Samsung 2000P v Watec

[West End Wendy]

I've had a chance over the last couple of nights to do a brief comparison between the Watec 120N and the Samsung SCB-2000P video cameras.

I was using a 100ED scope with a 0.5 (-ish) focal reducer and an Astronomik UHC-E filter. I should point out that I use these cams for visual use only, hence no pics.

In summary, the Watec has significantly better image quality, sees “deeper” and has no amp glow compared to the Samsung (not surprising considering its higher price and bigger chip) but the Samsung gives really pleasing results on a lot of DSOs and excels at the brighter, more colourful objects, such as the Ring and the Dumbbell.

One of the main differences between the two is that the Samsung is much noisier at the sort of gain levels required to see DSOs (I imagine the half inch chip versions, such as the 4000P, perform better here). The noise reduction system on the Samsung therefore becomes very important for live visual use. It works in a similar way to Registax by stacking the frames, and it can take several minutes to produce the “finished” image. It works really well, but it is understandably not as clever as Registax and can't “track” the object, so any drive error manifests itself as elongated or double stars. In addition the fact you have to touch the camera itself to access the menu induces vibrations (the Watec has a separate control box). The Samsung also has significant amp glow.

The difference between the two is most evident on M13, which is beautifully resolved to the core with the Watec and much less detailed in the Samsung (though still very pleasing). M51 showed it's spiral arms clearly in the Watec, but they were barely visible in the Samsung. On the Ring and the Dumbbell, however, the addition of colour is a major plus, and they are far more striking in the Samsung than in the Watec.

While the Watec is clearly and unsurprisingly the winner here, the fact is that it cost 10 times more than the Samsung (I paid £60 for the Samsung from ebay) and so on a “performance-per-pound” basis the Samsung is simply unbeatable. Bright, colourful nebula are superb, and I can't wait for Orion to return.

A fairer comparison might be with the Samsung SCB-4000P, which has the same-sized chip as the Watec, and is not available as cheaply. I'd love to try one.

Tim

[Psychobilly]

The "longest" exposure time with the Pal versions of the Samsung is only 10.24s Sens-up set to x512

I am still waiting to try mine under the stars... I love it as a low light security cam and will probably upgrade to a 1/2" cam for astro and use the 1/3" one for monitoring the obs and gear on the pier...

[garethmob]

really good comparision i havent had chance with mine yet althrough i do have the NTSC version which does have a slightly lower exposure time

[West End Wendy]

Had another chance to try the Samsung last week while on holiday in the Gower, South Wales (nice dark skies there). This time I was using an ST-80 with the 0.5 Focal Reducer. I should mention that the Samsung has had it's infra-red filter removed (my right thumb is still numb as a result).

This camera really is superb at bright (or relatively-bright) colourful nebula. I saw both the East and West Veil very clearly indeed, the “Wall” section of the North American Nebula, the Crescent, the Dumbbell and the Bubble and M52 in Cassiopeia. I also got a great view of Comet Garradd, looking just like I remember Hale-Bopp looking to the naked eye all those years ago. M15 and M11 looked good but clusters lack the “wow” factor for me on an LCD screen, and M51 was small and lacked detail, but that that was down to the short focal length refractor I was using.

Okay, the downsides -

Yes – it is noisy. After my last outing with the camera I discovered a “sharpening“ setting in a sub-menu which was set to “on” so I turned that off and that reduces the noise quite a bit but it's still pretty grainy, though acceptable. In the end I feel that noise is the price you pay for the “instant hit” of live viewing. The camera's noise reduction, which stacks images to reduce noise, does work brilliantly if you have a completely static image, but the simple RA drive on my mount isn't quite up to this, and so I ditched it for this session. (I'd be interested to hear from anyone who's had a better experienced with the Samsung NR without resorting to the extra complexity of guiding).

Amp glow – funny how when you pay sixty quid for something things like amp glow don't seem to matter all that much.

Image quality. It's not at all bad, but the more expensive Watec kills it on globulars and galaxies.

What I love about this set-up is that it's cheap, portable (I can lift the whole rig, including camera, LCD screen and power supply into the garden in one go, so no packing up needed at the end of the night) and it still feels like observing rather than imaging. My next purchase is a flip mirror, so I can do some actual observing in combination with utilising the seeing power of the CCD.

Tim