Move to CCD, please help!

[PhotoGav]

Ok, so this is a topic that has been discussed a million times on here and always seems to end with a different answer. However, there is one common theme - a mono CCD and filters is the 'best' way to create stunning astrophotographs. That is what I am trying to do, so I am planning the route ahead to get closer to that goal.

I am currently using a modified 60D and am pretty happy with the results I am acheiving with both the Skywatcher ED80 and Celestron 8" EdgeHD. I particularly like the field of view, but particularly dislike the noise the DSLR generates. So, theoretically, if I move to a good mono CCD, I will move from 'pretty happy' to 'happy', if not 'ecstatic'!!

So, the question is: which CCD / Filter Wheel / Filters combo would be most appropriate to work with both scopes for DSOs?

My research so far, which primarily involves looking at the images posted here and seeing what gear was used to create them, points towards an Atik. The 460EX, as so brilliantly used by Sara, was top of my list, but then Atik brought out the One - which looks a great package, but I am yet to see any final images produced by that camera. However, there are plenty of alternatives out there, QSI being one brand that seems to be a challenger, but I wouldn't know which one would be best.

Budget wise - I have a slowly filling piggy bank and no figure in mind. This is currently a hobby, so I can't spend all the money I earn on it (though it sometimes seems like that is exactly what I am doing!), but I am prepared to spend what is required to get a good camera that will last a while and get head turning results! My little personal goal with all this astrophotography is to have an exhibition of about twelve large prints of stunning DSOs in a local gallery space, so quality is key.

I hope that you fine folk out there will be able to offer me some good advice on how best to spend some more astro-dollars!

Thank you in advance.

[GuillermoBarrancos]

The Atik One has the exact same sensor as the Atik 460exm.

[steppenwolf]

Having looked at your website, you clearly know how to produce a good image so I don't need to caution you over the 'equipment does not make the imager' syndrome!

As you are used to the wide FOVs of an APS 'C' sized sensor (28.12mm) you will want the largest CCD sensor that you can get but somewhere along the line you are going to have to define your budget. You mentioned QSI and that caught my attention as I am a great fan having recently bought a QSI 683 WSG-8. This is an 'all in one' solution comprising a KAF 8300 sensor (22.5mm diagonal), 8 wheel filter wheel and an OAG - fabulous engineering but not a low budget purchase, highly recommended!

The ATIK 314l and the extremely good ATIK EFW2 with a suitably slim OAG would also be seriously strong contender!

Slightly off-topic and against the grain:-

However, there is one common theme - a mono CCD and filters is the 'best' way to create stunning astrophotographs.

Absolute tosh!! :grin:  A CCD and filters is just another way of doing it but OSC and mono + filters are capable of capturing 'head turning results'.

[PhotoGav]

The Atik One has the exact same sensor as the Atik 460exm.

Absolutely - is that a good thing or a bad thing!?

Steve, thank you for your response. Indeed - you are the reason why I mentioned QSI in my original post, you recommended them to me at SGL9 and the research I have done since then supports that. So definitely on the list. As an aside, I'll take this opportunity to thank you for the advice concerning flats and an EL panel. I have purchased an A3 Earlsmann panel and it works a treat!

Budget wise, it does seem that I am going to need somewhere in the £3k region to take this jump. I am saving...!

I see that Atik generally uses Sony chips and QSI use the Kodak chips - what difference is there between them?

[ollypenrice]

Heh heh, Steve's having a stir! Good on him. I do think that CCD roundly beats DSLR, the gap narrowing considerably in ultra fast optics like the F2.8 Epsilon in which DSLRs can shine. I also think that for speed and flexibility mono does win in the end, but I enjoyed OSC CCD for a few years. I often added mono narrowband data, though. The frustration factor may be higher in mono, for sure!

The big issue for you, I think, will be chip size. I've always been a bit tepid over budget implementations of the 8300 and generally felt one should go for the QSI or upwards. However, a friend has just added an Atik 383 to his considerable arsenal and really rates it. He even breathed the heretical thought that he might prefer it to his QSI. That's not the point, though. The Atik 383 has produced some great stuff in his hands so I would put it on the shortlist.

Last week Shine On produced this from a 460 at F5.3. The colour is a work in progress because, at the time of posting, he had only a tiny amount. However, a camera that can pull the tidal tail in two hours has to be quite something. http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/214878-leo-triplet-tidal-tail-in-2-hours/  The tail poped more easily in this data than it did in my own effort (11000 chip in the same type of scope) though mine had 9 hours of Lum. I have to say that this came as a bit of a shock!

Sony chips are so nice. Kodak chips are so big. Dammit, what a cruel world we live in!!!

lly

PS the One versus the 460? I very much doubt it will affect the images. It's really about convenience where the One has wisely borrowed from the svelt design of the QSI.

[PhotoGav]

Interesting, thanks for that input Olly. Yes, I saw the Lion's tail pic - stunning. It's partly responsible for making me move sooner than I might have otherwise on this! I will look at the 383 in more detail.

Of course there is no perfect solution.... Where would the challenge be then?!

[GuillermoBarrancos]

If you are interested in the KAF8300 sensor, you might take a look at the Moravian G2-8300.

Outside the UK it is a highly regarded camera with very good readout electronics. Better than the Atik.

It has a version without and with integrated filterwheel.

In Western Europe Teleskop-express.de is the main dealer of these cameras.

Just thought I would mention it.

I did a lot of research so far and my current shortlist is down to Atik 460exm, Moravian G2-8300 or G2-4000.

All three are more or less in same price range

[PhotoGav]

Excellent, thank you @GuillermoBarrancos. I have to say, I'm very much liking the look of the Kodak 8300 chip - appears to be a great sized sensor at a not ridiculous price... So, Atik v QSI v Moravian implementations...which is best?

Then there is the question of filters - at f10 (C8) and f6 (ED80 with reducer/flattener), are 1.25" filters going to work properly? From what I glean, they should be fine and it is only at f4 or less that it would become a problem and 2" filters would be necessary.

[swag72]

I can't help thinking that there is no 'right' choice and no uncompromised one choice either. In an ideal world, if I could get a Sony chip the size of the big Kodak chip I'd be there in a shot. Sadly, life isn't that simple and so we compromise. I did my first summer last year with the 460 - The chip at times was annoyingly small (hence I ended up with a couple of 3x2 mosaics that were both over 70 hours of data), and at other times it was perfect. I have found in the C9.25 that it bins rather well and so it kind of suits that as well.

Would I keep with the 460 chip? No I'm not planning on doing so ................ and so another compromise begins.

Would I get an Atik again? Personally no I wouldn't, next it will be a QSI.

Good luck in your choices!! We've all been there and we all know how hard it is

[PhotoGav]

Mmmm, a very interesting response Sara and one that has surprised me. So, you are planning on chucking the Atik and moving camp?! What are you asking for the 460?! What are you going to be replacing it with. This all makes me glad that I posted the question as my initial plans seem to be very dodgy and definitely need a serious rethink!

[swag72]

Yes I am replacing the Atik soon - Will be mulling things over!!!

[GuillermoBarrancos]

Excellent, thank you @GuillermoBarrancos. I have to say, I'm very much liking the look of the Kodak 8300 chip - appears to be a great sized sensor at a not ridiculous price... So, Atik v QSI v Moravian implementations...which is best?

Then there is the question of filters - at f10 (C8) and f6 (ED80 with reducer/flattener), are 1.25" filters going to work properly? From what I glean, they should be fine and it is only at f4 or less that it would become a problem and 2" filters would be necessary.

People say the Moravian gives even the QSI a good run for it's money when it comes to the read-out electronics.

Someone did some SNR tests ( cant find link right now and gotta go out soon) and the Moravian CCDs were right up there in the top alongside the QSI.

Factoring in engineering build quality, I guess it will be QSI, then Moravian and then Atik.

But the QSI 683 comes in at a hefty price. That's why I think the Moravian is an excellent alternative.

If you go for external filterwheel option, you can either go for 31mm or 36mm unmounted. Depending which brand filters you plan to buy.

Baader has 36mm and Astronomik has 31mm for example.

Both 31mm and 36mm should not give any vignetting with the KAF8300 sensor.

PS. Me too like the FOV of the KAF8300 sensor very much, next to the slightly larger pixel size as well.

[steppenwolf]

Heh heh, Steve's having a stir! Good on him.

Moi???

I should have mentioned the Atik 383 as well, this too is a fine piece of equipment - Atik have really upped their game recently and I hold them in high regard, still definitely not as 'polished' as a QSI but ahead of the majority of contenders.

I love Sony sensors as they produce so little thermal noise - you still get hot pixels but general noise levels are very low and hot pixels can be handled with either dithering or a hot pixel map. Kodak sensors are without doubt noisier but dark frames and/or a hot pixel map resolve this easily and the a two stage Peltier cooling system noise is dramatically reduced at source.

[JohnC64]

Hi Gav, I went through the same dilemma as yourself on what CCD to go for.  (think everybody does)  http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/199102-kaf-8300-based-cameras-ooops/ 

It came down to a choice between  chip sensitivity and chip real estate.   Where  the Sony chips win on Chip sensitivity and TrueSense chips(KAF and KAI)  win on chip real estate area.  In the end, I went down the real estate route as, after moving from a DLSR,  and  running fov calcs, i kept coming back to the larger chips for the scope that i had.   Like Steve,  I also went for the QSI 683 WSG-8,  due to the quality of the engineering  of these cameras and the All in one solution.  In terms of cost they are more expensive but if you add the cost of filter wheels, OAG etc to other solutions, it comes out at a comparable price.  The All in One solutions also have the advantage of being compact and therefore the back focus requirements mean that they can be used without the myriad of adapters required to squeeze everything into  56mm.  

I think that the top contenders for me would be QSI , Atik and Moravian as they all have good reputations and support. (Obviously the Atik is UK based so a big plus there)

Whatever choice you make, I am sure that when you see your first image with a CCD, It will bring a smile to your face :-)

Cheers John

 

[ollypenrice]

Hmmm, I'm surprised that Sara is quitting Atik. I'm firmly onboard. I use their cameras commercially, though, and really rate the reliability and fuss free after sales. If you're a month out of warranty with QSI I reckon that's yer lot. (A friend's experience. Not impressed.) I haven't found this with Atik, shall we say. Mind you, their cameras have been so reliable.

Olly

[GuillermoBarrancos]

Morning

Just searched and I found the "ReadOut Noise" test again here: http://blog.astrofotky.cz/pavelpech/?page_id=782

It´s very interesting and you can see that the Moravian CCD cameras almost consistently beat the QSI, FLI and Apogee cameras in the tests he performed.

Three top brands that charge considerably higher prices for their cameras.

What suprises me is how bad the Starlight Xpress CCD like the SXVR-H18 holds up against the rest. It scores worst among all tested cameras.

[PhotoGav]

Thank you for digging that out Guillermo. I will give it a proper read later and try and understand what all those numbers actually mean! You are certainly putting forward a good case for the Moravian camera... Is that what you think you are going to go for?

[swag72]

Quite what you decide first is a tricky one.

Do you pick your camera manufacturer of choice and then look at the chips they have on offer? or, do you pick a chip you like and then look at who makes them?

I picked my chip and then went for the manufacturer I think either way limits you. I have heard very good things about Moravian, sadly they didn't do the chip I was after................

[GuillermoBarrancos]

Thank you for digging that out Guillermo. I will give it a proper read later and try and understand what all those numbers actually mean! You are certainly putting forward a good case for the Moravian camera... Is that what you think you are going to go for?

It´s one of the reasons why the G2-8300 and G2-4000 is on my list yes.

I have to wait til June before my astro Money (holiday Money) comes in. So I had and still have plenty of time to do lots of Research.

Like you, I can only spend my Money once and cannot afford spending a lot of Money on a camera and then regret it, selling at a loss and then buy another one.

So I try to get the best camera I can get for a good price.

The Moravian G2-8300 is slightly higher priced than the Atik 383L+, but the G2-4000 is excellent priced compared to the Atik 4000 for example, that is nearly 1000 euros more expensive.

The only difference is the water cooling option on the Atik 4000, which I could care less for, as unless you live in the South where temperatures during night are much higher, you will never use that option anyway.

So my current list is:

1. G2-8300

2. Atik 460EXM

3. G2-4000

The sony sensor in the Atik 460EXM is nice tho. The high QE sertainly helps when you go after the very very faint.

Tho my concern is that so far most images I have seen With the Atik 460 look very flat (2D like) compared to images taken With the Kodak sensors which show a lot more Depth (3D like).

I also like the extra real estate (FOV) of the KAF8300.

And with the slightly larger pixel size of the KAF8300, it gives just tat bit better arcsec pixel ratio on longer focal length Scopes, and still has a good amount of pixels when 2x2 binning.

So I feel the KAF8300 sensor is just a little more versatile. Hence, why it´s so incredibly popular I guess.

The G2-4000, which has the KAI 04022 sensor has even larger pixels and a nice square FOV (2k by 2k pixels), with 7,4um pixel size, an even better alrounder.

It also has an Electronic shutter compared to mechanical shutter on cameras with KAF8300 sensor. So can handle very short exposures.

Tho, it´s QE range is lowest of the Three, but in Return a high well depth. I guess you can never have the best of both worlds.

[ollypenrice]

This well depth businesss is interesting. I've scrounged round our archives and found an image I processed from a visiting 460/Tak Baby Q. The trouble is that I was also working for the first time with an Astrodon RGB set (again not mine) and finding it challenging. The famous 'teal blue' of the Astrodons was making itself felt. So there were two variables, the unfamiliar filters and the unfamiliar camera. 

What do we think is the issue here, a reduced colour range? Very hard to say. Here's the image, anyway. http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Takahashi-EM200TEC140/i-6QzMX94/0/X3/ATIK%20460%20web-X3.jpg

Olly

[GuillermoBarrancos]

That is a fantastic image. Don´t see anything wrong with it.

In fact, what is interesting is that image doesn´t show much of the flatness I have seen so far in a lot of the images taken with the 460EXM.

Fueling the discussion that the flatness actually might end up being caused by the scopes that were used. In most cases this was an SCT (The 460EXM is very popular with EdgeHD owners).

There are some interesting discussions I have seen mentioning that SCT´s tend to show a flatter image due to the Optical design? And refractors showing the best Depth of Field.

As the KODAK sensors are large sensors, they often end up being used mostly with APO´s and RC´s.

And maybe that´s causing my bias towards the KODAK sensors in the end regarding Depth in images? Hmmm.

[PhotoGav]

Well, I'd be very happy to have produced that image! I see what you mean about the slight cyanish colour tinge and interesting that you think that is down to the filter set... So, which LRGB filter set would you recommend?

That's interesting about flat images from SCTs versus images with more depth from refractors - I suppose it does make some sense as with an SCT, you are essentially taking a picture of a mirror surface, whereas the refractor is the actual scene itself. Don't know if that does make any difference, but perhaps it does! Do you think reflectors suffer from flatness too?

Luckily I too have plenty of time to make my decision as the piggy bank currently has £20.51 in it... I need to shift that decimal point several places......!

[GuillermoBarrancos]

Well, I'd be very happy to have produced that image! I see what you mean about the slight cyanish colour tinge and interesting that you think that is down to the filter set... So, which LRGB filter set would you recommend?

That's interesting about flat images from SCTs versus images with more depth from refractors - I suppose it does make some sense as with an SCT, you are essentially taking a picture of a mirror surface, whereas the refractor is the actual scene itself. Don't know if that does make any difference, but perhaps it does! Do you think reflectors suffer from flatness too?

Luckily I too have plenty of time to make my decision as the piggy bank currently has £20.51 in it... I need to shift that decimal point several places......!

Which is indeed interesting, as images taken with an Ritchy-Cretien (RC) design don´t seem to suffer from this and an RC is basically also a reflector.

It might also be the influence of the corrector glas (plate) being used in SCT´s, which an RC and Newtonian doesn´t have? Just speculation now.

In the end tho, it might not be this simple and be a combination of many factors.

The KODAK sensors in general having larger pixels (with Sony 285 sensor being the exception), translating in a larger well depth, which then translates again in higher dynamic range.

Maybe that also might influence the Depth perception of the final image and then in the end favoring the KODAK sensors yet again.

It´s all very interesting, but might end up causing me a headache lol.

[swag72]

In fact, what is interesting is that image doesn´t show much of the flatness I have seen so far in a lot of the images taken with the 460EXM.

An interesting thought - I wouldn't consider this image flat (https://www.flickr.com/photos/swag72/9855898385/) and it was taken with the 460EXM.

[GuillermoBarrancos]

An interesting thought - I wouldn't consider this image flat (https://www.flickr.com/photos/swag72/9855898385/) and it was taken with the 460EXM.

I saw that image of yours many times! Absolutely love that one! How could I have missed that that one was taken with the Atik 460!

But you used the APO with that one I see.

I guess this pretty much fuels the SCT theory more and more.