slower fps rate (planetary) and Meade generic ASCOM driver problem

A place to report problems and bugs in SharpCap
Forum rules


If you have a problem or question, please check the FAQ to see if it already has an answer : https://www.sharpcap.co.uk/sharpcap-faqs

Please also read about Troubleshooting USB Issues before posting.

*** Please do not post license keys - please report any problems with licensing to 'admin' by private message ***

Please include the following details in any bug report:

* Version of SharpCap
* Camera and other hardware being user
* Operating system version
* Contents of the SharpCap log after the problem has occurred.
[If SharpCap crashes, please send the bug report when prompted instead of including the log]
A.Cidadão
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:11 pm

slower fps rate (planetary) and Meade generic ASCOM driver problem

#1

Post by A.Cidadão »

Hi Robin,

I would like to report two issues that occur in last version(s) of SharpCap.

#1 - max fps rate is now slower (e.g. only 40fps in a 640x480 fov for 10ms exposure whereas in earlier versions, and different software, was/is about 100fps). This slow-down occurs with various cameras, different FOVs and both for 8 and 16 bits.

#2 - the Meade generic Ascom driver, that worked ok, now gives rise do error preventing mount guiding motion (N,S,E,W arrow buttons).

I attach:

log file, detailed

screen capture showing mount error message and fps image rate as well as camera settings.

Thanks in advance!

António
Attachments
SharpCap bug A-Cidadão.jpg
SharpCap bug A-Cidadão.jpg (358.58 KiB) Viewed 870 times
Log Sharpcap bug A-Cidadão.txt
(170.04 KiB) Downloaded 48 times
User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 13173
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:52 pm
Location: Vale of the White Horse, UK
Contact:

Re: slower fps rate (planetary) and Meade generic ASCOM driver problem

#2

Post by admin »

Hi,

I think I know what might have caused the Meade move axis problem - I had code to allow MoveAxis on some old Meade ASCOM drivers that did not support it. Recently I realised that was being used for all Meade drivers, which was probably wrong, and in trying to fix that only applied my fix to the actual movement, not to the list of available movement rates. Anyway, I have a potential fix, which I will put in next week's update.

No easy answer on the frame rate. I have tested 4.0 with the ZWO ASI174, which achieved ~168fps at full resolution, which is the same as the maximum I have seen in other versions. Could you share details of the camera you are using and also the capturesettings files from both 3.2 and 4.0 so we can compare settings for anything that might be causing it.

thanks,

Robin
A.Cidadão
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:11 pm

Re: slower fps rate (planetary) and Meade generic ASCOM driver problem

#3

Post by A.Cidadão »

Ok Robin, similar conditions with 3.2 and 4.0.
270fps with 3.2, about 40 with 4.0.
Best wishes
Antonio
Attachments
40.txt
(53.38 KiB) Downloaded 45 times
32.txt
(37.76 KiB) Downloaded 46 times
A.Cidadão
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:11 pm

Re: slower fps rate (planetary) and Meade generic ASCOM driver problem

#4

Post by A.Cidadão »

Hi again Robin,

Don't know if this helps, but in latest AsiCap version (ZWO's) the fps rate is also around 40fps (640x480; 16bit; 10ms exposure).

Sharpcap 3.2 in the same computer remains rapid. Also tried firecapture and is fast.

New versions of ZWO drivers?

Thanks!

António
A.Cidadão
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:11 pm

Re: slower fps rate (planetary) and Meade generic ASCOM driver problem

#5

Post by A.Cidadão »

Sorry If I was not clear...

Earlier version of AsiCap is fast...

Current version of AsiCap is slow...

All from ZWO

António
User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 13173
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:52 pm
Location: Vale of the White Horse, UK
Contact:

Re: slower fps rate (planetary) and Meade generic ASCOM driver problem

#6

Post by admin »

Hi,

Ok, a pattern is starting to appear...

Is the slowdown only happening for small ROI selections?

I am thinking that ZWO have changed the way that ROI works so that it no longer has such a big speed advantage. If that was the case then the speed at full resolution would be the same between the two versions, but the speed at small ROI would be different - does that match what you are seeing?

thanks,

Robin
A.Cidadão
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:11 pm

Re: slower fps rate (planetary) and Meade generic ASCOM driver problem

#7

Post by A.Cidadão »

I will try that, but just one more info...

downloaded SharpCapInstall-4.0.7957.0-64bit (july 7; 64 bit version so I had not to remove latest 32 bit software).

works super-fast

António
A.Cidadão
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:11 pm

Re: slower fps rate (planetary) and Meade generic ASCOM driver problem

#8

Post by A.Cidadão »

OK, here is the data...

183MM pro, 1x1 bin, 1ms exposure so that speed is not compromised...
...............................
latest version, 32 bit:

full frame 8 bit - 19fps
full frame 16 bit - 10fps

1280x1080 8 bit - 40fps
1280x1080 16 bit - 40fps

640x480 8 bit - 40fps
640x480 16 bit - 40fps

320x240 8 bit - 40fps
320x240 16bit - 40fps
...........................................

version 4.07957.0 (july 5, 64 bit):

full frame 8 bit - 19fps
full frame 16 bit - 10fps

1280x1080 8 bit - 70fps
1280x1080 16 bit - 70fps

640x480 8 bit - 150fps
640x480 16 bit -150fps

320x240 8 bit - 270fps
320x240 16bit - 270fps
A.Cidadão
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:11 pm

Re: slower fps rate (planetary) and Meade generic ASCOM driver problem

#9

Post by A.Cidadão »

Hi Robin I think your interpretation is correct, and if that is what happened then ZWO changes seriously compromised the value of the camera as a planetary imager.

I hope that you, or them, can revert the issue while using the latest software versions.

Best wishes, and thanks again for the support!

António
User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 13173
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:52 pm
Location: Vale of the White Horse, UK
Contact:

Re: slower fps rate (planetary) and Meade generic ASCOM driver problem

#10

Post by admin »

Hi,

thanks for checking - I will pass it on.

Robin
Post Reply