Which Atik for my set up?!

[Johnboy2011]

I know this is an old question but wondered what the consensus is for my set up?

I am looking to upgrade to CCD from DSLR on my Skywatcher ED80 with FR and have pretty much decided on Atik. I really like the look of the 314L + package that FLO offer as I need filters and wheel too and like the idea of controlling everything with Atik software.

My only question is whether I should try and slightly future proof myself and go for a 4 series? My thinking is getting a slightly larger and more sensitive chip and also I get the impression you only get the Dawn software with a 4 series. (I don't have photoshop so I assume I could process with Dawn?) I am lost with the variety of Sony and Kodak chips as there seem to be a number of new ones all claiming excellent sensitivity!

Is there a "sweet spot" you think a beginner should head for without blowing the budget? I am thinking it maybe worth spending a little more now to get a reasonable chip size to avoid losing out by changing later. Just to confuse me further and just outside what I was thinking of spending I see Atik have now launched the 490!!

I appreciate that my question has been asked before and is a matter of opinion but I do value the experience of the forum. Thanks for your help.

John

[sloz1664]

Hi John,

FWIW I'd spend all my outlay on the best ccd I could afford. Image mono only until funds allow you to

obtain your filters & wheel. Then you can compliment your mono images with colour. I would purchase the Atik 460EX

excellent sensitivity & a good size chip. With respect to the 314L have you researched the image size with respect to your optics with

either CCD Calc or http://www.12dstring.me.uk/fov.htm.

cheers

Steve

[Martin-Devon]

John, I would agree with the above post - if your budget can stretch to it, see if you can opt for the 4 series Atik such as the 460EX. I started with the 314L+, and it's a great CCD, but you do get only a small capture field. I upgraded last autumn to a 460EX and it was well worth it, much bigger fields and excellent sensitivity/resolution (take a peek at my recent Flickr images in my signature below). In terms of the choice between a 460 or a 490, I'd advise you to talk to somebody like Ian King (see his website for contact number) - I had this exact discussion with him last week, and for short focal length, fast F-ratio refractors (such as your ED80) the 460EX may still be the best one to buy.

Martin

[Coco]

Future proof?

I started out with DSLR then modded, then ATIK 314, then 383 then 428 and guess what, I'm back with the trusty super sensitive 314 again, as for future proof you will have to wait an awful long time for the 314 to become worthless... the 16 HR predecessor still sells for £500-550

The 285 Sony chip is one of the most sensitive available to the amateur , yes its got a small field of view but I've had fabulous images with a 300mm f/4 camera lens, the stars didn't look like blobs quite the opposite..

You will probably be able to pic a bargain up at the next International Astronomy Show..

http://www.international-astronomy-show.com/#

[Coco]

Here are a few 314 images

ATIK 314

ATIK 16 HR

ATIK 314

And the list goes on...

[mallorcasaint]

And forget about Dawn. It's rubbish.

[RobH]

And forget about Dawn. It's rubbish.

Would you care to elaborate.....lots of people like it, including Olly Penrice, and he's no slouch when it comes to imaging.

Re. cameras.....as Guy says, the 285 chipped cameras are superb. The 460EX is slightly more sensitive with a larger chip, and I expect the 490 is also very good but can't talk from experience regarding this camera. I have an Atik 16HR and a 460EX and would recommend either of them.

Cheers

Rob

[Gina]

I got Dawn with my Atik 314L+ but never got round to trying it

[Martin-Devon]

I also echo the comment above about the Dawn software. Atik's Artemis capture software is excellent and I think this is what Olly and others praise, but their Dawn package is another kettle of fish, and gets little mention - I don't even know anybody that uses it, but I may be corrected.....

[Johnboy2011]

Thanks for the replies all. I have made my decision and plumped for the 314L, apart from field of view I can't find a bad word about it. I could buy a lot of goodies for the extra £1k the 460 would cost, starting with PS.

Now just to learn how to use it! Are there any good resources for getting started with CCD?

John

[Coco]

Thanks for the replies all. I have made my decision and plumped for the 314L, apart from field of view I can't find a bad word about it. I could buy a lot of goodies for the extra £1k the 460 would cost, starting with PS.

Now just to learn how to use it! Are there any good resources for getting started with CCD?

John

I doubt you have any regrets, none what so ever..

[mallorcasaint]

Artemis Capture is brilliant and easy to use but Dawn? I highly doubt if anyone praises it as it is neither complete nor useful for serious imagers. For a piece of software that is supposed to be "workflow" based it is not very intuative and it certainly lacks the fine tools to extract the best out of your data.

You have probably made a good choice in the 314L+. For the money there's little to beat it I would say. You can always upgrade at a later date.

[Davey-T]

Had my 314L+ for a few years and wouldn't dream of parting with it, even if I bought a new CCD camera I'd still keep and use it.

Tried Dawn once and couldn't make head nor tail of it.

Dave

[RobH]

I also echo the comment above about the Dawn software. Atik's Artemis capture software is excellent and I think this is what Olly and others praise, but their Dawn package is another kettle of fish, and gets little mention - I don't even know anybody that uses it, but I may be corrected.....

Ah....I was obviously getting the two confused.....thanks for clearing that up in my mind

John, you'll love your new camera....looking forward to seeing your results and hearing your thoughts on it.

Cheers

Rob

[jackrussell0232]

I'm going to play devil's advocate here, to a point.

I'd say 'forget the 490ex', unless you intend to image with a camera lens. Yes, it's the new kid on the block, but it uses exactly the same technology as the 694 based cameras, but it has more, smaller pixels.

I doubt that anyone would disagree that, all other things being equal, smaller binned pixels will not outperform equivalent size native pixels. So if you would never need the resolving power of pixels smaller than 4.5 microns (eg SX H694 or 460ex), you'd be buying a less sensitive camera by going for the 490. The 490 is dividing exactly the same number of incoming photons between many more, much smaller 'charge collecting pits'. These are then read out through exactly the same amplifiers/converters as are on the die of the 694 chip. The 4.54 to 3.7micron difference might not seem a big step, but the area is 66% less. If you need the high sampling rate (200mm focal length), then it's a price worth paying, but few imaging gurus will buy a 490 unless the already have a bigger pixel camera as well. It's great that the 490 can be binned 2x2, 3x3 etc and still be effective, but no one should buy a camera with the aim of always using it binned 2x2 or more, when better options are available.

The other thing I'd say is, consider persevering with the DSLR, or modding it if you haven't already. Some people on here will be laughing at this I know, others will just be raising eyebrows. A modded DSLR is a very useful tool for astrophotography, certainly my modded EOS 550d is. You're unlikely to see many DSLR shots which will compete with Olly and Co's amazing images. But many of these images contain hours and hours of data, which improves Signal to Noise ratios hugely. They're also taken on mounts which track very accurately and are then processed by experts . Few people with their skill and experience would use a DSLR. Because of this, there are very few DSLR images which get close to that quality. But I've seen a few, where someone has had the patience to take and sum 10 hours of DSLR subs and guess what - their images are stunning too.

If you want to do narrow band, then DSLR isn't an option for sure.

How about this? Get a 314l+. Even today, nothing gets close for the money and in 10 years it will be a great guide camera. The only thing it lacks is a big sensor. Where you want a big sensor use your DSLR.

If you want to push the boat out, blend the superior images of key objects taken with the 314 on top of the wider field picture from the DSLR.

Bring it on guys, I'm standing by to be shot down/flamed/ or even just disagreed with in a civilized manner. Sorry if I've rambled on a bit.

Happy imaging,

Jack

[jackrussell0232]

Sorry, correction to my last: the area is of each pixel isn't 66% less, it's 66% of the size of the bigger pixels. Sorry.

[JacobvonChorus]

I have an Atik 314L+. Barely used it but love it, great for narrowband. I use it at effectively 400mm, and the FOV is just fine IMO. This chip has been around for a long time and will continue to be around for a long time. This camera is not going anywhere anytime soon, it is great as is. Of course, if you can afford to go for a larger chip, then definitely consider it, otherwise you will be very satisfied with the 314. Trust me, I went in with overly high expectations with this camera and was still blown away by its performance, that says something.

Jacob

[Gina]

The Atik 314L+ has absolutely transformed my imaging - couldn't praise it more "Blown away" by it's performance describes it beautifully

[FLO]

Thanks for the replies all. I have made my decision and plumped for the 314L...

There's a FedEx van with a 314L+ in your area....

[Wailin]

(take a peek at my recent Flickr images in my signature below). In terms of the choice between a 460 or a 490, I'd advise you to talk to somebody like Ian King (see his website for contact number)

Martin

Stunning Images Martin

[ollypenrice]

Ah....I was obviously getting the two confused.....thanks for clearing that up in my mind

John, you'll love your new camera....looking forward to seeing your results and hearing your thoughts on it.

Cheers

Rob

Yes, I adore Artemis Capture, Rob, but have never so much as opened Dawn. I'm not knocking it, I just manage to do my stacking and calibrating in AstroArt 5 which I can understand. Since the pre-artistic bits of imaging are not my strong point I go with what I can understand!! I really like AA5 because you can see and control exactly what goes where. I'm told that Pixinsight can get a slightly tighter reslult but it would bring me to tears and I try to enjoy what I do!!

Olly

[kirkster501]

I have the same ED80/0.85 FR setup. I am going for the 490EX later on this year I think.