Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

CCD queries ....


Komet

Recommended Posts

Hello all .....

I am considering upgrading my CCD. At the moment I have a QHY IMG2Pro which is similar (but with better cooling) to the SX H9 or the ATIK 314L. A really good piece of kit that has helped me produce some (in my opinion at least) really good images over the few years I have had it ..... (gardenobservatory.org.uk).

I am considering either a 460 or 490EX but have a few questions that really could only be answered by those that have upgraded from similar cameras.

1 .... I use 1.25" filters. Any vignetting issues?

2 .... As the pixel size is smaller on the ATIK's, does this really affect the exposure length to achieve a similar signal?

3 .... As a previous owner of an IMG2Pro, H9 or 314L, did your images improve with the greater resolution? I ask this because I have seen some good and some quite horrible images from the 460 and 490 (although I have seen both good and bad from the QHY/SX/ATIK also of course). The point is ..... was it a really worthwhile upgrade. Have your images improved?

I know it is all objective but I would really appreciate anyones thoughts on this.

I have always had a rule where (if possible) I will not "upgrade" anything unless I feel I have hit a bit of a limit with a particular piece of kit. Any upgrade from my IMG2Pro has to be able to increase the limit if you follow my meaning. Basically that means resolution.

Any and all comments very welcome. Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've owned a 16HR (early 314L), two 4000s and an 11000. I've also processed a number of images taken with both the 460 and 490 here.

You will have no vignetting issues with 1.25 filters on either 460 or 490.

These are sensitive, clean cameras and you won't notice much difference in exposure time.

In processing a 490 image I did feel that stars had saturated and lost colour in relatively short exposures. I put this down to the lower well depth but this was just one image and the impression could have been false. However, the impression was formed 'blind' because I hadn't realized I was working on a 490 image, I thought it was a 460 and was wondering about the star colour before realizing my mistake.

I would match pixel size to optics before deciding which to go for. At very short FLs I'd go for the 490 and bear in mind that I could bin it at longer ones. For the kind of medium FLs I mostly use I'd go for the 460.

Honestly, if you've seen bad images from either of these cameras don't blame the cameras! They are lovely instruments. Only my addiction to football-field sized chips stops me from buying one. Sensitive, clean, compact - and FLO say there are price reductions. Treat yourself§

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've recently started using the Atik One 9.0, which uses the same sensor as the 490EX but has a built in filter wheel. So far, I've not noticed any vignetting with 1.25" filters but the built in wheel is very close to the sensor which is a going to help. I opted for the 9mp sensor as it gives smaller steps on the size of binned pixels and generally do 2x2 or 3x3. Getting more detail out of unbinned is going to require a motor foccuser I think.

From what I could tell those sony sensors are very good with respect to noise, dark current, quantum efficiency etc. A larger sensor seems to push you towards the ex-kodak sensors which are much older technology.

Probably should add this is my first astro camera so take what I say with a pinch of salt :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be cautions of the SX cameras especialy if you want to use thier oag and filterwheel as this can have problems working with +/- 55mm reducers, atik are a little for forgiving iirc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be cautions of the SX cameras especialy if you want to use thier oag and filterwheel as this can have problems working with +/- 55mm reducers, atik are a little for forgiving iirc.

Yes, does seem odd. I've got both the mini & full size sx fw with oags in front of my atiks and there's not much room left to play with. The sx CCDs sensor is set back even further so can't see how that would work!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, does seem odd. I've got both the mini & full size sx fw with oags in front of my atiks and there's not much room left to play with. The sx CCDs sensor is set back even further so can't see how that would work!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can't you just pop the levelling plate off the newer SXs to give them similar back focus to the Atik?

That said, don't you just wish someone would put the optical people and the camera people in a room and let them thrash it out? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't you just pop the levelling plate off the newer SXs to give them similar back focus to the Atik?

That said, don't you just wish someone would put the optical people and the camera people in a room and let them thrash it out? :D

This whole +55 mm is beyond a joke to be honest and shows total lack of knowledge of the equpment in use these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.