Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

Welcome to Stargazers Lounge

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customise your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements

    • Grant

      Light Pollution Petition   24/05/16

      Please sign the online petition to "Introduce legislation to combat light pollution" and help spread the word! https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/119428
antimorris

New Atik 4 series

18 posts in this topic

I just saw Atik's announcement about their new 4 series. Nice to see the slimmer body aimed at hyperstar systems. I wonder how long it will be until they are available? What do you all think of them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did they sell many 320E's? The new 4 series have similarly tiny pixels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 420 has Setpoint cooling for under a grand!.. I had almost settled on going for a 314L but now I'm wondering about the higher resolution of the 420....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good 6-12 months before I can afford one but I was looking forward to a 314L plus as well. These new ones have got me thinking hard but the small pixel size is a puzzle. I am after increased sensitivity compared to my DSLR, so will the fatter pixels in the 314L plus be that much of an advantage over these new ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

420L or Atik 320E have the same CCD, which is quite old, not Exview HAD like in 314L+. That means lower QE in the 320E/420L. The CCD in 450L is better, somewhere between 314L+ and those 320E/420L. If you use short focal refractors or hyperstar or things like a PowerNewtonian then you can think about getting those small-pixel cameras.

Note that higher resolution needs better guiding and longer exposures...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The 420 has Setpoint cooling for under a grand!.. I had almost settled on going for a 314L but now I'm wondering about the higher resolution of the 420....

You are taking 'better resolution' to mean smaller pixels? I don't worry about 'resolution' in that sense. This may matter in the daytime. At night I worry about what really gets resolved on the final image. The 314L has nothing to prove in this respect and will out perform, shall we say, the smaller, less sensitive, small pixel chip. I have have quite a lot of imaging time with the 314L and 320E and would go for the 314L any day.

However, small pixels, small body and big Hyperstar does have something to be said for it!!

Olly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

314L agreed, every day of the week...though, like Olly, the temptation to hyperstar my C11 is now getting very strong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for a hyperstar you can always choose something with bigger sensor :) It can handle APS-C, while new Atiks are max 2/3".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would go 314l as well, the pixel size and sensitivity are fantastic.

I am not totally convinced on these smaller pixel (with larger quantity of pixels) cameras. I know you could bin the sub to improve the sensitivity but no idea what the results etc would be.

I don't care about number of pixels its more about matching the focal lenth to the camera and objects you want to capture and the 314l covers the best of most worlds....at a price.

For galaxies only, a atik 16ic-s would be perfect (smaller ccd size). (they dont do these anymore do they?)

I will be very sad when amatuer astronomers start buying cameras because of number of pixels rather than looking at the noise, qe and pixel size.

8mega pixels has no benifit over a smaller camera if the object can fit on the smaller ccd using the same equipment. It then comes down to which pixels can gather the most information, least noise and at the best resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One advantage I can see to the new Atik 450 is if you were wanting to use them with a FL of around 300mm. Then you are looking at 2.38 arcsecs/pixel as opposed to the 4.46 arcsecs/pixel you would get at the same FL with a 314.

So for people mainly using telephoto lenses at 200-400mm you would get a nicer plate scale but for a FL of 500-750mm it would seem that the 285 based cameras are more suited.

Only one advantage though, there are more factors than plate scale to consider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And for a hyperstar you can always choose something with bigger sensor :) It can handle APS-C, while new Atiks are max 2/3".

Hyperstar will probably happen at some point anyway...what CCD to stick on the front...is yet to be decided.. but this form factor is a boon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm still thinking as a DSLR imager. Still trying to get my head around using larger pixels. Things like square stars come to mind. I know the 314 has a great reputation but I still seem to get distracted by sensor size... a bit like aperture fever I guess! So for me, finding a CCD thats the right match for my 80ED is really what I'm looking for & something that will give me better star colour too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Square stars might seem likely in theory but they don't appear in reality. I image all the time with the large pixel Atik 4000s and a focally reduced Tak FSQ with focal length in the camera lens region at 328mm. It gives stars that satisfy me, at least.

http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-deep-sky/160774-sh2-129-hargb.html

Astrophotography is firstly about getting enough signal. When you have that you can sharpen. The craving for megapixels is largely bred into us by the manufacturers who have long used them as a synonym for quality, which they simply aren't. In astronomy megapixel DSLRs are roundly and unequivocally outperformed by CCD cameras. Most imagers dream of the 11 meg chip in its various incarnations and that has lots of big pixels. Now you're talking!

Olly

Edited by ollypenrice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Square stars might seem likely in theory but they don't appear in reality. I image all the time with the large pixel Atik 4000s and a focally reduced Tak FSQ with focal length in the camera lens region at 328mm. It gives stars that satisfy me, at least.

http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-deep-sky/160774-sh2-129-hargb.html

Ooh I missed that one. Now thats exactly what I mean by star colour. Beautiful. I know good processing skills are needed but the data has to be there in the first place and the Atik 4000 has bigger pixels than the 314. So if pixel size matters why should Atik come out with something that seems to fit into an even smaller niche? I guess I need to understand how hyperstar works.

I think in summary for my budget/needs the 314 is still the way to go then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Partly it's price. The 4000 is expensive. (Tell me about it!). But at short FL and bombarded with light from an F2 Hyperstar the small pixel chips might well strut their stuff. The truth is there is more more theory than practice in lots of camera discussions and I work only, entirely, on practice. (That's cos I don't understand the theory!!)

Olly

Edited by ollypenrice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 314l+ has nothing to prove - search around and you will find world class images produced with it with a variety of different setups. They outperform their price bracket by miles.

You would have to prise mine out of my "cold dead fingers" to quote a famous man.

+1 for the 314l+ over these new cameras.

Edited by johnrt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If small pixels were the big thing then I'm fairly sure a lot more people would be using the SXVF-M8C although this only came in the OSC format.

A picked one up second hand for roughly the same price as a modded DSLR. I'm glad I did as it's opened up the world of M42 lenses but I have to say, even with a 66 imaging at f/6 - 400mm takes a lot more time and effort than it would with something like the 314L. A focal reducer for these small pixel cams is a must unless you are willing to put in at least 3 - 4x the amount of time in on your choice of target.

So, the plus point is that I do get increased resolution. Negatives are that the M8C effectively turns an f/6 scope into an f/12 scope when compared to bigger pixel cams like a DSLR or 314L.. Also my guiding has to be a lot more accurate. In reality, the cam effectively halves the 'reliable' guiding times of what I could achieve with a 6+ micron chip.

I'm sure the new 450L will have its place for Hyperstar owners and extreme wide-field specialists.. or perhaps 66/72 owners with very forgivingly still and dark skies.

Atik should also have a think about a small-ringed / dovetail mounting system and lens adapter kit for it though unless they want to rely on Geoptik to provide the lens interfaces and I don't think Geoptik do an M42 or Pentax-K mount version of their T>Lens adapter system.

What I want is a monochrome 4mp version of the ICX285AL. :D

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shops with photo-accessories should have something like this:

uchwyt_do_obiektywu.jpg

21_1.jpg

It has a tripod mounting so you can catch the lens + cam and put it on a mount.

Edited by riklaunim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.