Used KAF-8300 or new ASI 1600MM-Cool?

[MartinFransson]

3 minutes ago, RichLD said:

Here's a good example of *lots* of subs to get an image of a very faint object (SH2-224) using the QHY163m credited to David from the QHYCCD website. 62 X 8 minutes.

http://www.qhyccd.com/images/SH2-224.jpg

Thank you! Just hard to know what that would have looked like with a KAF-8300

Maybe I won´t be going for the really faintest of stuff, but for example dusty clouds around NGC1333, M78, vdb152 and the likes. That´s what I want. See here for example my DSLR image of M78. I want better than that And at worst, the ASI would be like a mono, cooled version of a DSLR. Not all that bad.

[RayD]

15 minutes ago, MartinFransson said:

Thank you! Just hard to know what that would have looked like with a KAF-8300

And there, my friend, lies the question 

[VilleM]

I would go for ASI, Ive used both KAF-8300 (SBIG STT8300M) and currently own ASI1600MM-C. Both are good cameras, however for me ASI calibrates out perfectly and SBIG just keeps getting more and more tricky with bias and dark. I dont know why but bias is certainly off, resulting in banding. Also dark frames need to be taken more often than with ASI. Could be just because camera itself is older.

Anyhow, here is some shots with ASI1600MM-C and 6" newtonian on HEQ5.
B33 10x180s, M42 15x180s, IC1805 46x180s, and NGC1499 20x180s (two panel mosaic).

[RichLD]

I really do think that for most of us skies, not camera technology, are the limiting factor .

[RichLD]

7 minutes ago, VilleM said:

I would go for ASI, Ive used both KAF-8300 (SBIG STT8300M) and currently own ASI1600MM-C. Both are good cameras, however for me ASI calibrates out perfectly and SBIG just keeps getting more and more tricky with bias and dark. I dont know why but bias is certainly off, resulting in banding. Also dark frames need to be taken more often than with ASI. Could be just because camera itself is older.

Anyhow, here is some shots with ASI1600MM-C and 6" newtonian on HEQ5.
B33 10x180s, M42 15x180s, IC1805 46x180s, and NGC1499 20x180s (two panel mosaic).

Great shots! 

[MartinFransson]

VilleM, those are some great shots! Your testimony might just be what makes my decision easier

[VilleM]

40 minutes ago, MartinFransson said:

VilleM, those are some great shots! Your testimony might just be what makes my decision easier

Thanks Rich and Martin. Also, what type of OTA youre using? For Newtonian I would go for light weight camera to avoid collimation issues (focuser might tilt and scope becomes very nose heavy easily). SBIG STT8300M is way too heavy for my current imaging scope (Boren-Simon 6" f/2.8). Also ASI is round, so its better for Celestron RASA -type scopes when camera is mounted infront of the aperture.

Yes, its true that skies (and exposure time) are key factors. Although narrowband can be done in very heavy lightpollution. My skies luckily are excelent, I have little to no light pollution in East / West / South. North has some, but trees block it so its unusable direction anyways.

[MartinFransson]

1 minute ago, VilleM said:

Thanks Rich and Martin. Also, what type of OTA youre using? For Newtonian I would go for light weight camera to avoid collimation issues (focuser might tilt and scope becomes very nose heavy easily). SBIG STT8300M is way too heavy for my current imaging scope (Boren-Simon 6" f/2.8). Also ASI is round, so its better for Celestron RASA -type scopes when camera is mounted infront of the aperture.

Yes, its true that skies (and exposure time) are key factors. Although narrowband can be done in very heavy lightpollution. My skies luckily are excelent, I have little to no light pollution in East / West / South. North has some, but trees block it so its unusable direction anyways.

I will be using a Skywatcher 150PDS 6" Newtonian and all of my Canon lenses. And yes, the weight on the focuser has concerned me.

[swag72]

@VilleM I have to say that these are by far the most convincing images I have seen with the ASI1600.... Nicely done indeed

[RichLD]

2 hours ago, MartinFransson said:

Thank you! Just hard to know what that would have looked like with a KAF-8300

Maybe I won´t be going for the really faintest of stuff, but for example dusty clouds around NGC1333, M78, vdb152 and the likes. That´s what I want. See here for example my DSLR image of M78. I want better than that And at worst, the ASI would be like a mono, cooled version of a DSLR. Not all that bad.

Forgot to say, nice shot!

[VilleM]

Thank you Sara!

Martin, if you decide to go with KAF-8300 make sure you get lightest possible camera (there is plenty of options with same sensor). SBIG STT8300M that Im using weights a ton, or two. I wouldnt use it on newtonian.

[tomato]

I had already invested in a stable, high capacity mount, and I currently have limited PC processing capacity, so I went with the Moravian G2-8300. It is a heavy camera mind, and I've only just sorted out the scope  balancing issues.

A big +1 for the quality of your sky, to date I have only imaged once from a good dark site and the results were far superior to my previous efforts  from my suburban backyard.

[MartinFransson]

Just thought I'd let you know I've decided to go with the 1600MM-Cool. The used QSI683 I had going on turned out to be a fraud plus the CCDs are too heavy for my stock focuser. 

[VilleM]

Good choice! Clear skies for new camera!