224MC vs 290MC

[SAW]

Hi,

Narrowed my choices down to these two cameras to use with my SW Mak150 Pro. I purely want a camera just to use with this scope to do some planetary imaging, don't want filter & wheel so I'm sticking with OSC until I've got more experience. I'll also probably use a 2.25 barlow. Which do you think is better ? I've already got a uv/ir filter if I go for the 224. Am I actually going to notice much difference paying the extra for the 290 ? I have got usb3 on the laptop but not ssd drive although I could add an external.

[Owmuchonomy]

In your position I would do some simple calculations. Optimum for planetary imaging is a focal ratio of 4 to 5x your pixel size. So for the 224 this is around f/ 16 to 18 and for the 290 f/ 12 to 14. So your scope is f12 and thus you should use the 290 without a Barlow for best effect. For the 224 it’s a bit more awkward as you really need a 1.5x Barlow, not something that’s easy to find. The 290 has better near IR performance so with the aid of an IR pass filter your kit will get great mono images of the Moon.

[SAW]

One of these ?

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/uv-ir-filters/baader-ir-pass-filter.html

[Owmuchonomy]

31 minutes ago, SAW said:

One of these ?

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/uv-ir-filters/baader-ir-pass-filter.html

Yes, that’s ideal but just for getting mono images with an OSC camera or as a luminance layer when using a mono cam with RGB filters. To be honest, I would think about getting also a mono cam just for the great lunar shots achievable with your Mak. An ASI174 mono and a 2x Barlow would be nice. ?

[SAW]

I already have a 120MM I didn’t really want to have to use filters for the planetary stuff with the Mak. 

[SAW]

Out of interest how does the 290 go with my SW72ED as in calculations ?