Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

Calling all Ed80 owners, what camera do you use?

jabberwocky

By jabberwocky
in Discussions - Cameras

Recommended Posts

jabberwocky

jabberwocky

Posted
Posted

I've pretty much decided my first foray into imaging is going to be with an ED80 but I haven't a clue which ccd to use with it, I've spent hours on FoV calculators but my head is still spinning, so what do people use?

Am I right in thinking that the short focal length of the ed80 will give me widefield images but the sensor size of the camera will also affect this?

since I work 5 nights of the week ill be going for a one shot colour camera to maximise my time, cost isn't necessarily an issue, it will just take longer so save for the camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RikM

RikM

Posted
Posted

An Atik 314L+ or Starlight Xpress SXV-H9 gives a respectable field size at a reasonable angular resolution on a reduced/flattned ED80. If you want to spend a bit more, the Atik 460 seems to be well thought of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tonedeaf

tonedeaf

Posted
Posted

unmodded eos550d, maybe someday later a ccd...

but regarding FOV size -> just type the chip specs (google) in eg. stellarium, put in the scope specs, maybe with FF/FR and you will see what FOV you will have...(don´t forget to save before you get a bluescreen <- happened to me twice :eek: )

then i search for targets that may match into the FOV :rolleyes:

generaly speaking the bigger the chip the bigger the FOV (as far as my understanding) so the biggest bang for the buck you will get from a DSLR...with ccd´s it will get quite expensive :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jessun

Jessun

Posted
Posted

Am I right in thinking that the short focal length of the ed80 will give me widefield images but the sensor size of the camera will also affect this?

Sound right to me :smiley: !

The problem of vignetting - uneven illumination, trailing off towards the edges - can affect larger CCDs and that is something a FOV calculator never reveals. Some optical designs cover bigger CCD's, and the art of flats will cure mild to moderate vignetting.

The really interesting factor is arc seconds per pixel. You'd want a number that your seeing can warrant.

I plan to put an APS size CCD (The M25C) to my reduced ED80, but haven't tried it yet. The combination will give me about 3 arc sec per pixel, and this can probably be considered a less than ideal combo. Smaller stars could run the risk of fitting in one pixel thus making them square, but that's theory... I need to test it myself.

A KAF8300 based camera seems quite good for the ED80. I wish I had one! :cool:

/Jesper

Link to comment
Share on other sites
martin_h

martin_h

Posted
Posted

Sound right to me :smiley: !

The problem of vignetting - uneven illumination, trailing off towards the edges - can affect larger CCDs and that is something a FOV calculator never reveals. Some optical designs cover bigger CCD's, and the art of flats will cure mild to moderate vignetting.

The really interesting factor is arc seconds per pixel. You'd want a number that your seeing can warrant.

I plan to put an APS size CCD (The M25C) to my reduced ED80, but haven't tried it yet. The combination will give me about 3 arc sec per pixel, and this can probably be considered a less than ideal combo. Smaller stars could run the risk of fitting in one pixel thus making them square, but that's theory... I need to test it myself.

A KAF8300 based camera seems quite good for the ED80. I wish I had one! :cool:

/Jesper

I use the QHY9 ccd which is KAF8300 based...works well in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

One shot colour is slower than mono. The mono luminance-red-green-blue system was invented to save time. It is SO hard to get this message across. When using a one shot colour camera or any single colour filter you are excluding about two thirds of the light from the chip. (If you are collecting red you are not collecting green or blue.) In monochrome LRGB you only do this when obtaining the low resolution colour data. The rest of the time you collect all colours at once (luminance) so you save time. That is the whole point. In One Shot Colour imaging each single pixel is condemned to collect only one third (ish) of the light all the time. It never collects all of the light all of the time. When a mono camera is collecting its luminance data that is exactly what it is doing. Collecting all of the light all of the time.

Fastest; LRGB in a mono CCD camera.

Second fastest; One Shot Colour CCD.

Very distant third fastest; DSLR.

Olly

http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Best-of-Les-Granges/22435624_WLMPTM#!i=2277139556&k=FGgG233

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jabberwocky

jabberwocky

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Olly so essentially I'd have to collect far more subs with OSC than mono and filters to get the same quality image?

How do people plan their AP sessions with filters, do you do a night of red, then a night of green etc etc or do you try to do all in one night but fewer of each?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blinky

blinky

Posted
Posted

I hear what Olly is saying but I still maintain that in the UK with our infrequent clear skies, OSC is the way to go. A dozen subs from a OSC only equates to 3 subs each of lrgb, I'm sure I could no more with less noise from 12subs than I could from 3. Under Ollys perfect skies I'm sure mono is the way to go when you can dedicate a night to each channel but in the UK that could well take over a month!

Sent from my HTC One S using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

Well, I have enough time to use OSC. If I lived in the UK I might not have... When I used an OSC I just ran it on one mount, forgot about it, came back the next night, shot a load more, etc etc.

The issue is not physical but psychological. You will get a better result in a given time with mono whether you live at Mauna Kea or in Manchester. However, what might happen in Manchester is that with a mono you don't get a full data set so you have LRG-dammit whereas with OSC you get a bad OSC picture. I can perfectly well see that that you might prefer the latter!

The fact remains, for a given quality mono is significantly faster. On bright objects the difference is less than on faint ones, where mono leaps ahead.

You can shoot your LRGB with science in mind or psychology. Science says shoot L and blue high in the sky and R and G when the target is low. Psychology says, At least try to get a data set so shoot LRGBLRGB etc. You takes your pick.

I think 12 subs OSC and 3x4 subs RGB are exactly equivalent. It's the next hour that makes the diffierence. In the OSC you are doomed to take an extra hour of RGB. In a mono you can get about three times the data via a luminance filter. With a mono you could also have shot your RGB in Bin2 and gained about 30% more signal.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnrt

johnrt

Posted
Posted

Am I correct in thinking that the red green and blue give the colour of an image and the luminance gives the detail?

Yes, exactly that. A multitude of sins can be hidden with a decent lum layer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
davies07

davies07

Posted
Posted

I use a QSI583 on my ED80. I also use the Televue TRF-2008 reducer.

If time is short you can shoot luminance channel only and get a mono image. Check my Flickr page to see what I've been getting.

I love the QSI camera but the available back focus for some of the Televue reducers is a bit short so you need to be careful with how you mount them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nmoushon

nmoushon

Posted
Posted

A little late to the party but I have a Equinox ED80 with an off brand x.76 R/FF (which surprisingly works extremely well) with an unmodded Canon 450D with a CLS filter. I personally think, in this price range, this is one of the best setups you can get. Simpley because of the ease of use, set up, maintenance and image quality. I live in a pretty heavy LP area (on the boarder of the orange/red color on the LP maps). Here are what I got this past winter with this setup. http://stargazerslou...2/#entry1826215 These would obviously be better if taken with a CCD OSC or mono but not having to fudge with a computer trumps everything for me at the moment. Only because I have no permanent place to set up and thus have to tare down every night.

If you have the time, effort, money to go CCD then I would suggest going with what Olly has suggested and go mono over OSC. When the time comes that I can get a permanet setup place (i.e. pier or obsy) I will make the switch to CCD and it will be mono. It also provides you with much great options to go with in the future such as narrowband. Easier to resale when the time to upgrade comes along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • 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.