Orion vs. ZWO

[Clear Skies!]

Hi everybody!

I recently decided which telescope to buy, but now I need to know which camera is better: Orion or ZWO.

I saw Orion G4 camera and some ZWO cameras, for example that on the link.

I have read that Orion G4 camera and all cheap cameras have very small sensor, so they are good just for planetary imaging, but I can stack these image together in ICE (Image Composite Editor).

I want to know, too: CCD or DSLR. (Cooled Orion G4 vs. Nikon D5300)

I will have Sky-watcher 200p-DS and EQ5 mount.

Which camera do you think is better?

And also, which filters under 100 € do you preffer?

Thanks!

 

P.S. I have DSLR (Canon PowerShot SX130), too, but it isn't useful because the lens can't be removed.

Edited December 16, 2019 by Clear Skies!

[happy-kat]

Are you also going to do visual with that telescope?

[Clear Skies!]

14 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

Are you also going to do visual with that telescope?

Yes.

[johninderby]

ZWO is very well supported but with Orion I would check first to see if it will work with the capture software you might want to use.

Edited December 15, 2019 by johninderby

[Skipper Billy]

I would suggest that before you go any further I would have a long hard think about this.

I dont want to seem negative but a 200mm scope on an EQ5 is going to wobble like a jelly and the merest breeze will wreck any subs.

I would suggest a much smaller scope and a bigger mount before going any further - something like an ED80 on a HEQ5 seems to be a good starting point. Maybe with a DSLR to start with.

I would also suggest reading this book.

To answer your question - you can see how something will appear using any scope camera combo by using this calculator.

Sorry if this isn't what you want to hear but I am genuinely trying to point you in the right direction.

[Clear Skies!]

1 hour ago, Skipper Billy said:

I would suggest that before you go any further I would have a long hard think about this.

I dont want to seem negative but a 200mm scope on an EQ5 is going to wobble like a jelly and the merest breeze will wreck any subs.

I would suggest a much smaller scope and a bigger mount before going any further - something like an ED80 on a HEQ5 seems to be a good starting point. Maybe with a DSLR to start with.

I would also suggest reading this book.

To answer your question - you can see how something will appear using any scope camera combo by using this calculator.

Sorry if this isn't what you want to hear but I am genuinely trying to point you in the right direction.

What about Sky-watcher 150p on EQ5? I have a bit small budget - under 450 € for the mount.

[johninderby]

Many people are having real success using the 130p which you might also consider.

Edit:

Meant the 130 PDS

Edited December 15, 2019 by johninderby

[happy-kat]

130PDS (you won't reach focus with the f5 130P and many DSLRs)

There is a long thread with lots of images taken using the 130PDS.

Edited December 15, 2019 by happy-kat

[Clear Skies!]

And what about 150p? I have Celestron AstroMaster 130EQ already.

[Clear Skies!]

22 hours ago, Skipper Billy said:

on an EQ5 is going to wobble like a jelly

What do you mean by this? Will it collapse? Break down? Destroy?

How much does it affect on photo quality?

 

Clear skies!

[Clear Skies!]

On 15/12/2019 at 14:29, johninderby said:

ZWO is very well supported but with Orion I would check first to see if it will work with the capture software you might want to use.

Yes, it is supported; I have Windows 7 64-bit.

[wimvb]

From what I could find, the Orion has a small sensor with large pixels. With your 200pds you are undersampled at roughly 1.7 arcsecs/pixel. Ok for nebulae, but imo too course for galaxies. At the same time, you probably won't fit nebulae on that small sensor.

What ZWO camera are you considering? On my wish list it would be

1. ZWO cooled

2. DSLR (new or second hand) 

3. ORION G4

But as @Skipper Billy wrote: use a field of view calculator when evaluating various candidates.

[Clear Skies!]

On 16/12/2019 at 17:24, wimvb said:

From what I could find, the Orion has a small sensor with large pixels. With your 200pds you are undersampled at roughly 1.7 arcsecs/pixel. Ok for nebulae, but imo too course for galaxies. At the same time, you probably won't fit nebulae on that small sensor.

What ZWO camera are you considering? On my wish list it would be

1. ZWO cooled

2. DSLR (new or second hand) 

3. ORION G4

But as @Skipper Billy wrote: use a field of view calculator when evaluating various candidates.

I use Stellarium software for that.

 

Thank you for your opinion.

[Science562h]

To this day, CCDs are still better overall. For filter, a light pollution. The G4 records for 60 minutes & it's "Sequence" programmable. It's a dedicated DSO camera, not a light filtered DSLR, that records for 30 seconds, uncooled, with noise. With the G4, the cooler drops temp. from 70° F to 24° F & you don't have to edit noise in photoshop.

As for compatibility, since you have a Skywatcher, your price & match is the Orion G-series of cameras anyway, not a Nikon DSLR. You would be downgrading to a non-astro camera. Like placing a non-astro camera on a good imaging telescope. It doesn't match. To be a professional astronomer, & raise your rank, a person must use dedicated DSO cameras, no-matter what anyone says. You can never make rank or get a promotion, uing a DSLR, as your primary CAM. No professional observatory uses DSLRs, no matter what & your cameras are going to all be CCDs, with up to 100 watercooled & programmed to record.

Last year, I setup meteor sensors, throughout Texas; from Houston to Dallas. Readup on Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS). My college teachers were from NASA's actual & real flight safety control room, at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical U. My astronomy teacher earned his MS, at the Australia observatory overseas. I had already observed his thesis on active galaxies.

The G4 is alright, it lets me see, what I need to, at home.

Image. Orion Starshoot G4 camera. 

Edited January 18, 2020 by Science562h