Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

The ultimate which ATIK ccd thread.


ncjunk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

And I'll stick with my high sensitivity and low noise cameras with the very faint objects - I like the challenge. For larger FOV I'll change the optics FL :) I love prime lenses for widefield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to add a 383 to that list at the start.

I keep changing my mind between the 383 and the 428 every couple of minutes.....I'm seriously losing the plot.

Sent from my GT-I9003 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neil,

Also ask what people mean by low noise. Do they mean fewer hot pixels or a very smooth background ?

Hot pixels on the 8300 chip can be removed with dithering if you've enough subs. On many occasions backgrounds are pretty much the same on the Sony and Kodak chips as far as I have seen. Maybe a slight nod to Sony. You are likely to get more signal per minute with the Sony.

Note I've said Sony and Kodak. Your heading can be a bit alienating to non Atik users :)

Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Dave,

I think we're generally looking at background noise. Most of these cameras have no problem with hot pixels and, as you say, they can be removed.

Also it's an atik thread because most people i know on here have atiks and i've had one before and want to get another. The qhys tend to be good when the software works (i have had problems with my qhy6) and sbig qsi etc are nice but a bit more expensive (i'd love a qsi)

There have been lots of atik 428ex vs 450 or 314 vs 460 threads so i wanted one to cover the cheaper atik cameras and see what the pros and cons are.

I don't think there's a "wrong" camera anymore after the dsi3, air cooled 285 really? Are you serious?

Sent from my GT-I9003 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take your point re Atik. If you think they're the best then stick with them.

Re chip size. I'm no world expert but I can see the case for the biggest you can afford with any particular pixel size. If the chip is too big on occasions then crop. If a chip is too small be prepared to image a few more nights mosaicking. I'd go with crop !

FLO put a brief and to the point explanation of the pros and cons of the 460 v 490. Can't for the life of me find it but it says most of what you need to know.

Just to show I'm not a Moravian snob, I'd go for an Atik 490 if I got myself a nice 300mm f2.8 camera lens. Other than that a G2 8300. The only difference I've seen between the QSI and Moravian is the case colour and price :eek: If I had an ED 80 I might be persuaded to risk a 460 after seeing some images recently.

There's nothing wrong with an air cooled 285 chip...... if you just want to guide with it.

Good luck and I hope it's sorted in your head before next summer and the dark nights have gone :)

Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watch it, or i'll scream and scream and scream until i'm sick....

I want it ALL!

Sent from my GT-I9003 using Tapatalk 2

As a sometime English teacher, Neil, I must insist upon accurate literary quotation so it is, 'I'll thcweam and thcweam till I'm thick' (and I can, too!) Violet Elizabeth Bott. Ah, those were the days! Lying under my bed eating chocolates and reading William books.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point here is there is no one camera that suits everyone and every circumstance. I think the 314 would have been a good one for me but i thought what the heck and went for the bigger sensor of the 460 to future proof myself a little more. But could have gone for the 490. Or the 428. or the 383.... Or maybe a SBIG instead.....? I just bit the bullet and went for what others were raving about. Safety in the collective wisdom if you like..... If its good enough for Sara, Olly, Martin, Gina and others, it good enough for an imaging numpty like me....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Earlier on today Neil and I had a PM conversation about doing a comparison of the 460 and the 383. At the moment I own both (long story!). This isn't scientific in that the conditions are certain to be different between two nights, but it might be interesting.

I'm attaching a single 300s sub taken with a Borg 77 with a 0.8fr and a Ha filter and 2x binned - for both the 460 and the 383. The 460 was the night before last, the 383 I've just taken. Ideally it would be unbinned, but the 460 run was binned. Later I'll add some dark frames for comparison too.

A few obvious issuesto take into account - I just substituted the camera, so the FR spacing isn't correct and the corners look bad!! and I think the SX OAG on the filter wheel might be intruding into the light path of the 383 a bit givenm the bigger chip, but it seems to have got stuck and so I couldn't move it.

The difference in field of view is apparent, I'll leave others to consider sensitivity/noise. What is also worth noting is that the 383 will cool to -45 rather than -25.

460 mono

pickeringstriangle-bin--003Ha.fit

383L mono

Pickerings triangle 383 - -003-Ha.fit

Helen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing that does have to be taken into account with 8300 chips, is the Atik is not the best out of the available options out there, which does have quiet a bearing on the purpose of this thread and might not really be helpful in deciding via comparison which Atik to choose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing that does have to be taken into account with 8300 chips, is the Atik is not the best out of the available options out there, which does have quiet a bearing on the purpose of this thread and might not really be helpful in deciding via comparison which Atik to choose.

I would like to see some hard data proving this. I have seen one person on the net with a 383 and a gsi and he said he couldn't tell the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see some hard data proving this. I have seen one person on the net with a 383 and a gsi and he said he couldn't tell the difference.

The atik 383 definately had a problem with noise when the power supplied went below 12.5v on the initial version. I dont know if the current version suffers from the same problem or if its been revised.

Earl: i agree theres kind of 2 themes here a chip and manufacturer theme. I've read that some other 8300 makes are better.

Sent from my GT-I9003 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an ST-8300M and a QSI 683 WSG8. I can do a comparison test but it will have to wait until we once again have dark skies (late August). As it is now we barely have nautical darkness for a few minutes :(

The first obvious thing to note is that the QSI has a lot lower BIAS. I'll start a thread on the subject!

/p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I have run a battery down till my 383 just took black subs and never noticed any change in the subs until the first black one turned up, pluged the charger in and I was away again. My 383 was new last December.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I have run a battery down till my 383 just took black subs and never noticed any change in the subs until the first black one turned up, pluged the charger in and I was away again. My 383 was new last December.

That would tie in with the results I get when searching as most problem posts occurred in the first year or so after release.

So it may be sorted then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Earlier on today Neil and I had a PM conversation about doing a comparison of the 460 and the 383. At the moment I own both (long story!). This isn't scientific in that the conditions are certain to be different between two nights, but it might be interesting.

I'm attaching a single 300s sub taken with a Borg 77 with a 0.8fr and a Ha filter and 2x binned - for both the 460 and the 383. The 460 was the night before last, the 383 I've just taken. Ideally it would be unbinned, but the 460 run was binned. Later I'll add some dark frames for comparison too.

A few obvious issuesto take into account - I just substituted the camera, so the FR spacing isn't correct and the corners look bad!! and I think the SX OAG on the filter wheel might be intruding into the light path of the 383 a bit givenm the bigger chip, but it seems to have got stuck and so I couldn't move it.

The difference in field of view is apparent, I'll leave others to consider sensitivity/noise. What is also worth noting is that the 383 will cool to -45 rather than -25.

460 mono

pickeringstriangle-bin--003Ha.fit

383L mono

Pickerings triangle 383 - -003-Ha.fit

Helen

Thanks Helen! your a star!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just as a pointer to what I have found so far:

SBIG ST-8300M: Bias base level 740 (ADU)

QSI 683: Bias base level with high speed read: 1240

QSI 683: Bias base level with quality read: 240

This tells me that there is something to dig into here, and that it has to do with electronics implementation! Yes?

/per

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I just downloaded and had a good play with the above fits from the 460 and 383. Its very close when you stretch them till they look the same and I wouldn't IMO say that the sony chip is much quieter than the Kodak chip. For $1000 more and less real estate i'm happy with the 383 thank you! We need some bin 1 data I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I just downloaded and had a good play with the above fits from the 460 and 383. Its very close when you stretch them till they look the same and I wouldn't IMO say that the sony chip is much quieter than the Kodak chip. For $1000 more and less real estate i'm happy with the 383 thank you! We need some bin 1 data I think.

i see you use 1.25" filters with your 383 do you have any issues with vignetting ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i see you use 1.25" filters with your 383 do you have any issues with vignetting ?

Its fine with an f5 Newtonian but an f4 Newtonian starts cutting into the corners. But on the other hand its fine with canon f2.8 lenses? very odd Here's a flat at f2.8 with a Canon 200mm f2.8L http://www.flickr.com/photos/46302893@N02/8356206663/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too would like to see a hard data comparison between QSI and Atik or SBIG on the 8300. I'd be (pleasantly) surprised if the less expensive cameras matched the QSI, though it is a nice piece of work in other ways, too, to justify the price.

The other thing is calibration. The simple subtraction of darks doesn't, I suspect, automatically give a like-with-like comparison since experience tells me that different cameras like different routines. My Atik 4000s were fine with trad dark subtraction. My 11000 is far better when given the bad pixel map treatment. Who knows why?

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its fine with an f5 Newtonian but an f4 Newtonian starts cutting into the corners. But on the other hand its fine with canon f2.8 lenses? very odd Here's a flat at f2.8 with a Canon 200mm f2.8L http://www.flickr.co...N02/8356206663/

What are the black and white point readings with the F4? Are they going to come out with flats or is the data loss too great? As you say, odd that the 200L works so well. That's a nice lookiong flat!

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the black and white point readings with the F4? Are they going to come out with flats or is the data loss too great? As you say, odd that the 200L works so well. That's a nice lookiong flat!

Olly

Nope way too far gone at the corners with f4. Cropping is needed but not a lot. I don't use my f4 scope as the mirror and mounting is rubbish and tube is just too bendy and consistent collimation is impossible. I've got a Royce conical 10in f4 mirror on order that i'm wanting to make a carbon serrurier truss Newtonian with.

I also have a Mamiya 300mm F2.8 APO here and that shows only a little more vignetting at f2.8 than the canon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • 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.