Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_2019_sp_banner.thumb.jpg.a0ff260c05b90dead5c594e9b4ee9fd0.jpg

Recommended Posts

hello, im interested in the zwo asi camera for dso like i mentioned above.

i mostly use it with my eq5 mount.

anybody know or have this type of camera and can give me his review about it.

i'll appreciate if those of you could send dso photos that you take with this camera.

clear skies for all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, kodos55557 said:

hello, im interested in the zwo asi camera for dso like i mentioned above.

i mostly use it with my eq5 mount.

anybody know or have this type of camera and can give me his review about it.

i'll appreciate if those of you could send dso photos that you take with this camera.

clear skies for all.

If your going to go with an uncooled camera for DSO work presumably due to cost then get a mono version. If you go colour in an uncooled camera then you mas as well get a astro modified DSLR with a bigger sensor.

The mono 178 is a viable DSO imaging camera but you should always go with cooling if you can afford it or consider a second hand cooled camera.

It's also a smaller sensor so if you are going to do anything with it well it will be mostly galaxy imaging.

Adam

Edited by Adam J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Adam J said:

If your going to go with an uncooled camera for DSO work presumably due to cost then get a mono version. If you go colour in an uncooled camera then you mas as well get a astro modified DSLR with a bigger sensor.

The mono 178 is a viable DSO imaging camera but you should always go with cooling if you can afford it or consider a second hand cooled camera.

It's also a smaller sensor so if you are going to do anything with it well it will be mostly galaxy imaging.

Adam

thank you for the comment.

do you know some sites that sell second hand ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is couple of images done with ASI178 color - cooled version, from very light polluted location.

Camera was paired with TS80 APO scope and x0.79 FF/FR, on heq5

M81-M82-v3.png

m101v2-optimized.png

Advantage of such camera is that it can used as planetary cam as well, like this:

Jupiter with RC8 scope:

jupiter_optim.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Here is couple of images done with ASI178 color - cooled version, from very light polluted location.

Camera was paired with TS80 APO scope and x0.79 FF/FR, on heq5

M81-M82-v3.png

m101v2-optimized.png

Advantage of such camera is that it can used as planetary cam as well, like this:

Jupiter with RC8 scope:

jupiter_optim.png

Thank you, you've got sone nice photos.

So from what i understand,the best way will be the cooled version of 178??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kodos55557 said:

Thank you, you've got sone nice photos.

So from what i understand,the best way will be the cooled version of 178??

Best way in DSO imaging is to get set point cooled camera, regardless of the model.

That enables you to do a proper calibration of subs.

Camera model of your choice will depend on different factors - like pairing scope(s), your budget, mono vs OSC, etc ...

For example ASI178 has small pixels and is suited for shorter focal length scopes - up to 500mm in focal length. Mono is better choice but more expensive as you need filters as well.

What is your budget and your other gear that you want to pair camera with? What are your targets of interest? Will you be guiding your mount? A bit more info can help with giving recommendation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Best way in DSO imaging is to get set point cooled camera, regardless of the model.

That enables you to do a proper calibration of subs.

Camera model of your choice will depend on different factors - like pairing scope(s), your budget, mono vs OSC, etc ...

For example ASI178 has small pixels and is suited for shorter focal length scopes - up to 500mm in focal length. Mono is better choice but more expensive as you need filters as well.

What is your budget and your other gear that you want to pair camera with? What are your targets of interest? Will you be guiding your mount? A bit more info can help with giving recommendation.

My budget goes between 300-350 dollars.

I have the sw 150 with focal of 750 and meade 90 with long focal of 900.

I thought about buying guide scope but not at this point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, kodos55557 said:

My budget goes between 300-350 dollars.

I have the sw 150 with focal of 750 and meade 90 with long focal of 900.

I thought about buying guide scope but not at this point.

 

With those scopes and a 178 it's going to be galaxies and planets only. Maybe the off planetary nebula. You may be better off with a modified DSLR within your budget unless you can find something second hand. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am using an ASI 178 on an Esprit 150 to capture small galaxy targets. This is M51, 2.92 hrs integration time. The camera has been fitted with a Peltier cooler bringing the sensor temp down to 0-5 deg C. I am having some fun trying to get the colour balance right, this is a version modified by @Han Solo using PS. The camera is very sensitive and the small pixels can capture fine detail under the right conditions, but the FOV is limited with this scope.

IMG_0957.JPG

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, kodos55557 said:

My budget goes between 300-350 dollars.

I have the sw 150 with focal of 750 and meade 90 with long focal of 900.

I thought about buying guide scope but not at this point.

 

Indeed, as @Adam J mentioned, with such limited budget you are probably best off using second hand DSLR (modded or regular) to get you started.

I presume that you are yet to start in AP? Have you done any imaging yet?

There are really two courses of action that make sense:

1. As said - get second hand DSLR. Maybe it would be best to start without a scope - just using DSLR on your mount and simple lens in 50mm range. Do some wide field imaging first and develop your stacking and processing technique. You can also use same camera on 6" F/5 scope (you will need T2 adapter for your camera model). You will need coma corrector at some point, but you don't need it to start with - your images will suffer from coma in the corners, but you can crop center (and get similar FOV as with ASI178 or other small sensor cameras). Coma corrector will need further investment, and these are not cheap (not overly expensive either ($150 and upwards).

2. If you plan to get serious with AP and plan to invest more further down the line, then you can get small sensor camera, non cooled one, mono version. This will be used as guide camera later on, but for start it will enable you to do some imaging (in B&W without color information) again to learn skills of stacking and processing, and also allow you to do some EEVA/EAA if you find that sort of thing interesting. That is Electronically assisted astronomy, where you sit next to your scope / computer and observe targets on computer screen as a successive stack of incoming short duration frames (5-10s subs) making image progressively better. You can also save your image at some point - so you will end up with image to process later.

Just to add for first option you won't need computer in the field - you can shoot with DSLR, it will save subs on memory card that you can later download onto your processing computer to finish the image.

Dedicated astro camera (even small ones without cooling) need computer "in the field" - you need to download images from your camera directly to your computer to be saved. This usually means lap top computer if you don't have observatory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

As said - get second hand DSLR. Maybe it would be best to start without a scope - just using DSLR on your mount and simple lens in 50mm range. Do some wide field imaging first and develop your stacking and processing technique. You can also use same camera on 6" F/5 scope (you will need T2 adapter for your camera model). You will need coma corrector at some point, but you don't need it to start with - your images will suffer from coma in the corners, but you can crop center (and get similar FOV as with ASI178 or other small sensor cameras). Coma corrector will need further investment, and these are not cheap (not overly expensive either ($150 and upwards).

maybe it will be the best option.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the 200d canon camera.

I dont understand very much the specs of this camera,do you think its good for start??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, kodos55557 said:

I saw the 200d canon camera.

I dont understand very much the specs of this camera,do you think its good for start??

Get something astro modified from this chap. Maybe a 600D or a 450D.

 https://m.cheapastrophotography.vpweb.co.uk/Available-Cameras.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/04/2019 at 15:29, tomato said:

I am using an ASI 178 on an Esprit 150 to capture small galaxy targets. This is M51, 2.92 hrs integration time. The camera has been fitted with a Peltier cooler bringing the sensor temp down to 0-5 deg C. I am having some fun trying to get the colour balance right, this is a version modified by @Han Solo using PS. The camera is very sensitive and the small pixels can capture fine detail under the right conditions, but the FOV is limited with this scope.

IMG_0957.JPG

That is really nice. So you have the colour version. I've been thinking about this camera too especially for galaxies like the one above. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gerry Casa Christiana said:

That is really nice. So you have the colour version. I've been thinking about this camera too especially for galaxies like the one above. 

Yes the 178 is a great galaxy camera. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gerry Casa Christiana said:

That is really nice. So you have the colour version. I've been thinking about this camera too especially for galaxies like the one above. 

No, it is the mono version with a filter wheel. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, tomato said:

No, it is the mono version with a filter wheel. 

Now it makes sense why it was so good. I would love to do mono but it's a question of time but seems like a lot more time needed? I seem to have a couple of sessions when it's clear maybe 3 hours and then call it session done :) anyway very nice well done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Gerry Casa Christiana said:

Now it makes sense why it was so good. I would love to do mono but it's a question of time but seems like a lot more time needed? I seem to have a couple of sessions when it's clear maybe 3 hours and then call it session done :) anyway very nice well done. 

This is one of the most common misconceptions in astro imaging, mono collects data faster than one shot color You will get a better image in three hours with the mono. In three hours you would do the following.

Lum = 1.5 hours

Red = 0.5 hour

Green = 0.5 hour

Blue = 0.5 hour

Total = 3 hours

So if you assume that each RGB pixel collects 1/3rd of the signal of the Luminance filter then you get the following.

The formula for light gathered per channel is:

(Filter transmission as a percentage of Lum) x  (number of active pixels) x (integration time in hours) = relative signal strength.

**Remember that One Shot Colour uses a filter matrix and so for red only one in 4 pixels are active for green two in four pixels are active and for blue one in 4 pixels are active. For mono all pixels are always active.

First For One Shot Colour:

Red = 1/3 x 1 x 3 = 1

Green = 1/3 x 2 x 3 = 2

Blue = 1/3 x 1 x 3 = 1

Total = 4

Now for Mono:

Lum = 1 x 4 x 1.5 = 6

Red = 1/3 x 4 x 0.5 = 0.66

Green = 1/3 x 4 x 0.5 = 0.66

Blue = 1/3 x 4 x 0.5 =0.66

Total = 8

 

So using LRGB on mono you collect twice the number of photons as one shot colour in the same amount of time. So relatively your 3hours is now 6hours of equivalent data. Hence if you are short on time can you afford not to go mono?

So long as you have a filter wheel you only need focus on Lum then just rotate for each filter.

Adam

 

Edited by Adam J
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your making a strong case for me needing to go mono when I get a camera. The one thing I have strongly against it is my desire for quality, eyepieces I have wall to wall Televue, not quite so much quality in scopes though I have an APM and a very good Dob among others , my worry is I will want Astrodon filters and they sting the wallet with a hornet sized stinger .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, alan potts said:

Your making a strong case for me needing to go mono when I get a camera. The one thing I have strongly against it is my desire for quality, eyepieces I have wall to wall Televue, not quite so much quality in scopes though I have an APM and a very good Dob among others , my worry is I will want Astrodon filters and they sting the wallet with a hornet sized stinger .

You don't need astrodon filters, even the cheapest lrgb set will outperform osc. Baader filters are great too while saving for astrodon narrow band. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Adam J said:

You don't need astrodon filters, even the cheapest lrgb set will outperform osc. Baader filters are great too while saving for astrodon narrow band. 

Narrow band filter that they do are meant to be the best but the cost. I like Astronomiks filters for visual, I may settle on them, A bit OCD as well.

Alan

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, alan potts said:

Narrow band filter that they do are meant to be the best but the cost. I like Astronomiks filters for visual, I may settle on them, A bit OCD as well.

Alan

 

I have owned both 5nm Astrodon filters and Baader filters. Both have good quality AR coatings with the AD filters being a little better and a little narrower, but the baaders are still good, with almost all other filters I have heard of issues with reflections to one extent or another. For me the 5nm ADs I currently own are not really that much better than 6nm or 7nm filters in terms of band pass, its all about the AR coatings.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Very interesting thread as I, like the op, am currently looking at zwo cameras for use with my eq5, 650/130 and 1200/150 reflectors. The aim is for quicker capture of photons from DSOs to help reduce noise with fainter targets.

As a step up from my Canon 1000D DSLR I first considered the ASI294MC as its low noise and high QE seemed appropriate. However, after watching Dr Robin Glover's excellent video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RH93UvP358&feature=youtu.be (a few times for understanding!) I came to the conclusion that the overall photon capturing capability wasn't that much better than my 1000D due to the DSLR's larger pixels.

With a bit more consideration the ASI183MM is my current (!) favourite. Why? Because it's low thermal low noise seems to make cooling unnecessary for luminance imaging at my Bortle 4-5 location (noise at approx 10% of sky).  It's a 20M pixel camera and 2X binning would increase the signal level 4X (less for SNR) and still provide a good resolution image (I typically bin 2X with my 1000D for noise reduction). Binning is also a bit more appropriate for the imaging scale and guiding I achieve with my setup.

For RGB filter imaging I understand detail isn't so important and therefore the increased noise due to RGB filters can be reduced by sacrificing detail (more binning?) as luminance will provide the necessary detail.

The ASI183MM still looks to provide a reasonable fov, although a bit less than my 1000D.

I hadn't planned to get into mono imaging, but it seems to make sense as the best way forward. Have I missed something important? Thanks.

Edited by bobro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bobro said:

Very interesting thread as I, like the op, am currently looking at zwo cameras for use with my eq5, 650/130 and 1200/150 reflectors. The aim is for quicker capture of photons from DSOs to help reduce noise with fainter targets.

As a step up from my Canon 1000D DSLR I first considered the ASI294MC as its low noise and high QE seemed appropriate. However, after watching Dr Robin Glover's excellent video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RH93UvP358&feature=youtu.be (a few times for understanding!) I came to the conclusion that the overall photon capturing capability wasn't that much better than my 1000D due to the DSLR's larger pixels.

With a bit more consideration the ASI183MM is my current (!) favourite. Why? Because it's low thermal low noise seems to make cooling unnecessary for luminance imaging at my Bortle 4-5 location (noise at approx 10% of sky).  It's a 20M pixel camera and 2X binning would increase the signal level 4X (less for SNR) and still provide a good resolution image (I typically bin 2X with my 1000D for noise reduction). Binning is also a bit more appropriate for the imaging scale and guiding I achieve with my setup.

For RGB filter imaging I understand detail isn't so important and therefore the increased noise due to RGB filters can be reduced by sacrificing detail (more binning?) as luminance will provide the necessary detail.

The ASI183MM still looks to provide a reasonable fov, although a bit less than my 1000D.

I hadn't planned to get into mono imaging, but it seems to make sense as the best way forward. Have I missed something important? Thanks.

I promise you that there is a world of difference between a dedicated mono camera and a 1000D having owned a cooled 1000D for imaging. The dark current and read noise are much higher and its only getting 30% QE or maybe even worse at 650nm.

I assume that again as per the OP you are not going for a cooled camera due to cost. If that is the case then I really do recommend a mono sensor at the very least.

Personally if I was going to get a 183 mono without cooling then it would be the Altair Hypercam 183m as it has some advantages over the ASI, binning 2x2 would be a good idea.

Without cooling you will need to take temperature matched dark frames on the same night as your imaging run.

The ASI 294mc is at the top end of sensitivity for OSC cameras, but due to its dark current would really need to be cooled.

Adam

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/05/2019 at 13:00, Adam J said:

This is one of the most common misconceptions in astro imaging, mono collects data faster than one shot color You will get a better image in three hours with the mono. In three hours you would do the following.

Lum = 1.5 hours

Red = 0.5 hour

Green = 0.5 hour

Blue = 0.5 hour

Total = 3 hours

So if you assume that each RGB pixel collects 1/3rd of the signal of the Luminance filter then you get the following.

The formula for light gathered per channel is:

(Filter transmission as a percentage of Lum) x  (number of active pixels) x (integration time in hours) = relative signal strength.

**Remember that One Shot Colour uses a filter matrix and so for red only one in 4 pixels are active for green two in four pixels are active and for blue one in 4 pixels are active. For mono all pixels are always active.

First For One Shot Colour:

Red = 1/3 x 1 x 3 = 1

Green = 1/3 x 2 x 3 = 2

Blue = 1/3 x 1 x 3 = 1

Total = 4

Now for Mono:

Lum = 1 x 4 x 1.5 = 6

Red = 1/3 x 4 x 0.5 = 0.66

Green = 1/3 x 4 x 0.5 = 0.66

Blue = 1/3 x 4 x 0.5 =0.66

Total = 8

 

So using LRGB on mono you collect twice the number of photons as one shot colour in the same amount of time. So relatively your 3hours is now 6hours of equivalent data. Hence if you are short on time can you afford not to go mono?

So long as you have a filter wheel you only need focus on Lum then just rotate for each filter.

Adam

 

Well that convinced me I think. So now I just have to save more money for filters and filter wheel. Now you say it I've heard this before and it does make perfect sense. I'll be saving for a mono now if it means saving time. Thanks for taking the time to explain that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.