Which Canon to modify

[dyfiastro]

Good evening everyone

I have been looking over the last few weeks at possibly getting a camera just for astrophotography.
I am currently using my fuji XT2 but have no intension to get this converted and to be honest is not supported very well.
Not having the cash at present to go with dedicated mono setup I am considering getting something like a 100D to modify and use with BYE.
The main thing at this point that is holding me back is noise, the XT1 and XT2 control noise very well.
Now I have not used a canon for a few years so a little out of touch with the newer crop bodies.

I will be doing the conversion myself to keep costs down.
As a reference this is a single 300 second exposure with the 130PDS at iso1600 on the XT2. How does this compare with what I would get from a Modified Canon

Thanks in advance

Edited November 8, 2016 by dyfiastro

[Dr_Ju_ju]

As an example of what you can get, here is a single, unprocessed image, recently taken @ Galloway star party, of M42:

It was taken with my modified 600D, through a Skywatcher ED80\matched coma corrector.

[Knight of Clear Skies]

Your single exposure looks good but there isn't much Ha showing. For comparison, here's an 8 minute test shot of the Pacman taken using a modded Canon 1100D.

This is 16x30 second unguided subs at ISO 6400 on an ED120 with reducer, so about f6.4 I think. So 3 minutes more exposure time than yours, more read noise due to the multiple exposures and less total signal due to the slower scope. This image is a bit noisy but it was just a test.

[iapa]

Another M42, Canon 600D, 8" F5 reflector. Just trial shot, but shows as above, the increase in red end capture

[dyfiastro]

Thanks everyone.

I have not shot M42 with the XT2 as my mount is currently away.
Once back I will take a few exposures and see how it compares.

Looks like the 600D controls noise pretty well, what filters are you using with them?
 

[almcl]

Just to confuse things a bit further, here's a single, unprocessed 360 second jpeg of the  Pacman taken on a Canon 700d, Astro modified by Juan Fierros of Cheap Astro Photography.  It has the Baader filter replacement.

My light polluted suburban back garden necessitates the use of a light pollution filter and I use the Astronomik EOS CLS-CCD clip filter.  I am considering getting their Ha filter as well.

 

[sharkmelley]

You should be cautious of comparing noise levels in images in this manner.  The background light pollution is very often the main source of noise in an exposure.  Unless you know the level of light pollution it is impossible to make a sensible comparison between images.  In addition it is difficult to compensate for different F-ratios of the optics used.

All in all, you draw conclusions at your own risk.

For long exposure deep sky imaging with a colour camera, the quantum efficiency and dark current are the most important factors.  Read noise is less important because you can always increase exposure length to drown out read noise.  I've never seen QE or dark current figures for a Fuji and they are not available for all Canons, so this makes like for like comparison very difficult.

However, modifying a camera will certainly make a huge difference to its H-alpha sensitivity.

Mark

[dyfiastro]

15 minutes ago, sharkmelley said:

You should be cautious of comparing noise levels in images in this manner.  The background light pollution is very often the main source of noise in an exposure.  Unless you know the level of light pollution it is impossible to make a sensible comparison between images.  In addition it is difficult to compensate for different F-ratios of the optics used.

All in all, you draw conclusions at your own risk.

For long exposure deep sky imaging with a colour camera, the quantum efficiency and dark current are the most important factors.  Read noise is less important because you can always increase exposure length to drown out read noise.  I've never seen QE or dark current figures for a Fuji and they are not available for all Canons, so this makes like for like comparison very difficult.

However, modifying a camera will certainly make a huge difference to its H-alpha sensitivity.

Mark

Thanks, the sensitivity was one of the main things I was looking for but noise is another factor that I cannot ignore.
The XT2 is very good in regards to noise as was the XT1. The main issue I have at present is that software like DSS do not support it very well and there is no way of integrating it with software like there is with Canon or Nikon.

This is not something I am going to rush into and will be doing further testing once the mount is back first anyway.
The other option at present is to just use the XT2 for 6-12 months and save for a CCD.

Thanks everyone

[iapa]

16 hours ago, dyfiastro said:

 

Looks like the 600D controls noise pretty well, what filters are you using with them?
 

I did a 60s, ISO800 unguided exposure with Skywatcher 0.9x Coma Corrector, Skywatcher Light Pollution Filter, Canon 600D - mod by Astronomiser. 

[dyfiastro]

Hi everyone.

Just thought that I would post an update to say thank you and to let you know I have a 600D that I managed to get a decent price and a baader replacemnt filter arriving over the next few days.
I had looked at doing a full spectrum conversion it was more cost effective for me to go down  this route as I have no current plans to use it for IR imaging and the baader filter worked out cheaper than a decent IR cut filter.