Sony 814 to Kodak 8300

[zicklurky]

Ohhh sweet, thinking of a dual rig?

[swag72]

Yes

[Physopto]

I would be very interested to know your thoughts on any real world differences between the two cameras. Same chip but different camera  manufacturers. Also how the software see both cameras.

Derek

[swag72]

SGP sees both camera's fine. I am currently doing some bias with the Moravian. It won't be used for a while yet. 

[zicklurky]

2 minutes ago, swag72 said:

SGP sees both camera's fine. I am currently doing some bias with the Moravian. It won't be used for a while yet. 

Are you getting another FSQ 85?

Also, has SGP added support for 2 CCD's?

[swag72]

No SGP has only support for one camera, so you will need two instances of it running- The second one will only have the camera and focuser connected though and not the mount..... so it will be running something like a slave if that makes sense

[zicklurky]

1 minute ago, swag72 said:

No SGP has only support for one camera, so you will need two instances of it running- The second one will only have the camera and focuser connected though and not the mount..... so it will be running something like a slave if that makes sense

Ah ok - I read that an upcoming release will add support for 2 cameras, but that was a while ago now, not sure if it didn't pan out or it's still coming.

[swag72]

Its still in the pipeline - It's quite complicated I would expect as you'd need to synchronise the two and also they are looking at enabling dithering as well, so that would have to be synchronised too 

[Physopto]

So forgive me please but does that mean you use SGP for control and data acquisition instead of say Maxim?

[swag72]

I do use SGP yes.

[Scott]

pfft. 10 days. salt  rubbing and wounds come to mind

apart from the number of available days, I'm guessing sky quality may play a big part.

I seriously suspect that spanish/french/hawiian etc recomendations may be a bit different if made with knowledge of uk imaging in mind. This is not to say the 8300 isn't a fine chip for uk conditions. which camera its mounted in would probably be different though

[swag72]

2 minutes ago, Scott said:

pfft. 10 days. salt  rubbing and wounds come to mind

apart from the number of available days, I'm guessing sky quality may play a big part.

I seriously suspect that spanish/french/hawiian etc recomendations may be a bit different if made with knowledge of uk imaging in mind. This is not to say the 8300 isn't a fine chip for uk conditions. which camera its mounted in would probably be different though

Then I will gladly bow out and hopefully someone from the UK that has used both will be able to offer some real life UK experiences

[Physopto]

I must admit I did not know that SGP could do the data acquisition as well. I just thought it was for overall control of other programs. Well learn something new everyday. Thanks.

Derek

[martin_h]

I had a KAF8300 chip fail on me a couple of years ago, the seal between the chip and cover glass failed and allowed moisture in, I dont know what caused it, It could have been thermal shock, or not! Some programmes seem to turn on the cooler and get the temperature down in a few seconds, then it yoyo's about for a bit until it stabilises, other programmes lower the temperature in steps over a set time.

[Scott]

2 hours ago, swag72 said:

Then I will gladly bow out and hopefully someone from the UK that has used both will be able to offer some real life UK experiences

my apologies Sarah, I thought we were all aloud to express an opinion 

[perfrej]

I am all for the Kodak chips as real estate is key for me. The other day I thought I should try some "proper" calibration of some data I had on M106. I grabbed 100 new fresh BIAS frames and 50 darks. I normally don't use darks at all... Went through the motions of really careful creation of a super-BIAS in Pixinsight, then calibrated the darks with that so that they became scalable. I then proceeded with the correct procedure and calibrated all the flats and lights, and then came the big moment; integration.

So, with about 45 10-minute subs of each color I now two stacks of each color for comparison: one with just BIAS and flats (50 BIAS, no "super", just straight stack) fiddled with cosmetic correction, and one brand new extra-super-duper-calibrated with DARKS. Now, everybody says you HAVE TO use darks wit hthe Kodak chips. As I said, I never bothered. Now I really had the chance to see the magic improvement.

As much as I try, I simply cannot tell the difference, and I have similar noise and SNR figures from the PI stacking.

 

Note to self: scratch the darks - it ain't worth it...

The M106 without darks is up for grabs in a quick-and-dirty version here.

My PI calibration process is as follows:

1. All light frames get cosmetic correction with sigma 3

2. PI batch preprocessing script without integration. After first time you save the calibrated flats and the integrated BIAS as master ones (quicker next time around that way). I use lights (of course), BIAS and flats.

3. Manual integration

 

By the way, my camera is set to -30°C, except during the Provence summer when I use -20°C.

/per

[swag72]

8 minutes ago, Scott said:

my apologies Sarah, I thought we were all aloud to express an opinion 

Of course we are Scott, which is why I thought that your opinion was a good and relevant point and I don't want to taint anyone's ideas when they are not looking at like for like, when comparing the UK skies with mine in Spain  

That's why I said I was bowing out ........

[Physopto]

2 hours ago, perfrej said:

I am all for the Kodak chips as real estate is key for me. The other day I thought I should try some "proper" calibration of some data I had on M106. I grabbed 100 new fresh BIAS frames and 50 darks. I normally don't use darks at all... Went through the motions of really careful creation of a super-BIAS in Pixinsight, then calibrated the darks with that so that they became scalable. I then proceeded with the correct procedure and calibrated all the flats and lights, and then came the big moment; integration.

So, with about 45 10-minute subs of each color I now two stacks of each color for comparison: one with just BIAS and flats (50 BIAS, no "super", just straight stack) fiddled with cosmetic correction, and one brand new extra-super-duper-calibrated with DARKS. Now, everybody says you HAVE TO use darks wit hthe Kodak chips. As I said, I never bothered. Now I really had the chance to see the magic improvement.

As much as I try, I simply cannot tell the difference, and I have similar noise and SNR figures from the PI stacking.

 

Note to self: scratch the darks - it ain't worth it...

The M106 without darks is up for grabs in a quick-and-dirty version here.

My PI calibration process is as follows:

1. All light frames get cosmetic correction with sigma 3

2. PI batch preprocessing script without integration. After first time you save the calibrated flats and the integrated BIAS as master ones (quicker next time around that way). I use lights (of course), BIAS and flats.

3. Manual integration

 

By the way, my camera is set to -30°C, except during the Provence summer when I use -20°C.

/per

Which camera Per?

 You list two, sbig and qsi. Really nice image by the way. May be a quicky for you but nice.

Derek

[perfrej]

Sorry, that was the QSI. The SBIG, unfortunately, is a totally inferior camera in every respect.

 

/per

[ollypenrice]

I put my own money into chip size with the Atik 11000. This comes at a price in terms of resolution and sensitivity but I remain a widefield fan. However, I did recently get a close look at some data from a 12 meg Sony, sadly only available in colour from Atik, and I must say that it gave me pause. Depending on your target and your focal length I still think a case can be made for the Sony chipped cameras. If I were limited to one camera, though, I would want at least the space provided by the 8300.

The 11000 can be used with 2 inch mounted filters. That's what we have in two of the three full frames we use here. The other, slightly better, has 2 inch unmounted. Beyond this format the filter prices are, for me, prohibitive.

Olly

[Jonk]

Sara, I've also chosen the G2-8300 and will get it once funds allow (hopefully 1-2 months away, can't stretch to much more), mainly based on your advice - the proof is in the pudding as they say, and your work is highly regarded.

This coupled with a WO Star 71 (Mk1 or will see what the MK2 has to offer) should be a great combo for large nebulae.

If you ever want to part with the Moravian, drop me a line!

 

[Physopto]

On ‎21‎/‎03‎/‎2016 at 19:21, perfrej said:

I am all for the Kodak chips as real estate is key for me. The other day I thought I should try some "proper" calibration of some data I had on M106. I grabbed 100 new fresh BIAS frames and 50 darks. I normally don't use darks at all... Went through the motions of really careful creation of a super-BIAS in Pixinsight, then calibrated the darks with that so that they became scalable. I then proceeded with the correct procedure and calibrated all the flats and lights, and then came the big moment; integration.

So, with about 45 10-minute subs of each color I now two stacks of each color for comparison: one with just BIAS and flats (50 BIAS, no "super", just straight stack) fiddled with cosmetic correction, and one brand new extra-super-duper-calibrated with DARKS. Now, everybody says you HAVE TO use darks wit hthe Kodak chips. As I said, I never bothered. Now I really had the chance to see the magic improvement.

As much as I try, I simply cannot tell the difference, and I have similar noise and SNR figures from the PI stacking.

 

Note to self: scratch the darks - it ain't worth it...

The M106 without darks is up for grabs in a quick-and-dirty version here.

My PI calibration process is as follows:

1. All light frames get cosmetic correction with sigma 3

2. PI batch preprocessing script without integration. After first time you save the calibrated flats and the integrated BIAS as master ones (quicker next time around that way). I use lights (of course), BIAS and flats.

3. Manual integration

 

By the way, my camera is set to -30°C, except during the Provence summer when I use -20°C.

/per

Per, I should have asked earlier, what software do you use to control your data acquisition. I use Maxim and The SkyX, I  have done for several years. Only because I got the software with purchases, but am interested in what others use with their CCDs. Also the reasons why?

Derek

[MattJenko]

There is a lot of discussion about sheer image size and noise, but nothing about resolution apart from brief mentions. The 814 is at 3.69 and the 8300 is 5.4. This is quite a sizable difference, so the matching of scope comes into play as well a good deal surely, or is it purely a size fight? Widefields would mean pure size concerns, that much is obvious, but for other targets, I would have thought resolution becomes a much bigger concern in the eventual choice?

[Physopto]

I would also think well size makes a difference to how you image certain objects and if there is anti blooming.

Derek

[ollypenrice]

3 hours ago, MattJenko said:

There is a lot of discussion about sheer image size and noise, but nothing about resolution apart from brief mentions. The 814 is at 3.69 and the 8300 is 5.4. This is quite a sizable difference, so the matching of scope comes into play as well a good deal surely, or is it purely a size fight? Widefields would mean pure size concerns, that much is obvious, but for other targets, I would have thought resolution becomes a much bigger concern in the eventual choice?

You're right that resolution is also a concern. You also need to know what kind of values your seeing and guiding will support before getting too optimistic in search of small pixels!

And, yes, deep wells are nice as Derek implies, particularly from the point of view of retaining star colour in long exposures.

Olly