ATIK Horizon 287 pounds more than ASI1600mm pro on FLO?

[Adam J]

Just struggling with why the ATIK Horizon currently available for pre-order on FLO's page is £1575 vs £1288 for the ASI1600MM pro

Is there some advantage to the ATIK that I am not aware of?

If I was 18 months behind the competition / market leader in CMOS imaging cameras I would say that coming in at 287 pounds more than said market leader is a poor business strategy. 

Anyone else a little disappointed?

[Guest]

HI Adam J, did never make any thoughts about the price, since I already have my ASI 1600 Version 2, and do not have any intentions to buy either the PRO version and also not the ATIK HORIZON..

But ! If I would have again to decide which one to buy, I would for sure go for the ATIK, out of one 2 main reason, I did have an ATIK460EXM and it was not working   ( due to my mistake ) did send it to ATIK in UK for repair and it was repaired within a week or so, and sent back within 2 days and I had to pay something like 160€ for the sevrvice and postage fee and ATIK is a EUROPEAN BRAND....

My ASI is still working , but not sure what should I do when it should not, and I need service from ASI in CHINA ?? or where shall I send my ASI !!

Hence, I would go for ATIK.. SERVICED IN EUROPE, despite the price difference..  

 

Martin

[John78]

53 minutes ago, Adam J said:

Just struggling with why the ATIK Horizon currently available for pre-order on FLO's page is £1575 vs £1288 for the ASI1600MM pro

Is there some advantage to the ATIK that I am not aware of?

If I was 18 months behind the competition / market leader in CMOS imaging cameras I would say that coming in at 287 pounds more than said market leader is a poor business strategy. 

Anyone else a little disappointed?

Which is £89 more than the QHY who launched the camera "right" the first time round with amp glow reduction, DDR, heated window etc....  Never quite understood why people supported the ASI so much more than the QHY when it was technologically inferior and more expensive - the playing field is now level.

I'd largely agree with Artem though - Atik will get supported and convince CCD'ers to swap because of the brand and domestic support team, not sure it'd crack the US market because importing from China is very economically appealing.

[sloz1664]

Atik have a brand name you can trust. That is key, especially with the amount of conversation, that abounds, in the worldwide Astro forums.

Steve

[Adam J]

1 hour ago, sloz1664 said:

Atik have a brand name you can trust. That is key, especially with the amount of conversation, that abounds, in the worldwide Astro forums.

Steve

I have not heard more that 1 or 2 people complain of issues with the ASI1600mmc (and how many have been sold) and not a single person complain, not one, about the QHY163m on any of the forums I read. The ASI071c is a different case. I do suspect that QHY cracked it with the added DDR and that the others are just copying them. QHY had issues with some cameras maybe 7 or so years back but not much reported now. 

If you feel there is a reliability issue perhaps you could point me towards the posts in question? 

All in all I am not sure that I would distrust QHY or ZWO and certainly not in a sufficient way to warrant that much expense in my mind.

I was ready to pay maybe 100 pound more for a local EU provider but its taking the Micky a little to ask for a premium of nearly 300 pounds when the ZWO product has proven to be so very successful. Its also worth noting that this price gap is significantly more than the price gap between the QHY9s and the 383L which are only separated by 200 pounds (slightly less in fact) at a similar price point.   

Just my feeling on the matter. Others may be willing to pay 300 pounds more for a functionally identical product. 

For me its more a choice between an affordable and proven ZWO solution vs an untested and slightly out of budget ATIK solution. Although I was holding out in hope that they would bring it in at a more competitive price. 

Adam

 

 

 

 

[geordie85]

I was seriously considering getting the horizon but that price tag is too steep for me.

I'll more than likely go for the qhy since its almost £400 cheaper. 

Having the peace of mind from atik that it's a uk based brand if anything goes wrong is nice, but not almost £400 nice.

[sloz1664]

54 minutes ago, Adam J said:

I have not heard more that 1 or 2 people complain of issues with the ASI1600mmc (and how many have been sold) and not a single person complain, not one, about the QHY163m on any of the forums I read. The ASI071c is a different case. I do suspect that QHY cracked it with the added DDR and that the others are just copying them. QHY had issues with some cameras maybe 7 or so years back but not much reported now. 

If you feel there is a reliability issue perhaps you could point me towards the posts in question? 

All in all I am not sure that I would distrust QHY or ZWO and certainly not in a sufficient way to warrant that much expense in my mind.

I was ready to pay maybe 100 pound more for a local EU provider but its taking the Micky a little to ask for a premium of nearly 300 pounds when the ZWO product has proven to be so very successful. Its also worth noting that this price gap is significantly more than the price gap between the QHY9s and the 383L which are only separated by 200 pounds (slightly less in fact) at a similar price point.   

Just my feeling on the matter. Others may be willing to pay 300 pounds more for a functionally identical product. 

For me its more a choice between an affordable and proven ZWO solution vs an untested and slightly out of budget ATIK solution. Although I was holding out in hope that they would bring it in at a more competitive price. 

Adam

 

 

 

 

Hi Adam,

I have 3 CCD cameras Atik, SX & QHY. The QHY has been to China twice for repair. I'm not condoning QHY for this, as I would buy from any of the three suppliers again. I now know that QHY have been supportive on my issues. The worry is sending expensive equipment back to China. Also, the three cameras I have, have been around for many years. The ZWO are a new player in the medium size format chip and it did have issues with amp glow. To their credit they sorted it. 1600 cooled version is new to ZWO and I feel it needs to be out in the field for a while before commenting on it's durability. That said, If it stands the test of time I would not hesitate to purchase one.

Steve

[Ouroboros]

I have been holding back on making the transition from DSLR to CCD or CMOS for some time. In part I've been waiting for the ATIK Horizon to come out. I'm a tad disappointed on the price I have to say. Is it justified? I can't see a technical or performance reason to justify the higher price, although I can see the advantage of using a local supplier wih a good record for support. For the latter I would be willing to pay a bit of a premium, but I'm umming and ahing at this price. 

The other factor is that I quite like buying a complete package from the same manufacturer.  But the price differential is very significant once you start looking to buy the camera, filterwheel, filters etc from ATIK compared with ZWO.

[Ouroboros]

There seems to be more interest, and more than a little bad tempered contention about this camera on CN. Worth reading, though I'm no closer to a decision.

[zicklurky]

I don't quite understand those posts on CN. The Horizon is in beta, and some people are complaining some features aren't working properly. That's the whole point of a beta, to get the product tested and fix any issues before going into production. And they were made aware it was a beta product when they bought it.

I do feel the pricing is a bit high though. But I guess we'll have to see when it launches if there's any features which make the extra cost worth it. The ASI and QHY sometimes get microlens reflections on very bright stars, and Atik said this is not present on the Horizon, so that's one thing. Maybe they somehow got the read noise even lower?

[Ouroboros]

1 hour ago, zicklurky said:

I don't quite understand those posts on CN. The Horizon is in beta, and some people are complaining some features aren't working properly. That's the whole point of a beta, to get the product tested and fix any issues before going into production. And they were made aware it was a beta product when they bought it.

I do feel the pricing is a bit high though. But I guess we'll have to see when it launches if there's any features which make the extra cost worth it. The ASI and QHY sometimes get microlens reflections on very bright stars, and Atik said this is not present on the Horizon, so that's one thing. Maybe they somehow got the read noise even lower?

One comment I read suggests that the extra price might be justified in the software that is only available with ATIK products. I don't know how valid this comment is.  I would hope that someone like myself who is buying such a camera for the first time can not only use it straight out of the box, but also expect to use the software to set up image gathering routines - lights, darks, control filter wheel etc  - without having to spend a couple of hundred quid on further software.  Is this true?   Could someone who knows ATIK software comment? 

[Adam J]

4 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

One comment I read suggests that the extra price might be justified in the software that is only available with ATIK products. I don't know how valid this comment is.  I would hope that someone like myself who is buying such a camera for the first time can not only use it straight out of the box, but also expect to use the software to set up image gathering routines - lights, darks, control filter wheel etc  - without having to spend a couple of hundred quid on further software.  Is this true?   Could someone who knows ATIK software comment? 

From what I know people say there software is good, bit it will only work with their filter wheels etc....which are very expensive and so if you want to use there software you will not only be shelling out more for the camera but for the filter wheel too.....

 

 

 

[ollypenrice]

Surely it's premature to 'review' the Atik without having tried a final production version? A camera and a chip are not at all the same thing. Who knows how the camera will perform or compare with other cameras using this chip? I certainly don't, but I'm looking forward to seeing and, I hope, trying one.

It's for a good reason that I have five Atik cameras here. I like the way they perform in sustained and heavy commercial use, I like their software and I like their customer service. I do think it encouraging that they have not  rushed into production with the new CMOS technology and have taken their time.

But I have no idea about the performance or other qualities of the Horizon and won't have any till I've tried it!

Olly

[Andyb90]

A little off topic but had a quick look at the Atik spec and it says back focus is 13mm. The ASI1600 is 6.5mm. This is probably worth baring in mind if using a flattener/reducer with short back focus as even a few mm can make a difference. I have experience of this as my flattener has 63mm back focus and I needed to fit in OAG, filter wheel, camera and connecting adapters.

Andy.

 

[Ouroboros]

To be fair, Olly, here we're not reviewing it. We're considering whether a camera is worth the extra 300 quid. 

[Ouroboros]

I'm attracted to the OSC version. I know, I know, shock horror! I realise this goes against the mono mantra - I know all the arguments in favour of mono.  But I think as a straight replacement of my unmodded Canon 450D it might be nice intro to cooled CMOS imaging. 

[RichLD]

On 21/11/2017 at 12:02, John78 said:

Which is £89 more than the QHY who launched the camera "right" the first time round with amp glow reduction, DDR, heated window etc....  Never quite understood why people supported the ASI so much more than the QHY when it was technologically inferior and more expensive - the playing field is now level.

I'd largely agree with Artem though - Atik will get supported and convince CCD'ers to swap because of the brand and domestic support team, not sure it'd crack the US market because importing from China is very economically appealing.

I couldn't agree more. The QHY brand got a really bad reputation early on which seems to have stuck around, despite them making some stunning products. The 367 is a real game changer though...

[ollypenrice]

3 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

To be fair, Olly, here we're not reviewing it. We're considering whether a camera is worth the extra 300 quid. 

In my view it's a 'review' if you say you're disappointed by the price because you can buy the same thing for less. But who knows if it's the same thing? I think we should try the camera then decide whether or not it is the same as the others.

Olly

[Alien 13]

You can but a Canon DSLR for £350 or one for £1200 both having the same sensor but clearly not the same..

Alan

[Ouroboros]

18 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

In my view it's a 'review' if you say you're disappointed by the price because you can buy the same thing for less. But who knows if it's the same thing? I think we should try the camera then decide whether or not it is the same as the others.

Olly

Chuckle .... I'd call it a preview rather than a review. 

[Chris]

3 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

I'm attracted to the OSC version

The OSC version is a lot cheaper than the mono - £1235

I'm not sure how that compares to the OSC's for the other brands with this chip?

[Ouroboros]

45 minutes ago, Lockie said:

The OSC version is a lot cheaper than the mono - £1235

I'm not sure how that compares to the OSC's for the other brands with this chip?

What I assume is the ZWO equivalent is £230 cheaper.  

[ollypenrice]

1 hour ago, Ouroboros said:

Chuckle .... I'd call it a preview rather than a review. 

 ... and I'd call it a noview since it ain't been viewed! I hope that will change soon.

Olly

[Adam J]

8 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Surely it's premature to 'review' the Atik without having tried a final production version? A camera and a chip are not at all the same thing. Who knows how the camera will perform or compare with other cameras using this chip? I certainly don't, but I'm looking forward to seeing and, I hope, trying one.

It's for a good reason that I have five Atik cameras here. I like the way they perform in sustained and heavy commercial use, I like their software and I like their customer service. I do think it encouraging that they have not  rushed into production with the new CMOS technology and have taken their time.

But I have no idea about the performance or other qualities of the Horizon and won't have any till I've tried it!

Olly

I dont think anyone had reviewed the camera with exception of the guy on CN, who arguably should not have reviewed a beta product as if it was a finished product. 

My comments were about what I have heard of the ATIK software (camera independent) not about the new camera in any way. All I have said is it is significantly more expensive than the ASI1600mmc pro (more so if you purchase their filter wheel) and am questioning why and if it is a wise business model when coming late to the game when people have been pretty happy all in all with the product produced by the current market leader in CMOS cameras.

I dont at all agree that we know anything of why they are late to market with a CMOS product, but from their own blog they only started working on it 8 months back so that is still getting on for two years after the release of the ASI1600, does it really make sense to sit and ponder the whole thing while ZWO sells 100s / 1000s of cameras? The people buying those ZWO cameras are unlikely to sell up and get a horizon subsequently.

But if I was to add my guess to your own guess then it would be that ATIK got wrong footed by the sudden shift of focus onto CMOS.

I have heard you suggest that you may be tempted by the new QHY367c I think?  At this rate ATIK wont release an equivalent before 2019 probably longer so I would ask you if you are willing to defer your purchase of that camera and wait for the ATIK version based on there reputation?

Just look at the number of CMOS based cameras introduced by ZWO and QHY respectively, probably more than 20 models and largely successfully (ASI071mc problems aside), ATIK produce one largely unproven untested CMOS camera and people are already making the argument that its a superior product....does that really add up.

Weighing up my options as I currently am, do I purchase the unknown entity for more money or the known performer for less cash, like you say we dont know until someone like you reviews it, but to be fare it would it need to be with the ZWO as a benchmark.

Yes the camera is more than just the sensor, so lets look at what we do know.

1) The horizon has no USB hub - people seem to find that very useful.

2) The horizon as a smaller body so better for hyperstar (but i would argue that is catering to a neich market).

3) The horizon has a longer back focus and so is likely to require larger filters (further adding to its cost btw).

Finally ATIK do have the benefit of being in the EU but at the same time I dont see people complaining about ZWO customer service either, there is a long long thread of happy ASI1600 owners on this forum.

Adam

[Mick J]

All seem happy now over on the Cloudy Nights thread (page 4).