Canon 6D, Sony A7S or a OSC CCD.

[Phillyo]

I would really like to get a more portable, easy but at the same time decent set up running. I have an Astrotrac with all the gubbins, some nice lenses plus an adapter to attach them to a CCD if needs be. I'm happy to take a laptop out with me, but I was wondering which would give the best results for similar price range? I'm big into my photography and I'm thinking of getting the new Canon 5D Mark IV soon but at the same time would like something like the 6D with it's awesome low light capabilities, however for fast paced photography it kinda sucks.

So for simple widefield, portable photography would a OSC camera out perform the Canon or Sony? If so what are my options? I have a clip in LP filter for the DSLRs but not for a OSC but I could get one if needs be.

Thanks all,

Phil

[StuartJPP]

Hi Phil,

Despite everyone screaming that you need a dedicated mono CCD with filter wheel and filters I like to ignore them and do my own thing

I asked someone recently (won't mention his name in case he loses credibility around here) a very similar question regarding a modified full frame DSLR or QHY8L OSC...he said hands down he'd prefer the modified full frame DSLR over the QHY8L OSC. This is what I had hoped he would say and I would have chosen that path regardless of his answer but wanted the opinion.

If I couldn't get a modified DSLR or modify one myself then I'd probably have to choose a OSC. There just isn't enough Ha response in a non-modified camera for my liking.

What do you mean by portable? Something to chuck in the car or airline portable? It makes a huge difference. Also what lenses/scopes are you intending on using? DSLRs work best with sharp fast optics.

I have recently modified a Canon 6D (2nd hand), it is probably one of the best DSLR options at the moment. I wouldn't particularly want to use it if it wasn't modified though. What I like about the DSLR option is:

1) I currently image exclusively with lenses so there are no adapters, no sagging of focusers, I get a fairly flat field with not much vignetting etc.

2) Liveview is awesome for focusing, on a 650D with a twisty touch screen display it is even better.

3) Everything is self-contained, this is important depending on how "portable" you want to be. There is no way you can take a CCD on holiday and expect to cool it with a battery you take with you. You will more than likely have to buy a battery there. The power requirements of a cooled CCD is to me a deal breaker, typical is 12W (50% on QHY8L), quite a drain on airline friendly portable batteries.

4) Following from above, no laptop/netbook unless you want to use one. I can be imaging within a few minutes, sometimes a laptop can take longer than that to boot up, especially if there are any updates to be done.

These are my opinions and I know of one or two other people who would agree with this, but most won't

I'd like to try the Sony A7S, it really does look good and I have seen great results with it but I always feel like Sony are sticking two fingers up when it comes to tethering and intervalometer options. Just my take on it. With a Canon it is so much simpler, there is so much support for them.

[Psychobilly]

I have drifted back to the "simplicity"  of a timer remote and DSLR with shortish FL camera lenses - it's pretty much hassle and stress  free imaging ...  I haven't done much with my Astrotrac  and certainly wouldn't dream of using with anything more than about 200mm FL  it with my current experience and kit and more importantly total lack of star hopping skills...

Stuart your long FL pics with it are simply amazing and show how much time and effort you have put into "fettling" it ...

I have recently had my original 7D full spectrum modified and have still to do any really "deep" imaging with it but like using it with the timer remote and camera lenses - I use an in body IDA MFA filter with it so in theory I could use it with 300/2.8 and other lenses - I don't fancy putting the 600/4 on it...

Peter...

[Phillyo]

Thank you both (for some reason I didn't see these replies!)

I was thinking just going to dark sites locally or around the UK, not really abroad (yet). Lenses and scopes would be a 50mm 1.4, 14mm 2.8, 70-200 2.8 and my WO Star71. To be honest I'm probably going to be sensible, for a change, and get the 5D III for my normal photography for now

Thanks both,

Phil

[StuartJPP]

Phil,

The 5D3 is quite capable stock but will be much better modified on Hα rich targets...since the 5D3 is overkill for astro I opted for a "cheap" 2nd hand 6D to come along...still not cheap but much cheaper than a 5D3. I like my 5D3 and use it much more often than my 7D which hardly gets any use any more.

Lincolnshire has some of the darkest skies in the area, I do most of my imaging from there so you won't have to travel far.

Here's some shots taken with a stock 5D3 on targets that are not Hα rich but would benefit (especially M33 & M31):

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/223828-m33-triangulum-galaxy/

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/224341-11-pixel-crop-of-m33-triangulum-galaxy/

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/228572-octobers-one-and-only-image-is/

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/223711-my-best-m31-attempt-so-far/

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/232568-m101-pinwheel-galaxy-widefield/

[Phillyo]

Hi Stuart,

The main reason for the upgrade to the 5D3 is for my terrestrial photography so I won't be modifying it for Ha. I shoot portraits of my dogs mostly (You may have seen on Flickr) but I'm wanting to do people portraits, weddings etc hence the upgrade to full frame from APS-C (7D). For Ha targets I'll just use my CCD with the Ha filter on it as I can attached my camera lenses to the CCD anyway

I'll be using it for galaxies though that's for sure. Great pictures

Phil

[sharkmelley]

I asked someone recently (won't mention his name in case he loses credibility around here) a very similar question regarding a modified full frame DSLR or QHY8L OSC...he said hands down he'd prefer the modified full frame DSLR over the QHY8L OSC. This is what I had hoped he would say and I would have chosen that path regardless of his answer but wanted the opinion.

I agree 100%.   The QHY8 OSC uses the same sensor as the SX M25C.  I have an SX M25C and I've tested it against my modified Canon 350D.  The QE (Quantum Efficiency) of the SX is approx 1.1x the QE of the Canon 350D so there's no real difference between them except for the cooling - the cooling could make a big difference if your imaging is limited by thermal noise. 

I have just ordered a full frame camera - the Sony A7S - which I will modify.  This was after some testing I was able to do on a modified A7S.  The A7S QE is better than than twice that of the Canon 350D (including the all important H-alpha wavelength), the dark current per unit area is 1/6 of the 350D and the read noise is 1.4e at ISO 2000 (note that unit gain is around ISO 4000) and continues to drop at higher ISOs. 

The proof will be in the final images - there are more and more of these slowly appearing.  I seriously think this camera will prove to be a game changer. I hope to be using mine in time for the Spring Kelling Heath star party.