Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

OSC Only ....... Option 1, Option 2 or Option 3?

bbblue

By bbblue
in Discussions - Cameras

Recommended Posts

bbblue

bbblue

Posted
Posted

Hello to you all.

Like many others before me I'm on the CCD merry-go-round!

I am really only interested in 'one shot colour'

Please spare me a few moments of your time to help me get off this fairground ride!

I enjoy taking pics of galaxies and nebulae and my main scope options are as follows:

Skywatcher 80ED DS Pro

Lightwave 60 ED Triplet

Option 1 Atik 383L+

Option 2 Atik 4120EX

Option 3 Your suggestion of an alternative

thanks bbblue

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply
blinky

blinky

Posted
Posted

I love my QHY 8 but everyone on here will slate them! For sensor size to cost ratio it can't be beaten (unless you buy a dslr). The noise is so low you don't need to bother with dark frames, they have the same size sensor as a dslr and good sensitivity to Ha(although as its osc, you are only illuminating a quarter of the pixels, but I have still had some good results).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steppenwolf

steppenwolf

Posted
Posted

If you are only interested in OSC then option 1 is mono only from memory.

I have some experience of the Atik 4120 EX mounted on a 100mm APO refractor and it worked well. This is a relatively generous sized sensor.

I own an early Starlight Xpress SXVF-M25C which has an APS size sensor and I'd certainly recommend it.

Sent from my iPhone from somewhere dark .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
r3i

r3i

Posted
Posted

I love my QHY 8 but everyone on here will slate them! For sensor size to cost ratio it can't be beaten (unless you buy a dslr). The noise is so low you don't need to bother with dark frames, they have the same size sensor as a dslr and good sensitivity to Ha(although as its osc, you are only illuminating a quarter of the pixels, but I have still had some good results).

Not everyone on here will slate them, I'll back you up :smile:

The older, original QHY8 was a bit of a 'dog with fleas' due to frosting up and issues with lack of chip orthogonality. The current QHY8L is a different kettle of fish - it's nicely put together and gives lots of bangs per buck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davey-T

Davey-T

Posted
Posted

Theoretically yes, but in practice real world conditions and circumstances paint a different picture.

True but the pixels seem a bit on the big side, not sure how it affects colour sensors though, do you divide them by four ?

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davey-T

Davey-T

Posted
Posted

I appreciate the time you have all spent in replying to my question ..... what if I were to go down the mono route with a couple of grand in my pocket?

Mono route is expensive, you could easily spend £5000.00 on a camera / filter wheel and full set of filters, speaking from experience here :) £2000.00 might be a bit tight but there's always used stuff up for sale.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

Sorry, I have to do this since, as yet, you haven't pushed the button. I have to recommend mono for both nebulae and galaxies. I'm sorry, I can't help myself, and you are perfectly free to ignore me.

Nebulae love Ha, the capture of which is absurdly inefficient if you use only a quarter of your pixels. Why would you do that?

Galaxies love luminance, which OSC captures at no more than 1/3 efficiency. (My own measurements make it 1/4 but they are not super-scientific.)

In OSC you capture twice as much green as red or blue. Why would you do that? Nobody else does.

If you have imperfectly corrected optics you cannot refocus between colours as you can with mono.

Do you think processing will be easier? It won't. I've had several years' experience of using the same CCD camera in mono and OSC flavours and the mono, if you want a good result, was easier.

In my opinion OSC is slow and difficult but slightly cheaper and, on on-off nights, perhaps less frustrating.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gorann

gorann

Posted
Posted

I have a Canon 60Da as a colour camera and it got me hocked on astrophotography, but to move along I just bought a mono ATIK 460EX with filters to start using now when the sky is getting dark again. When moving on from the Canon, I never saw a OSC CCD camera as an option (getting the strong impression that OSC CCD is an an outdated breed) but was thinking long about getting a camera from the new generation of highly sensitive DSLRs like the Sony a7s, which as far as I can understand will beat any colour CCD in its price range, and it is an easy stand-alone camera without the need of a computer. So, if you want a colour camera to avoid having to invest in filters, why not buy one of these new super DSLRs instead of a OSC CCD?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
r3i

r3i

Posted
Posted

Mono route is expensive, you could easily spend £5000.00 on a camera / filter wheel and full set of filters, speaking from experience here :) £2000.00 might be a bit tight but there's always used stuff up for sale.

Dave

It's always worth keeping an eye on the second hand market as some nice stuff comes up from time to time.  Also, if you can manage without the latest and greatest to start off with, you can put together a wrokable solution for a less eye watering amount of cash - I picked up an old SXV-H9, a set of Baader NB filters and a basic manual filter wheel for about £800.  As I said, not the most glorious setup in the world but sufficent to keep me entertained until the lottery numbers come up trumps :smile:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ouroboros

Ouroboros

Posted
Posted

bbbIue - I asked more-or-less that same question a while ago. However the mono-enthusiasts were so damning of OSCs that I ended up buying ..... precisely nothing. My problem is that I only get a couple of opportunities a month if I'm lucky to get some astronomy done. I also have to set up and tear down on each occasion. So I don't need any more technical complexity in my setup. So an OSC seemed like the right way to go - offering a camera with benefits similar to a modified DSLR, but with the advantages of a cooled CCD. But no, that's not the way to go according to those in the know. So, as I say, I end up in an impasse of indecision and I carry on with the trusty old DSLR. If I had an observatory and the opportunity to get out there pretty much any clear night I was able to I would not hesitate to get a mono camera and filter wheel. In fact it would be interesting to know how many of those recommending mono have a permanent set up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
smudgeball

smudgeball

Posted
Posted

Hi

I don't have a permanent set up. (in the pipe line - but will probably be a pillar with small shed cover, rather than full blown roll off roof shed)

I went through the same thought process as you.

I bet you've googled like mad and read loads of threads on here and other forums.

Ouroborus makes a really valid point. The best purchase for you might be No Purchase.?

I recently purchased a mono ccd having previously used a modded dslr.

The lure of OSC was there, but I leaned towards narrowband so it was mono for me.

Then I had the issue of pixel size, resolution sensor size etc etc :sad:

If I worked out the pounds-per-minute used ratio of my new Atik 460 + filter wheel + filters it would be eyewatering.

It's not easy.

If you go mono I'm sure you'll enjoy it and don't ignore the well looked after secondhand market.

Thumbs up for SGPro as well, it's working well with me so far.

I've subscribed to this thread with interest and look forward to seeing how you get on.

Regards

Neil

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seo

seo

Posted
Posted

I do have a permanent set up and I absolutely recommend a mono CCD 100%.

IMHO with a mono CCD you can do any sort of Astronomy even in "difficult" scenarios. For me either someone simply enjoys AP or doing any kind of his/her own research a mono CCD is for a lot of reasons (many of them have previously stated) the way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChrisLX200

ChrisLX200

Posted
Posted

It is very rare that I've seen any result from a OSC and thought it was a good image. There are always exceptions of course, but the time and effort that went into creating a really good image from a OSC camera (most often a DSLR actually) makes it a labour of love - huge amounts of data and tricky processing were required. A beginner is simply not going to match those few excellent results and is going to get frustrated. Listen to Olly above ^ , he nails the reasons why this will happen.

The only downside to going with a mono camera is the extra expense of the kit. My Atik490EX kit (camera plus filterwheel) is no more difficult to handle or use than a OSC setup, in fact it stays attached to the scope and is all moved (mounted/dismounted) in one piece for storage.

ChrisH

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ouroboros

Ouroboros

Posted
Posted

ChrisLX200 .... ok I'm listening. What's your routine for using the camera? Do you have two USB cables running to the PC - one for the camera and another for the filter. Are they both controlled from the same application? Do you have to refocus when you change filters? If you do, do you use a remote focuser, requiring yet another cable presumably, or do you refocus at the telescope? Do you use each RGB filter in turn, and then luminance, or cycle round these in some way?

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.