Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_annual.thumb.jpg.3fc34f695a81b16210333189a3162ac7.jpg

Atik 314L+ versus 414EX


Recommended Posts

Sorry, should have mentioned, taken through an Equinox 66, HEQ5 mount and ST80/QHY5 finder setup. All taken with APT.

Yup - the fact that you're guiding shows the real sensitivity increase. Mine spread over an area so it looks like it's not as sensitive from the FITS!

Now I've got the ATIK OS X OpenPHD done I'm looking forward to the next clear night.. pity I hadn't got that fixed for the last session.

I'm a bit of a detail junkie.. so either small pixels or putting a 2x or 5x PM with larger more sensitive pixels will do me :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Looks like the weekend might be first light for my plunge into mono CCD imaging...

The figures for the two CCDs are ICX285: peak QE = 55% ICX825: peak QE = 73% if you're doing narrow-band imaging at the point of peak QE, then  a "flux" of 100 photons per second per pixel lighting up

My 414EX arrived yesterday! Looks to be clear on Saturday so I'll post some images if I get anything. Just to say, it's a thing of beauty. Lovely build quality.

Posted Images

So, an update. Got out last night for a session when the un-forecasted cloud finally left at 9.30... I revisited M1 and took 60 mins of 2 min subs of Luminance and 20 min of 2 min subs for each of R, G and B. I could probably do a lot more with the processing and had to find a star to refocus the RGB filters on so had to crop due to a slightly different FOV but overall I'm not displeased with it. 

M1   24 01 2015   120sx30(L), 120sx20(R), 120sx20(G), 120sx20(B)   Atik 414EX, Equinox 66, HEQ5, APT, ST80&QHY5   CC2014 V1 CROPPED

I think I've still got a long way to go to learn how to stack, merge and process LRGB images...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just taking a set of bias and darks - then I'll see if I can sort out a pseudo L flat (although this will just be with the filter it won't undo any scope unevenness).

What's just gobsmacked me is how fast the camera got from 19degC (inside central heating on) to -15degC - compared to the 383Ls cooling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I've done a set of bias, darks and pseudo flats. They're 32bit floating FITS saved by a simple stack in PI without pixel rejection for anyone to have a butchers at. The Flat is though the UV/IR + Neodymium + second UVIR that sits in the L filter slot.

Master built of 10x BIAS 0.0sec at -15: 10xBias-15.fit

Master build of 10x DARK 500s at -15: 10xDark_500s-15.fit

Master pseudo flat of 30x 0.2sec at -15 giving ~20K value through the filter and 4 layers of white T-shirt:  30xFlat_0_2sec-15.fit

Edited by NickK
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm looking at one or the other and was wondering if anyone has had any experience with the new 414? I know it's early days but I'd be interested to hear any comments. the 414 is supposed to be more sensitive but I'm struggling to move past the 314L+. After all, it's certainly got the runs on the board hasn't it ?

The 414 is 50% more sensitive in Ha and even more across the whole range, but I want to see a side by side comparison done at the same time preferably using a twin scope set up .

A.G

Link to post
Share on other sites

Further update on this. You may have noticed the vertical lines on the left of the images. Atik have advised that a firmware update is needed and rapidly provided me with the update file. I'll test it out when we get some clear skies, perhaps in 2016...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a 414 and get the same li n especially on the left. How do I get the firmware update?

Send ATIK support an email: support@atik-cameras.com they'll then send you the update.

Note that I know ATIK are attending the European Astrofest in London today and this weekend.

Edited by NickK
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

The 414 looks like a winner to me, I'm very seriously thinking about hitting the button on the OSC 414. I'm thinking the extra sensitivity might help compensate for the Bayer matrix reducing sensitivity. I would be very interested to hear how the OSC version performs, but I might be the one who buys it and reports on it I reckon :)  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris

If you do push the button let me know how you get on. I might be tempted by a dual mount setup OSC and Mono. Might be dreaming though!

Ed

lol you're not alone in dreaming about this, someone on CN was also thinking of having one of each I read! :)

Well I'll be pushing the button on an OSC Atik camera of some sort :) Just a case of which one?

I've been eyeing up the 420 for quite some time for it's fine pixels and narrow body (I have a short frac, plus a long term goal of Hyperstaring my C8 you see), although this new 414 should be very sensitive even as an OSC so it's very tempting to stretch to it :) I now have enough dosh in paypal for the 420 so that's tempting me also.

If its the 414 I'll post how I get :) I don't think there's much info out there on the one shot 414? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dug around for ages for info but couldn't turn up very much atall, was advised it wasn't the most suitable pixel size for my short fracs so went another way in the end

Did you go the way of the 1100D like in your sig? or do you have a CCD which isn't in your sig?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dug around for ages for info but couldn't turn up very much atall, was advised it wasn't the most suitable pixel size for my short fracs so went another way in the end

I was looking into this CCD camera to use with my William Optics ZS66 SD, are you saying that it has not got the best pixel size to use with this particular scope? If not what is the best pixel size to look for ?

Look forward to following this thread

AB

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking into this CCD camera to use with my William Optics ZS66 SD, are you saying that it has not got the best pixel size to use with this particular scope? If not what is the best pixel size to look for ?

Look forward to following this thread

AB

Hi, you can use the link below to input your scope and various cameras. From this you can see both the field of view with various objects, plus it tells you the resolution in arc seconds per pixel. 

I quite often hear folks say not to go below 1 arc second per pixel, this is because its more resolution than the atmosphere will allow, plus the small pixels which contribute towards this fine resolution are less sensitive than big pixels. This over doing it with resolution is know as oversampling.

I've heard if you go too far the other way i.e say 5 arc seconds per pixel you can get blocky stars and detail due to the broad resolution, albeit the camera will be quite sensitive with chunky pixels. This is, you guessed it, undersampling.

I asked about resolution a while ago and a very well know imager said he used about 3.5 arc seconds, and his images are fantastic.

Some people think calculating resolution is worth while, and others don't worry about it. I personally think its worth working to between 1 to 4 arc seconds, I wouldn't want to go any chunkier or finer than that.

http://www.12dstring.me.uk/fov.htm 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Matching a scope and camera to get the perfect combination is a great idea....in theory. However, unless you are sure you will only ever use one scope or can dish out £1k-£2k for a different camera for each scope then comprimises need to be made. I have a 60mm f7 and a 200mm f5 and it's taken an eon to scrape together enough for one camera. something has to give somewhere and unfortunately, it won't be my budget :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you go the way of the 1100D like in your sig? or do you have a CCD which isn't in your sig?

I was looking at the 314/414 but was steered towards the 428, then I thought I was set on a 460, same resolution but bigger chip. I put all my thought to Steve Chambers who threw a spanner in the works by suggesting the Atik One-6.  Gulp, hadn't even considered anything higher, said no and walked away to think it through. The Astrofest deal was worth it in my eyes so I'm currently imaging in HA & OIII on the Cone tonight. Only my second time out with it, still got to work out the processing.. To be fair I have a friend using a 314L+ on a short refractor and hes produces very nice images. this was my first outing with the camera http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/236436-new-atic-camera-st-light/

Edited by Stardust
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, did I follow that correctly, did you get the Atik One in the end? If so that sounds like the slippery slope flat out in fifth gear with you initially looking at the 314 ;)

Congrats on the camera by the way, and hope imaging the cone goes well :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes I did get the one, in the end it was another 400 over the 460 but a Baader lrgb filter set was bundled in which I was going to have to buy so that's really only 200 extra for a slightly better camera and built in electric filter wheel. Very glad I did go for it as I'd drastically under estimated the benefit of a EFW. Did have to sell a scope and nagler after the event but I am very happy with the camera. I hope I have gone far enough that I wont need the change for a good long time if ever. The astro fund is well and truly bombed out but I don't think I need much else now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, you can use the link below to input your scope and various cameras. From this you can see both the field of view with various objects, plus it tells you the resolution in arc seconds per pixel. 

I quite often hear folks say not to go below 1 arc second per pixel, this is because its more resolution than the atmosphere will allow, plus the small pixels which contribute towards this fine resolution are less sensitive than big pixels. This over doing it with resolution is know as oversampling.

I've heard if you go too far the other way i.e say 5 arc seconds per pixel you can get blocky stars and detail due to the broad resolution, albeit the camera will be quite sensitive with chunky pixels. This is, you guessed it, undersampling.

I asked about resolution a while ago and a very well know imager said he used about 3.5 arc seconds, and his images are fantastic.

Some people think calculating resolution is worth while, and others don't worry about it. I personally think its worth working to between 1 to 4 arc seconds, I wouldn't want to go any chunkier or finer than that.

http://www.12dstring.me.uk/fov.htm

Hi,

Thanks for that link, I have had a good play around with it, but even the older Atik 314 cameras have too bigger pixels for my scope, so now I am stumped as that is the cheapest in there range, for smaller pixels I would have to jump to around £1300 which is a no go for me at this point in time.

The Atik 314 comes out at about 4.5 arc seconds per pixel, as I would need to use my 0.8x Flattener / reducer, to stop any files curvature.

Ant ideas if CCD camera from other manufactures that would fit the bill for me?

Regards

AB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Thanks for that link, I have had a good play around with it, but even the older Atik 314 cameras have too bigger pixels for my scope, so now I am stumped as that is the cheapest in there range, for smaller pixels I would have to jump to around £1300 which is a no go for me at this point in time.

The Atik 314 comes out at about 4.5 arc seconds per pixel, as I would need to use my 0.8x Flattener / reducer, to stop any files curvature.

Ant ideas if CCD camera from other manufactures that would fit the bill for me?

Regards

AB

What scope do you have again? Yes I think 4.5 "/pixel is a bit on the chunky side also.

How about the Atik 420L then at 820 pounds?

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/atik-cameras/atik-420l-ccd-camera.html

This is the other camera I'm considering. I tiny bit smaller chip still, but hi res small pixels so great for small fracs and hyperstar. I like small chips as I'm a small object junky, plus you can get away without taking flats with a small chip, and I have a nasty habit of skipping these :D

The only down side to small chips such as the 420 and 414 is that it can be a nightmare to find your target to image in the first place, so you need an accurate goto. 

Edited by Chris Lock
Link to post
Share on other sites

What scope do you have again? Yes I think 4.5 "/pixel is a bit on the chunky side also.

How about the Atik 420L then at 820 pounds?

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/atik-cameras/atik-420l-ccd-camera.html

This is the other camera I'm considering. I tiny bit smaller chip still, but hi res small pixels so great for small fracs and hyperstar. I like small chips as I'm a small object junky, plus you can get away without taking flats with a small chip, and I have a nasty habit of skipping these :D

The only down side to small chips such as the 420 and 414 is that it can be a nightmare to find your target to image in the first place, so you need an accurate goto.

I have the William optics ZS66SD frac, with the dedicated 0.8x FFR, which is needed.

Regards

AB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 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.