Complimenting OSC with Mono L and Ha

[ianaiken]

Contemplating complimenting my QHY8L with a QHY8 mono so I can capture luminance and Ha data at the sametime as RGB.

What are people's general thought about this? It seems a good way to maybe make the most of the clear skies in the UK. Also gives the option for all narrowband imaging.

Thoughts?

[johnrt]

So you are thinking of spending another £1559 over the £899 you have already spent on the QHY8L for the QHY8 pro?

I don't think thats the way I'd invest that sort of money on cameras. I'd flog the QHY8L and stick the money on what you were going to spend on the QHY8 pro and get a new gen Atik the 460EX for example at £2100.

Actually, if I were shelling out over 2k on a camera I'd just go what the heck and get an Atik 4000.

Buy that's just my opinion.

[ianaiken]

Thanks for your input, a very valid thought worth contemplating.

Not quite, the QHY8 is mono and 1K whereas the QHY8PRO is OSC AFAIK. I was thinking of capturing twice as much data at the sametime since I have two scopes that can be used for imaging. Both cameras would offer very similar FOV and image scale.

I agree it doesn't sound overly wise really having two cameras that do nearly the same. I don't really want to get rid of the OSC, and I also want to do narrowband

[ianaiken]

Maybe something like the 314L is better investment since I get a completely different FOV and can get closer to galaxies.

[ianaiken]

I swaer my eyes are getting worse with age. OK not the QHY8 is OSC also so forget that. Basically I'm after a mono camera.

[AndyUK]

Interesting thoughts Ian - I'm starting with the 314L+ mono and my plan (if I ever had the funding!) would be to also buy an ATIK 4000 OSC. As much as I would love to try "two-up" imaging (as you say, to save time), I don't think I'd personally have the skills / patience in trying to set up a two camera rig, added to which my NEQ6 mount is pretty much at max loading with just the MN190 on it, let alone trying to add another OTA!

There's no doubt that having the option of narrowband imaging is a big plus (how many times do we have a long-awaited clear night when the moon interferes?) and of course they're more sensitive than their OSC versions, but for me my thinking of going for an OSC would be to so that a) I could more easily capture a set-point cooled RGB image in one night (even If I then had to come back to it for more sessions - I have SO many unfinished mono RGB images at the moment!) and so I could more easily use my Geoptik lens adapter. I'd also like to use an OSC to more easily capture RGB star colour which could then be added to an NB image as a star layer...

Yes, it's potentially a lot of money to spend on another camera that would spend c. half its life in a case, but with software like Registar about to align different FOV frames and if you pick a camera with a different chip-size, it also opens up different FOV possibilties too. A 314L+ will certainly get you in much closer than the APS-C style chip in a QHY8 (which is great for the smaller galaxies and picking out particular sections of nebulae) but if "two-up" imaging is your goal, I'd first make sure that you're mount can take the load (what mount / OTA's do you have?)

[johnrt]

Yup, QHY8 is a OSC not mono.

So you just want a mono cam?

If you want to keep the QHY you already have then get an Atik 314l+ or if you cash it in then use the funds and go for the Atik 383. Again just my opinion. Personally I'd be going for the 383.

Remember your budget will also need to include a filter wheel and a set of LRGB filters and N/B filters which will add another £500 or thereabouts on top of the camera.

[ncjunk]

I have the QHY8L for widefield views and a art285 (same chip as the 314l) for narrowband.

I would suggest the 314 as well and remember the 500 for filter wheels and filters etc....

[ianaiken]

Thanks everyone, very helpful. The different FOV is good for close of galaxies and the OSC will be good for wide field and neb. I think it should also be possible to combine data from both. I have an 80 and 100 ED DSPRO with finder guider on HEQ5. I may do one at a time or I may put both scopes on. I have a dual mount bar or I could piggy back them.

314 it is :-)

[ncjunk]

if you have the money available flo have one on their clearance thread for 949.

dont know if its still available

[ianaiken]

Now just need a filter wheel and some filters I have a 2" Ha which I could use in the meantime, not that its clear or dark.

[steppenwolf]

I think it is a great idea - I have a Starlight Xpress SXVF-M25C one shot colour CCD and an SXVF-H9 mono CCD and often use the two in combination although not necessarily on the same night, although that is something I am aiming for. The sensors are a very different size too so this need not be an impediment! The following is a typical example of the data used:-

OSC Image

Mono (Ha in this case) Image

Combined Image

[ncjunk]

My plan is to have the qhy on the ed80 and the 285 on the c11. I aim to get in close and widefield at the same time.

Also thinking of trying an exoplanet at some point and feel two ccds can only aid in determining the light curve.

[ianaiken]

Steve - thanks for sharing, great example of combining the data, and confirmation of what I was thinking early this morning before bed.

It did dawn on me early hours of the morning, pun intended, that a wide field could be combined with data from a smaller FOV for certain shots (looking at my wide M13 shot of recent, where I cropped it to the size I wanted and this so happens to be what the 314 would have produced). With this ability to still combine data, which is one of my objectives, as well as offering a different FOV and up close of smaller objects it made sense to go this route.

So now, I have the ability to use both cameras simultaneously (pending weight and balancing) or individually. I have a mono which I can do narrowband with, starting with Ha, and an OSC for my colour data. I could always do LRGB too with the mono, certainly L. This seems to cover pretty much everything.

Now, do I get 1.25" filters or 2" filters. I have a 2" mounted Ha 7nm which I will start this season off with, but for the rest I'm not so sure. I guess it's gonna depend on which electronic filter wheel I can get my hands on.

[ianaiken]

My plan is to have the qhy on the ed80 and the 285 on the c11. I aim to get in close and widefield at the same time.

Also thinking of trying an exoplanet at some point and feel two ccds can only aid in determining the light curve.

I have this urge to do something more than just imaging, but I don't think my skies give opportunity to this.

I'm getting an OBS in the Summer which will increase the time I can spend with the scopes, no setup and tear down each session.

[ncjunk]

have you actually bought the 314 then?

i am toying with the idea of buying a big observatory mount but part of me thinks the eq6 with an ed120 and ed80 will be fine.

i think i'll go for the mount and the qhy art285 combo....so much money though (5000). but then the 314 aint cheap either!

and an obs makes a great difference, especially those nights when you fancy a quick image but not the setting up.

[swag72]

I have a mono 314L and have recently bought an Atik 16HR OSC. I am going to try the two up approach at some stage, with one on the SW 120ED and the other on the Pentax 75SDHF, although I've not yet decided which way round would work best as there's a bit of a difference in fov!

[ncjunk]

I have a mono 314L and have recently bought an Atik 16HR OSC. I am going to try the two up approach at some stage, with one on the SW 120ED and the other on the Pentax 75SDHF, although I've not yet decided which way round would work best as there's a bit of a difference in fov!

iI am sticking the 285 on the c11 as being mono it will be more sensitive and get more detail. I never believe in worrying about fov. Even at 1800 fl the 285 is perfect for most galaxies...although i have to start thinking about orientation as some of the larger ones dont quite fit on.

I'll let the qhy worry about widefield views.

[ianaiken]

have you actually bought the 314 then?

sshhh

obs makes a great difference, especially those nights when you fancy a quick image but not the setting up

and those nights where there are gaps in the cloud but setting up maybe a bit risky. Pulling the roof on and off will be so much easier.

@Sara when I want to combine data, I will likely put the OSC on the 100ED and the Atik on the 80ED, then the FOV are somewhat similar (well kinda not but closer). Of course, I will likely use both camera's on both scopes.

In reality, it will just be cloudy and I'll get to do none of this At least when it's clear I've got a good chance of getting some nice data.

Edit: I use AstroPlanner so I can see precisly what FOV I will get, and how the target will look in the frame. Very very handy for planning.

[ncjunk]

i find the 314 file sizes so much easier to handle and process. the qhy is a pain in the bottom with 14meg files!

[ianaiken]

Especially if you process them in PI as 32 bit, then they are 79MB each

[johnrt]

The Atik 314l+ is a dream. You'll be very happy together.

[ianaiken]

I'll dream for the night I can use it.

Just looking to see what spacer I will need. It will be put on a reducer requiring 55mm from reducer to chip. I think the distance to chip on the 314l+ is 10.1?

Just looking as to what I need. I don't have a filter wheel yet. I have a 2" Ha mounted filter and I was just going to screw this onto a FLO SW Reducer adapter which sits inside of the focuser before the reducer. I guess what I need to think about is maybe a Baader variable extension tube for when I get a filter wheel, so I'm not buying two extensions.

So it would be Atik > Spacer > Reducer > FLO Adaptor with Ha (inside focuser).

I'm not reading anything definite yet what the distances are, at least anything I understand.

[ianaiken]

According to the mechanical drawing for this camera back focus is 13mm. So, I need to figure out what would be needed between the SW reducer and the Atik. Would be easier if I had it here :-)

[swag72]

With the SW reducer, the distance is 55mm - That is the distance from the reducer flange to the chip. If you measure to the end of the nosepiece then you subtract 13mm from 55mm - Or add it if you measure to the red casing of the Atik.

You can also add 1mm for the width of the filter.