Once again. Dual Cameras?


I recall that almost two years back the dual camera was said to be close to being ready to test yet nothing ever appeared. Has this been abandoned?


Not abandoned just focusing on features that are more useful to the
majority of users. Generally features that require a specific set of
hardware will almost always be prioritized lower than features that can be
used for a vast majority of users.

So we’ll get to it at some point. I just can’t tell you when.


Jared Wellman
– Co-Founder and Developer


I suspect that this feature applies to more folks than would be obvious. It is true that not too many have two scopes and two dedicated astro-CCD cameras but if you add the folks that have one mount and astro-CCD but also have a DSLR and lens to piggyback, I suspect you have over half of the users.

Maybe some sort of poll to see how many would use this feature including piggybacked DSLRs.


Indeed, I’ve been waiting for this so I can run a wide field DSLR setup on top of my scope.

Synced capture would do me, just something that pauses capture on the second camera while the first camera slews, dithers, focuses etc.

I know it’s far from being that simple, but why not start with a simple system and build on it to allow a true dual setup?


I’ve been waiting for this too, but in the meantime I’m just running two
instances of SGP with one controlling everything besides the second
camera. The second instance of SGP just controls the second camera. This
won’t be the case for everyone, but I have found that even when dithering
the main camera I don’t lose any of the wide field images from the second
camera. This is working well for me and I just throw away the few
exposures from the second camera that are taken during meridian flips or
other large movements. I definitely want dual camera support, but frankly
this is working well enough for me that I’m not sure I would gain a whole
lot if there was more coordination.

Right now I’m taking 10min LUM subs on the main scope while the second
scope is taking 1 each of 3min RGB exposures. Coordinated dither would be
nice and at most I’d have to wait 3min after the main scope finished for
the second scope to finish before the dither would take place. But if I
ended up having to wait 3min after every 10min exposure I’d lose a
significant amount of LUM data over the course of the night. I’d rather
lose RGB data so I figure it’s better to just throw away the few RGB
exposures that are ruined by big scope moves or perhaps a dither from the
main scope.


That’s my view also. I don’t need anything fancy just now, even a simple mechanism which would trigger the next exposure in the slave camera sequence whenever the main camera starts exposing would be good enough for starters. Full synchronisation including focusing etc. could be added incrementally.

I know pushing out a stable version 3 is probably top priority just now but hopefully this can be revisited soon, especially since it sounds like some of the work has already been done.


Also waiting on dual camera support. No rush tho.


I would very much like dual camera support… but like Joel I am working around it. 2 instances of SGP open, one running everything, the other instance just with the camera and focuser running basically as a slave. The only subs lost are during the flip and target change… People always seem to ask me about dithering, but I’ve not found an issue with the dual rig, maxing the data a little between the two cameras and a good bad pixel map.


What I am hearing is that folks are doing dual camera by "making do"
with the system as is. Of course that can be done with any software that
can handle two instances and connect to two sets of equipment.

It would be nice to have a piece of SW that could actually say that it
does full dual camera. Except for a kludgy MaxIm controller that is out
there, it would be the only one I know of.

Maybe I am wrong, but there are a fair number of high end users that
still use the likes of ACP, CCD Autopilot and MaxIm that would probably
jump ship to SGP if they could get dual camera. It seems to me that high
end equipment users are more likely to want and to use a true dual
camera setup (since they probably already have the equipment) and would
be likely to pay handsomely for it given how much it would increase
their productivity.


The lack of any other software that does this could be a clue to how complex this is.

The synchronising needs to be both ways, then both systems need to manage filter changes and focusing independently.

I think it will turn out to be really difficult.


I would like feature this too. I think a lot of people do.


I would trade the optec focus lock feature in an instant for dual camera support, and as for market potential, I could be wrong but probably 1/100 …



Focus lock - those are pretty rare.

Surely a lot more folks with two cameras than with focus lock by a wide

Yves wrote:


I know you are changing your charging model , Bit I would be more than willing to pay for this



This feature is top priority for me. When using two cameras and filter wheels that are the same make and model, using two instances of SGP is not working for me.

Thank you for your consideration.



Same here, really looking forward to this happening- would make life so much easier. Don’t mind paying well for it too.


+1 from my side. I’d really like to see that feature.



This may be an issue with the cameras and filter wheel drivers.Having multiple ASCOM drivers for different devices is possible but if the driver author hasn’t set this up it won’t be possible. Nothing to do with SGP.


I want to second this feature request. An additional camera control may be in much more demand now than it was a year or two ago. We can see many examples on Astrobin. Please consider review of the priorities because it seems that it’s already became a critical feature for many users.


+1 +1 +1 +1