(New) Watec 910HX versus (old) Watec 120N+

[Macavity]

Having probably bored most people with the "hardware commissioning"

of my new Watec 910HX, I thought I'd start a new thread for this one! 

Clearly, when you buy a new (expensive!) VIDEO camera, you kind-of

hope it might be "better" or at least more sensitive than the last one?

Last night was perhaps the FIRST opportunity in ages to set up a test! 

Basically, I was trying to give both cameras a fair chance by using

*broadly* similar settings, to show a "warts and all" comparison.

This was the result: (Left: Watec 120N+ , Right: Watec 910HX)

The images are both a (Registax) stack of 100 x 5.12 sec with broad

cuts applied to the "levels" histogram and saved to a simple .jpg file.  

The images are reduced, but IMO show most of the salient features...

But *WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE*, you are (doubtless!) wondering? 

These are my claims...

The Watec 910HX (on the right):

• Shows (trivially anyway) MORE stars!
• Shows less "Heat Gradient" at the top
• Shows fewer hot pixels (the streaks!) 
• I was getting to Mag +18 fairly easily?

I didn't QUITE balance the gains (the 910HX has more background!)

but I genuinely think the signal to noise ratio looks rather better?

The image is more "even" anyway with less left to right gradient...

SUBJECTIVELY, I am now seeing more in real time on the screen!

Maybe, I have somewhat caught up with Lodestar X2 owners? lol

The images are not without fault! I am still playing with settings!!!

Notably, the *defaults* seem to show more of the (characteristic)

"black halo" (bracketing) around brighter stars than the older cam?

But I then found there is (among many) a "sharpening" setting in

the OSD. I reset this from "four" to "zero" and prefer the latter...

Sadly, at the time the (predicted) high clouds were gathering,

but I tried a few basic images of familiar objects despite:

M27:

M15:

A bit of judicious cropping will improve things! I did produce a passable

image of Stephen's Quintet, but I think it perhaps best to wait for better

(darker and clearer) skies! Watecs prefer cooler temperatures anyway! 

Conclusion:

Overall, I think the upgrade worthwhile. My faithful Watec 120N+

was beginning to "fall behind" the latest technology? It has also

(developed) hot pixels and gradients - Often needing dark frame

subtraction for production of aesthetic images of the faint stuff?

Above all, less "messing about" to produce a decent image!

[Mrbloke]

Well now you can try and sell it for £175,250 like the current ad on ABS!

[Macavity]

 And there was me content to screw it to the wall

      of my astro-shed as an "all sky" (cloud) cam.

[xtreemchaos]

the Watec 910HX is a def improvement,capturing loads more light.thanks for sharing.    charl.

[laudropb]

Very nice and informative report. Thanks

[Macavity]

Just in case there was any confusion re. the "white hole"

in the first images, if is (as you knew) M57 overexposed!

Here's quite a useful plot of the nearby star magnitudes. 

http://www.hacastronomy.com/picts/M57_dss2_3.jpg

From webpage http://www.hacastronomy.com/m57.htm

[Paul81]

Looks like the 910HX is a great camera, a very nice boost in sensitivity over the 120N.

Looking forward to seeing more