Colour or mono CCD?

[Bizibilder]

I may shortly have amassed enough pennies to get a CCD camera and will probably go for something like an Atik 314L - but the question is mono or colour? I don't get a huge amount of imaging time (clouds permitting) and wondered what are the main advantages/disadvantages of each. I don't really want to have to spend an extra few hundred pounds more on filters and a filterwheel if the colour camera will do more or less the same job. I know this is an often repeated question but I would still like some advice please.

(My current DSO imaging is done with either an ED80 or ED120 with flatteners/reducers and a modded Canon 1000D).

[Digz]

I think the general consensus is mono and OSC are pretty comparable - but I'm no expert. For me the choice is mono, because I like the ability to do NB and also image when the moon is out (which always seems to result in perfect clear skies)

[johnrt]

I vote for mono - much more flexibility as you can do narrowband. I think the idea that a colour camera is faster and easier than mono is a misconception. The mono will be much more sensitive and gather the data much quicker in comparison to the colour camera.

[Digz]

I guess the ability to do away with filters and FWs can simplify the acquisition of data and there are no issues of adjusting focus between filters (assuming your not using a parfocal set) .

The sensitivity of mono cameras together with binning should, theoretically mean its just as quick to work with mono, its a tough call for sure.

[Bizibilder]

I'm quite happy going for a single target in one evening - maybe 3-5 hours of data - at the moment the cost of filters and wheel just seems to be excessive if the OSC will do all I want it to. Thanks for the replies so far.

[Digz]

I'm quite happy going for a single target in one evening - maybe 3-5 hours of data - at the moment the cost of filters and wheel just seems to be excessive if the OSC will do all I want it to. Thanks for the replies so far.

Does NB appeal to you? If not OSC will be what you want IMO. Alternatively a manual FW and cheap filters can help.

I wish I had saved enough pennies by now (although I have no idea which CCD I will go for)

Good luck with your choice.

[Freddie]

Have a look at the "CCD Viable ......" thread started a few days ago in this section. Covers the subject pretty well.

[RikM]

I love my Mono camera. SXV-H9 with a manual filter wheel and Baader LRGB+Ha. The ability to grab nice Ha frames when the moon is out is a real plus. I also find LRGB much easier to process than DSLR ever was.

[Gina]

Definitely mono I say. I have never looked back since getting a mono 314L+ and filters etc. You can get LRGB images quicker than OSC due to the extra sensitivity and availability of binning for the RGB. I do NB too for nebulae plus it's good to add some Ha to LRGB on galaxies which often have Ha emitting areas.

[sloz1664]

I agree that mono is the better all round imaging ccd. But there are other matters to take into consideration. Do you have to set-up & tear down after each session,

if so, it takes a lot longer to set-up for mono than OSC. There is the added filter wheel to contend with - manual or electric that can have problems with fine focussing between filters, all well & good if you have an Obsy, but not all of us have that privilege.

If you think OSC cannot take narrowband have a look at this link http://qhyccd.com/ccdbbs/index.php?topic=1357.0 taken with a QHY8 OSC.

cheers

Steve

[andyboy1970]

Thing is the Mono cameras are far more sensative because they don't have a bayer matrix and ever pixel is gathering the same type of data.

The problem with OSC doing NB is the times increase to at least double that of the mono.

Question is - do you want easy processing sessions or complicated?

I would love a mono 314+ but can't afford it at the moment but you really need to spend on good quality filters to do it justice.

My experiance is from doing mono planetary and LRGB.