Canon 750d or not

[gonzostar]

Hi

I have currently a 450d camera. I have a opportunity to get a 750d.  

The difference between these 2 is that the 750 has 24mp compared to 12mp. Also the 750 has a slightly larger sensor. 

How much of a difference if any will this make to my images with my set up?

I mainly use the 102mm ES  APO refractor on avx mount. 

Clear nights hopefully

Dean

 

[gonzostar]

Answered my own question, Judging by this week the answer is NO! No!  

[Space Ranger]

I have a Canon 760D which has the same sensor as the 750D. I use it most for daytime photography and widefield shots of the night sky. I've also managed to get some telescope shots through equipment not dissimilar to yours. It is a good camera for all of that. I haven't used the 450D but having had experience of a 600D and 650D I would imagine that compared to the 450D, the 750D would offer reduced noise and articulated touch sensitive screen as well as the higher sensor resolution.

The sensitivity to H-alpha isn't great though, so if you're main interest is in imaging emission nebula, you'll find far better options out there. I've attached an image of M42 I obtained with approx. 30 min total exposure time (most 1 min subs), to give an idea of what can be produced by someone with basic image processing skills. HTH

Later added point of clarification - on checking I've since realised the above image was produced from captures using an astromodded Canon 600D, so maybe not an ideal example to provide considering the original post was about a 750D

[gonzostar]

That is a nice image the kind i was hoping to achieve. Thanks for sharing. Maybe pushed the camera to far taking 300s light frames on those warm May evenings. See my thread "Lines across image" Or could have just being unlucky with that individual camera. 

Never got those lines with the 450d

[Adam J]

To be honest with you I always rated the older 450 550 and 600 cameras as they are a cheap way into astro photography, you would not see me buying a more recent more expensive camera though simply because its not a cost effective way of getting better imaging performance. Once your over 350 pounds for a DSLR I think that you are better off saving your money for a dedicated camera. 

[gonzostar]

I like the 450d, but going down the dedicated camera route for me looks such a minefield 

[Space Ranger]

On ‎10‎/‎06‎/‎2018 at 20:14, gonzostar said:

That is a nice image the kind i was hoping to achieve. Thanks for sharing. Maybe pushed the camera to far taking 300s light frames on those warm May evenings. See my thread "Lines across image" Or could have just being unlucky with that individual camera. 

Never got those lines with the 450d

My astroimaging sessions tend to be in winter at <5degC so that probably helps my shots wrt noise. I haven't tried out autoguiding, so tend to be 2min or less exposure length when shooting through a scope. I have taken a few 5 min exposures with a wide angle lens and Star Adventurer mount without any obvious image artifacts though.

I currently have an astromodded 600D and also a 760D. The modded 600D offers a huge improvement in sensitivity to the red end of the visible light spectrum. I don't see a big performance difference between the 2 cameras for astroimaging through a telescope in any other aspects, although I tend to find the noise in the 760D images a wee bit less and easier to manage during the rudimentary image processing I am capable of doing. So as I think Adam J is saying, paying for a new 750D might not get you much better results than a similar camera that is a good bit cheaper. 

I didn't select/buy the 760D primarily for imaging through a telescope, although it does produce decent results. I bought it for the type of photography I do most - daytime photography and "nightscapes". I find it produces cleaner single shot nightscapes at high ISO than the 600D & a 650D I previously had use of (couple of nightscape examples attached). So for the sort of photos I take, the likes of the 750D/760D was good balance between what I hoped to achieve and what I had available to spend. At some point I might venture into the dedicated astronomy camera territory, but I like the portability and hassle free(?) nature of astroimaging with a DSLR for the moment.

HTH

[gonzostar]

Thanks for your indepth response Space ranger. Really like the nightscape shots. Very interesting to see or not the differences between your 2 cameras, And i think you are correct also in saying about the costs. I do like the portability of DSLR, and if i had a observatory the dedicated route would be the option. I am worried about the amount of time setting up, then wasted on very rare clear nights here

[Space Ranger]

7 hours ago, gonzostar said:

Thanks for your indepth response Space ranger. Really like the nightscape shots. Very interesting to see or not the differences between your 2 cameras, And i think you are correct also in saying about the costs. I do like the portability of DSLR, and if i had a observatory the dedicated route would be the option. I am worried about the amount of time setting up, then wasted on very rare clear nights here

I too have a mobile / non-permanent set-up and unpredictable weather - hence my preference for a DSLR thus far. I may be tempted sometime by the new CMOS cameras though as they can produce good results with unguided short exposures, so I could get usable data within my normal sort of imaging session of a couple of hours. The use for lunar imaging appeals too.

I've trawled through some images I've taken to look for 600Da and 760D images I've taken of the same object on the same night to compare side by side. I've attached single unedited images from each, just as they came out of the camera. The 760D image is on the right in both cases. Settings were ISO 3200, and 60 seconds. I normally use ISO 1600 or ISO 800 when imaging through the scope, so not sure why the higher ISO was used in this case.

I think it shows that there is very little discernible difference in noise performance between the two at these settings (note that at ISO 6400 I definitely feel the 760D has an edge). Not surprisingly the 600Da picks up the H-alpha emissions far better.

So if the DSLR will only be taking photos through a telescope, for stacking and processing, the quality of the end image taken with a 600D or 760D won't be much different. So probably doesn't warrant the extra cost you'll pay for the newer one. If like me you'd use your DSLR for other types of photography, then the newer, higher spec and more expensive camera might be worth it.

I'm afraid I can't give a comparison with the 450D that you're obviously familiar with. I have to add though that I find the live view capability on a flip screen that is touch sensitive (as the 760D has) brilliant and very convenient to use for night time imaging.

HTH

[gonzostar]

I am only mobile and also unpredicable weather  

Thankyou for taking time to trawl and load these amazing images. Its great to have a comparison between the 2 cameras. The 600Da looks very good. I have heard that the 60da and 600da can cause star bloating but doesnt seem to be the case with yours. You are correct though does the extra money make a big difference. If it does its certainly not worth the extra 200-300 pounds. 

However the swivel screen looks useful, especially with the wirlpool overhead at the moment.

Again thanks for your valuable input

Dean