Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

QHY5 versus QHY5-II

chris_suffolk

By chris_suffolk
in Discussions - Cameras

Recommended Posts

SkySurfer

SkySurfer

Posted
Posted

Hi,

There is a difference between the two cameras you mention, the QHY5II is mono only and has a 1/2" sensor size, the QHY5IIL can be bought in colour or mono and has a slightly smaller sensor at 1/3" , but and this is important, the L version is a lot more sensitive and also costs a bit more.

So all I all for guiding the QHY5II mono is the perfect choice, but if you can afford the extra and you may want a more sensitive camera in the future for planetary imaging then go for the QHY5IIL, but for planetary work you will also,need a set of RGB filters so the price goes up more.

If you are only concerned with guiding then the QHY5II is the way to go, that is the one I use and it is superb.

By the way if you have two identical cameras, one mono and one colour, the mono will always be a lot more sensitive every time.

Hope that helps

:) :)

SS

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkySurfer

SkySurfer

Posted
Posted

Hi,

There is a difference between the two cameras you mention, the QHY5II is mono only and has a 1/2" sensor size, the QHY5IIL can be bought in colour or mono and has a slightly smaller sensor at 1/3" , but and this is important, the L version is a lot more sensitive and also costs a bit more.

So all I all for guiding the QHY5II mono is the perfect choice, but if you can afford the extra and you may want a more sensitive camera in the future for planetary imaging then go for the QHY5IIL, but for planetary work you will also,need a set of RGB filters so the price goes up more.

If you are only concerned with guiding then the QHY5II is the way to go, that is the one I use and it is superb.

By the way if you have two identical cameras, one mono and one colour, the mono will always be a lot more sensitive every time.

Hope that helps

:) :)

SS

Sorry forgot to say the QHY5 is good but no where near as sensitive as the newer versions, but they are available second hand for a good price, so,really it's all about funds available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
Posted

Sorry forgot to say the QHY5 is good but no where near as sensitive as the newer versions, but they are available second hand for a good price, so,really it's all about funds available.

I'm not 100% sure about that.  The QHY5 and QHY5-II both appear to use the same sensor and have the same QE value.

I think the design of the QHY5-II is more flexible and I know the firmware is a little different, but I think they're very similar cameras.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkySurfer

SkySurfer

Posted
Posted

I'm not 100% sure about that.  The QHY5 and QHY5-II both appear to use the same sensor and have the same QE value.

I think the design of the QHY5-II is more flexible and I know the firmware is a little different, but I think they're very similar cameras.

James

Ok I will stand corrected......sorry

:) :)

SS

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wuthton

wuthton

Posted
Posted

but the newer one is not as well put together.

I have a QHY5-II, as a guide camera it is excellent but.... My first one did break after six months of use..... Buuuttt.... Bern at Modern Astronomy replaced it within a couple of days with no cost to me and no fuss either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kalasinman

kalasinman

Posted
Posted

I'm not 100% sure about that.  The QHY5 and QHY5-II both appear to use the same sensor and have the same QE value.

I think the design of the QHY5-II is more flexible and I know the firmware is a little different, but I think they're very similar cameras.

James

In the case of the QHL5, it uses the Aptina  mt9m001 with a peak QE 55% and was prone to pattern noise. The QHY5L-II mono uses the Aptina mt9m034 and has peak QE of 74% with pattern noise eliminated.

Only know this because I'm considering embarking on OAG and sensitivirty seems like a good thing.--Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
Posted

In the case of the QHL5, it uses the Aptina  mt9m001 with a peak QE 55% and was prone to pattern noise. The QHY5L-II mono uses the Aptina mt9m034 and has peak QE of 74% with pattern noise eliminated.

Only know this because I'm considering embarking on OAG and sensitivirty seems like a good thing.--Jack

True enough.  The QHY5L-II uses a different sensor and is more sensitive than both the QHY5 or the QHY5-II.  I think it may be overkill if it will only be used for guiding though.  People have been guiding for years successfully using the QHY5 after all.  I guess the greater sensitivity might be useful for guiding with an OAG where the choice of guide stars may be a bit more limited, but as I've never tried that I can't really say.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kalasinman

kalasinman

Posted
Posted

BTW I find the review to begin with a negative tone, unfortunate, calls into question the balance. Then he goes on to misstate that the chip is the same, which it isn't. The the keyring comment. By then I'd discounted this review as being another hack job. No credibility at all.--Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chris

Chris

Posted
Posted

BTW I find the review to begin with a negative tone, unfortunate, calls into question the balance. Then he goes on to misstate that the chip is the same, which it isn't. The the keyring comment. By then I'd discounted this review as being another hack job. No credibility at all.--Jack

You are of course entitled to your opinion, so is the author I must add!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chris

Chris

Posted
Posted

From what I can guess, at the time of this review the chip might well have been the same as the QHY5, the author linked to the QHY site for the chip info. Hopefully they have rectified the early model issues, they did have wobbly ports due to lack of PCB support I've seen one stripped down on a you tube vid in the past but it seems to have been taken down? (Don't know what happened there?).

Yes please, let us know your thoughts on the current QHY5 II :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scott

Scott

Posted
Posted

I have a qhy5-II and think it's quite nice. I use it for guiding mainly but  have also done a wee bit of lunar imaging with it and am quite happy with it. All that being said, there is no denying it's quite "delicate" and I'd definately never treat it with anything other than kid gloves, I realise it's not the same camera as the qhy5L-II but it's basically the same body and I can't imagine the build issues would be any different.

In short, great camera. Just treat it with respect :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lensman57

lensman57

Posted
Posted

I see that the model reviewed isn't current. Let's hope that when I get the QHY5L-II mono that it is satisfactory. I'll be happy to post my experiences with it.--Jack

QHY5-II

 APTIMA CMOS Sensor MT9M001

Format: 1/2 inch, 6.66mm x 5.32mm

Pixel Size: 5.2um x 5.2um (1280 x 1024) 1.3 Mega Pixels

30fps @ 1280 x 1024 to 170fps @ 400 x 400

ADC: On Chip 10 bit ( 8 bit output)

QE: 56% Mono only

QHY5 L-II

APTIMA CMOS Sensor MT9M034

Format: 1/3inch, 4.83mm x 3.63mm

Pixel Size: 3.75um x 3.75um (1280 x 960) 1.2 Mega Pixels

30fps @ 1280 x 1024 to 200fps @ 320 x 240

ADC: On Chip 14bit ( 8 bit output)

QE: Mono = 75%

A.G

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wuthton

wuthton

Posted
Posted

I see that the model reviewed isn't current. Let's hope that when I get the QHY5L-II mono that it is satisfactory. I'll be happy to post my experiences with it.--Jack

For a guider you might be better off with the QHY5-II over the QHY5L-II. The larger pixels more than make up for it's lower QE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tich

tich

Posted
Posted

Just to throw a bit of a spanner in the works I've got the QHY5L-II colour camera & I've used it for guiding on a few occasions. I have always found it sensitive enough to find a star to guide on plus I can use it for planetary imaging. It's PHD that gives me headaches as it seems to use a lot of the system resources & locks up from time to time but when the software is working all is fine. I think the newer QHY5L's come with a screw in nose piece probably to aid focusing when used on a guide scope. Mine never had one but I managed to find one to fit from a Celestron Plossl, also I can use a better quality IR filter now as the one supplied didn't appear to be of great quality.

10689925_10152666642578434_1144331626170

All in all I'm pretty pleased with it, as for the wobbly port the whole thing moves due to its design the leads have never fallen out & they have always been secure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tich

tich

Posted
Posted

I have a qhy5-II and think it's quite nice. I use it for guiding mainly but  have also done a wee bit of lunar imaging with it and am quite happy with it. All that being said, there is no denying it's quite "delicate" and I'd definately never treat it with anything other than kid gloves, I realise it's not the same camera as the qhy5L-II but it's basically the same body and I can't imagine the build issues would be any different.

In short, great camera. Just treat it with respect :D 

As much as I've taken care with mine I have dropped it on a couple occasions but it still works fine so it's pretty robust, or at least mine seems to be. I got mine back in Sept 2012 as a tester so I've gone through all the bugs to begin with but I think they are all ironed out now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scott

Scott

Posted
Posted

As much as I've taken care with mine I have dropped it on a couple occasions but it still works fine so it's pretty robust, or at least mine seems to be. I got mine back in Sept 2012 as a tester so I've gone through all the bugs to begin with but I think they are all ironed out now.

I'm talking more about the usb-b socket. its really quite sloppy and as I've said, i'm gentle with it

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tich

tich

Posted
Posted

I'm talking more about the usb-b socket. its really quite sloppy and as I've said, I'm gentle with it

Ah right got ya, mine has always fitted nice & firm whether I'm using the original lead or others that I have so it's never gave me any concerns.

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.