atik 414ex Ideal (CCD/CMOS) camera for faint & small objects?

[GTom]

I am looking for the ideal camera for faint and small objects, like early-stage comets and galaxies. This type of job doesn't require huge FOV, however sensitivity and low noise is essential.

Which one would you recommend?

Atik 414ex

ASI174mm-cool

Something else? Of course, larger FOV is also welcome, if it doesn't come with decreased sensitivity and a hefty price tag.

[iansmith]

Hello,

I'm just starting out with DSO imaging so my experience is limited. But that said, I'm using an Atik 414ex on an Edge HD11 to image planetary nebula and find it very good. Read noise is just under 4e for my camera. The noise looks fairly uniform and not much amp glow, esp when cool. Certainly seems to be easy to calibrate out. (not at home so I can't post images, let me know if you want to see some).

A 20 min sub of NGC7662 through a O3 filter will capture the faint outer halo quite well. The ASCOM driver works with Sequence Generator Pro, I haven't tried other software and not really used Atik's own capture software. Build quality is ok, although the USB connector could be a little more robust and the fan is noisy (constant white noise sound, no high pitch squeals) if you stand close to it, but soon disappears as you move away.

It happily cools to -10 deg C, could probably go further but the dark current is pretty low so I've not bothered to go lower.

I haven't used the other camera you mention so I can't offer any opinion on it other than I've found ZWO to be easy to do business with (I own the ASI120M and 178MM).

Cheers, Ian.

[riklaunim]

IMX174 is "good" but newer sensors are noticeably better in terms of read noise - and that's important for lucky imaging. 20 min exposures is something you don't do when you do lucky imaging - then few sec exposures or less are required - to battle high resolution seeing and tracking accuracy. With typical DS cameras like Atiks you do "normal" DS imaging on X-min exposures on much lower resolutions.

Newer sensors like IMX290 or IMX178 mono have very good performance but small pixels so you have to be careful with telescopes - to not get to much resolution

[GTom]

Thanks for both. I've just learned that the ASI1600mm-c does quite efficient binning, still, the 414ex has a higher QE.

I found a CCD "efficiency list", it would be great to squeeze the 1600mm there

[ollypenrice]

I haven't tried one of the ASI cameras so can't comment on them, but of the conventional cameras I'd be thinking in terms of a Sony chip with well matched pixel size.

Olly

[Gina]

I find the ASI cameras fantastic much to my surprise   Very low read noise makes for lots of short exposures and "lucky imaging" a definite possibility here in the UK.  A night with passing clouds and clear patches can be used and I have made good use of such nights with my ASI1600mm-Cool camera   So far I'm doing better with this camera than the Atik 460EX with its excellent Sony sensor.

[GTom]

49 minutes ago, Gina said:

I find the ASI cameras fantastic much to my surprise   Very low read noise makes for lots of short exposures and "lucky imaging" a definite possibility here in the UK.  A night with passing clouds and clear patches can be used and I have made good use of such nights with my ASI1600mm-Cool camera   So far I'm doing better with this camera than the Atik 460EX with its excellent Sony sensor.

Thanks Gina, That last sentence was a complete surprise to me! The ICX694 is almost the most efficient front-illuminated CCD money can buy nowadays. True, the ZWO has about 1/3 of the read noise of that sensor. Of course, being able to stack 1000's of subs is great, that eases mount and alignment requirements tremendously. This part applies to me, because I am in the process of fetching a travel mount (Fornax Lightrack, barndoor-typle like the Astrotrac) and load it with a 90/600 APO. Should be a precise thing, but still, not a guided G11 :D.

Anyway, I have some time to evaluate the scope+mount system, if I feel limited to 60-90sec, then the ASI should be the winner.