton Aupperle <milton@...> wrote:

Hi Tim;

On 28-Nov-07, at 3:27 PM, Tim wrote:

Milton:

I just got an email from Pt Grey announcing a couple of new Flea2

models in the works.

One uses a 1/3" 1.3MP EXview HAD ccd, and the other uses a 2/3" 5MP

SuperHAD ccd.  Both have pretty small pixels, 3.75 and 3.45 microns,

respectively.

But a 2/3" chip in a camera that's only about a 1 1/4" cube?  That's

pretty amazing.

If you take a Fleas apart, you can see the boards are all packed in a  

vertical direction. The CCD basically sits on the board by itself.  

It's a similar design that Pulnix used of their cameras.

So, which is more sensitive, an EXview HAD or a SuperHAD?

ExView HAD is more sensitive by about 100% or 2x times. It also has  

somewhat better well depth too.

So the Flea2 1/3" EXView HAD (3.75 microns per pixel) will have about  

the same light gathering ability as your Flea 640x480 (at 7.4 microns  

per CCD pixel) does, just more pixels.

However the Flea2  are still 12 bit camera not 14 bit like the  

Grasshoppers. For long exposure they still have the amp glow issue  

and although I've had several conversations on this issue with PGR on  

turning it off, nothing has materialized.

Interesting.  So my idea of purchasing a Grasshopper for DSO's, using

one of my fleas to guide with (and plugging it into the grasshopper)

is still probably the best one, if I could convince myself to spend

2700USD for the ExviewHAD grasshopper.  That'd be a tidy arrangement,

much less licorice all over the place than guiding with a flea and

imaging with my ST2000XM, which needs separate (stiff!) power and USB

cabling, and is heavy.

Wish Pt Grey would advertise in S&T.  It's disturbing that the Imaging

Source looks to be going to USB2, which for some reason PC users seem

to think is better than Firewire.

-Tim.