Skipping DSLR and going straight to CCD ?

[Vox45]

As I was looking at my wish list of astro gear I started to ponder...

Is it a waste of money to go down the DSLR path and then end up with a CCD cam in the future, when I will have exhausted my DSLR posibilities ? Why not go directly to what most people end up with anyway ?

The learning curve will be steeper for sure, but I will be able to invest more money sooner on a good CCD cam setup and (I guess) will be able to do planetary and DSO using the same cam right away.

What do you guys think of that ? If someone is serious about the hobby, would skipping DSLR make sens ?

[johnrt]

There is no law that says you have to start with a DSLR most do because they simply already have one or it's much much cheaper. The learning curve is no more difficult with CCD.

[Alien 13]

It depends on what you want out of AP if you are using a DSLR as a cheap substitute for a CCD then its probably best to go for one straight away if however you want portable widefield with fast camera lenses then a DSLR will be the best option and has no need to be upgraded.

Alan

[laser_jock99]

I see you have Canon 1000D already- start with that while you save up for a cooled CCD, no need to spend anything yet!

[Vox45]

What would be a suitable entry level CCD mono camera in your opinion ?

My eyes were set on an ZWO ASI120MM but I realize that it is in fact a CMOS camera (color), It must be more planetary oriented. When I look at the ATIK 314L it is way more expensive

This is indeed an expensive hobby !

[johnrt]

If you are going down the CCD route, it isn't going to be cheap. That's just a fact, and that's why many start with a DSLR.

Arguably if you are going for a CCD you will want a mono camera too, there is little to gain other than cooling in buying a colour CCD (smaller chip for a start), so you will need to add the price of filter wheel and LRGB & Ha filters to the camera cost.

You can go down the colour CCD route (QHY do a DSLR size chip) but for me the whole point of CCD is the opening up of narrowband images and that means mono.

[Vox45]

I see you have Canon 1000D already- start with that while you save up for a cooled CCD, no need to spend anything yet!

Yes I do own that DSLR, I got it from eBay (1400 shutter count, so almost new) for 143£. I could resell it and not bother with buying a T-ring/clip-in filters etc, and also not going through the dreaded moding...

Of course there is a BIG price difference between a CCD and DSLR setup !

[red dwalf]

the zwo 120 is a better planetary camera, also make a good guide camera, entry level cooled ccd would be a 314 L+ or the newer 414ex.

[Vox45]

If you are going down the CCD route, it isn't going to be cheap. That's just a fact, and that's why many start with a DSLR.

Arguably if you are going for a CCD you will want a mono camera too, there is little to gain other than cooling in buying a colour CCD (smaller chip for a start), so you will need to add the price of filter wheel and LRGB & Ha filters to the camera cost.

You can go down the colour CCD route (QHY do a DSLR size chip) but for me the whole point of CCD is the opening up of narrowband images and that means mono.

Yes, money is always and issue and I do realize that I will also need to change the OTA and then there is the mount and the guiding and so on I am ok with that, I just would not want to spend time and energy learning and fiddling with a DSLR and then realize that I should have gone with a CCD.

I am sure that lots of people went through the exact same existential crisis. I Just want to get some reactions from those who regret it or are really happy they made the CCD choice.

Learning from other's people mistakes

[Vox45]

the zwo 120 is a better planetary camera, also make a good guide camera, entry level cooled ccd would be a 314 L+ or the newer 414ex.

So would you agree that a ZWO 120 would be a suitable guide cam if I ever get an Atik 314L+ ?

As I am doing mostly planetary/luna/solar right now (with a cheap webcam) I could go with the ZWO and then slowly ease into CCD imaging with an Atik for DSOs later on ... I could always reuse the filter wheel/filters/OAG of the ZWO with the Atik and keep the ZWO for guiding... does that make sens ?

[wxsatuser]

Yes, money is always and issue and I do realize that I will also need to change the OTA and then there is the mount and the guiding and so on I am ok with that, I just would not want to spend time and energy learning and fiddling with a DSLR and then realize that I should have gone with a CCD.

I am sure that lots of people went through the exact same existential crisis. I Just want to get some reactions from those who regret it or are really happy they made the CCD choice.

Learning from other's people mistakes

I went for DSLR and don't regret it.

Will I ever get a CCD........at the moment no but may be later

[Vox45]

I went for DSLR and don't regret it.

Will I ever get a CCD........at the moment no but may be later

Since I already have the DSLR, I could go with the ASI120MM for planetary and guiding.... eventually sell the DSLR and get the Atik.

Comparing the price of an Atik 414ex (1000£) and what I need to buy to start entry level DSO photography (T-ring at 20£) I know I can mod the cam myself and I do not need filters for what I'll do. Results will be so-so but it's still good practice and experience. Besides, processing is also a big part of the result and there is a lot to learn there also.

[Vox45]

hum ... after reading this thread I think I'm gonna play it 'humble' and stick to the plan. These guys are light-years ahead of me.

I can't imagine the learning curve and years of practice before I can really get the most out of a 1000£ CCD cam

[wuthton]

Over the years I've upgraded my mount, telescopes, pc, software and my processing skills have improved (a bit) but there has been only two upgrades from which I've seen an instant and dramatic improvement in the quality of images I've produced.

1. Guiding

2. CCD mono

Looking back I wish I'd gone straight to CCD.

[swag72]

Here's my thoughts .............

I started off with a DSLR - While the actual image capture wasn't a massive issue as I'd used DSLR's extensively before, the processing of the data as well as the actual imaging equipment was a huge learning curve. I then changed to a mono CCD and I remember thinking that I'd made a big mistake, as my images were worse than the DSLR's!! It was just a learning curve and after a while I got the hang of mono CCD imaging. Now, I'd never change.

So, there was a learning curve from a DSLR to a mono CCD, so in my opinion, I'd see absolutely no reason why not to just jump in straight away if you have the funds. If you buy second hand, then if you decide that it's not for you, you'll lose very little on resale. 

There's no reason why people SHOULD go through the DSLR stage, although I do get the feeling sometimes that folks things it's a rite of passage. Life is so much easier and more versatile with a mono CCD, that if you can avoid the DSLR stage I'd say go for it. I think you'll get better results in a quicker period of time and in a short while you'll wonder what all the fuss is about!

[JLKelly]

Look at orion star shoot g3. 1/2 in CCD chip and guiding capability if you get better CCD later or go with DSLR. Thinking of this myself. About 420 usd

[Vox45]

Would you please stop changing my mind with logic and good arguments !

I have to admit that reading the linked thread with Olly and his fantastic work scared me a little. Now I have come back to reason reading your posts.

Look at orion star shoot g3. 1/2 in CCD chip and guiding capability if you get better CCD later or go with DSLR. Thinking of this myself. About 420 usd

So it would make sens for me to get a reasonably priced CCD for now to do planetary/moon and later get a better CCD for DSOs and use the old one for guiding ? That's what I was going for with the ASI102MM (it is CMOS though) how does it compare with the StarShoot G3 ? I hear a lot of good things about the ASI even though it is CMOS based.

Any thoughts ?

[Chris]

On paper the Orion G3 looks great for the money, although I've seen some references to folks struggling to get the software working for them. Not sure what the issues are but if Orion sorted the software bugs out I think it would make a good entry level camera. 

[Xplode]

Looking at your gear your weakest point for imaging is your scope, long focal length and slow optics makes it hard for a beginner.

A fast small refractor would give you pretty good results without guiding. A 6-8" newtonian would also work great, but you would need guiding for longer exposures.

Your mount is very good so no need to change that.

1000D is a good starting point, but a little higher noise than newer DSLR's like the 1100D, 550D, 600D that i recommend. 

Upgrade to a faster scope first, then autoguiding and after that you can start thinking about going for a CCD camera or upgrade to a better DSLR.

If you want advice on what scope to go for it would be great to know what you think you can afford.

[ollypenrice]

Nobody on this thead could possibly have had less IT experience than I did when I started CCD imaging. I was learning to use a PC as well, for heaven's sake! Very late starter...

I went straight into CCD mono on the advice of Ian King and it was good advice which I always repeat, though nobody said it was good for the wallet. Well, maybe Ian's!!! Super chap so no worries...

I've had a fair few guests say to me that they felt the DSLR stage, encouraged in some circles, was a blind alley and a waste of time. On the other hand my guests tend to be people taking it seriously enough to dedicate a holiday to it so, if you like, this sampling self selects the people bound for CCD-dom. When I see people using DSLRs here it doesn't half look like hard work, though, sharpening a screwdriver to turn it into a chisel. And then the data is such a business to process.

So, one reason I like mono CCD is that it's, well, easier!

I never did hold majority opinions. Sorry.

Olly

[hjw]

I have to admit that I am new to astrophotography, but coming from a photography background I am sure that I would not be satisfied to settle for a 1.3MP sensor (Atik 314L+). Looking at Olly's signature: Yes, if you can afford an Atik 11000 (or two of them )... but there you get into serious money. The camera would be twice as much as the rest of my gear combined. I am sure it will take me a long time to reach the potential of AP using a DSLR.

[Chris]

Hi hjw,

Small chips do have their plus points, and so do CCD's

-You can get up close to smaller objects like galaxies and PN's with a small chip.

- Not as much need for flat frames because small chips won't vignette as much as a big chip

- Same goes for the need for a coma corrector or flattener!

CCD's are also cooled so you don't get heaps of red noise on long exposures like you do with DLSR's in warm weather.

Then there's quantum efficiency and well depth. My Canon 350D had a QE of just 27% Most astronomical CCD's have much higher QE so are therefore more sensitive, especially mono CCD's.

Not sure how OSC CCD's are as I've only just got hold of one to try out.

[laser_jock99]

Yes I do own that DSLR, I got it from eBay (1400 shutter count, so almost new) for 143£. I could resell it and not bother with buying a T-ring/clip-in filters etc, and also not going through the dreaded moding...

Of course there is a BIG price difference between a CCD and DSLR setup !

Should take 40 minutes or so to mod a 1000D- not to be dreaded at all.

[Physopto]

If you decide to go down the CCD route try to get one that can image using 1.25" filters without any vignetting. The difference for the 2 " is twice the cost. A basic LRGB set will add about an extra  £300 if you go 2". Depends upon what you want/can afford to spend.

Derek

[hjw]

Hi hjw,

Small chips do have their plus points, and so do CCD's

-You can get up close to smaller objects like galaxies and PN's with a small chip.

- Not as much need for flat frames because small chips won't vignette as much as a big chip

- Same goes for the need for a coma corrector or flattener!

CCD's are also cooled so you don't get heaps of red noise on long exposures like you do with DLSR's in warm weather.

Then there's quantum efficiency and well depth. My Canon 350D had a QE of just 27% Most astronomical CCD's have much higher QE so are therefore more sensitive, especially mono CCD's.

Not sure how OSC CCD's are as I've only just got hold of one to try out.

I had a look at www.sensorgen.info and the Pentax K-30 is listed at 66% QE. Most other disadvantages of the larger chip could be negated when you crop down to the CCD image size. But you do have the option of having high resolution images of nebulas without resorting to mosaics. I cannot see how I could justify the expense.