Camera options

[Bobby1970]

Having sold some gear recently and some Dosh from birthday and Xmas knocking around, I have decided to get a replacement for my Altair GP Cam

It's replacement will be mainly used for lunar, planetary, and solar imaging. 

However, I also want to have more of a go at EEVA and imaging of some DSO's. 

My budget is £250, maybe £300 absolute maximum. 

There's a bewildering array of sensors, and I want to get the best I can for my budget. I do appreciate that I won't be able to get a "cooled" solution for my budget. 

So, my original choice was going to be the ZWO 224, then I noticed the 178, which has a larger sensor I believe??

On top of this I note that Altair Astro have cameras equipped with these sensors and seem a little cheaper? 

So, what would you guys recommend??

All advice greatly appreciated. 

 

[Bobby1970]

Anyone??

Currently thinking of the ZWO 178 colour. 

Bigger sensor than the 224 but how does it compare sensitivity wise?? 

Seen these with Cooling mods fitted also. 

[PeterCPC]

If you are going for planetary then I would go for the 224. I find it very good at planetary. You will also need an IR cut filter with it.

Peter

[Bobby1970]

18 minutes ago, PeterCPC said:

If you are going for planetary then I would go for the 224. I find it very good at planetary. You will also need an IR cut filter with it.

Peter

Thanks Peter. 

Ideally I would like something thats great for planetary, lunar and solar. But also capable of dabbling with some DSO/EEVA, the 178 would seem better suited to the latter due to its larger sensor?? Or am I thinking wrongly here?

Maybe a 224 and a camera lens? This would give me a wider FOV right??

Maybe I am looking for something that doesn't exist within my price range though. Lol

[PeterCPC]

The 224 would be good for planetary, lunar and solar. For DSOs you really need a bigger sensor but I have seen some DSO taken with the 224 on here. Alternatively, use the Canon 450d for DSOs.

Peter

[Bobby1970]

1 minute ago, PeterCPC said:

The 224 would be good for planetary, lunar and solar. For DSOs you really need a bigger sensor but I have seen some DSO taken with the 224 on here. Alternatively, use the Canon 450d for DSOs.

Peter

I have used the 450 for some DSO EEVA. Other people have suggested to me previously that this is a good way to go. 

But, in some ways the dedicated CCD type camera seems like an easier way to go, especially with live stacking of images. 

Maybe my thinking is wrong, but the cameras I have mentioned all seem as though they would be more "sensitive" to me. That's my take on it, based on some of the EEVA and DSO images I have seen taken. 

 

[PeterCPC]

Dedicated astro cameras will always be more sensitive than a DSLR - it just depends which route you want to follow. Personally I have decided to stick with the DSLR because I find imaging with Backyard EOS to be so easy and I am happy with the results that I get. It's your choice.

Peter

[vlaiv]

You are rather limited in your budget and requirements that you listed (planetary, lunar, solar, EEVA) although at first look similar, have some differences that make choosing camera very hard task to do.

I will start by listing things requirements for all types of imaging and then we can see how any particular camera model suits that.

- all of these require camera that has low read noise and high quantum efficiency, so that is common thing

- planetary, lunar, solar require fast download rates (meaning USB3.0 camera, ROI capability for planets, high FPS in any case)

- for planetary it is easier to work with color sensor (limited budget, no need for filters, filter wheel, and recording with change of filters is a bit difficult).

- for lunar and solar due to lack of color - mono sensor is better option. For H-alpha solar it is much better option (although color sensor can still be used - it will be only 1/4 effective since only 1/4 of pixels register that wavelength - red pixels).

- for planets you are fine with very small sensor - something like 1/3" sensor

- for lunar and solar, you want larger sensor, but not too large. Well, that depends on what sort of telescope you have. It needs to have diffraction limited field large enough to cover sensor. This is not a problem for smaller sensors, but could be problematic on a larger sensor like 1" sensor. If you attempt to shoot full disk images or mosaics - you don't want your images/panels to be soft at the edges because scope is no longer diffraction limited there.

- For EEVA mono is better than color in terms of getting image on screen quicker - more sensitive, but color provides you with color of object - something that is interesting with stars / clusters and nebulae (planetary in particular).

- For EEVA you want your sensor to be as large as possible or you need a scope that can be reduced well (by reduced - I mean focal length reduction).

- cooled camera will only be beneficial for EEVA (although many people work with non cooled cameras, having set point cooling, even if you don't use sub zero temperatures - enables precise calibration, which is beneficial).

Now we can begin comparing sensors

If I go by your signature and conclude that you have Skymax127 and AA 72ED-R, and want to do everything equally well - I would say go for 178 - color model.

For that camera and Skymax127 you will need x2 barlow to get to critical sampling rate (for color camera). Since it is Mak, I doubt you will be doing Solar Ha, so color model is fine - for lunar and planetary it is fine as well.

For 72ED-R and EEVA, you will benefit from focal reducer, although you don't need field flattener. Something like x0.79 FF/FR will make that scope into F/4.8, but even better would be GSO x2 simple reducer (1.25" version, you don't need full 2") - mounted to give you something like x0.66 reduction to make your system F/4. You could try to use it at full x0.5 and F/3 but I believe your edge of field will suffer greatly - that small scope has quite a bit of curvature due to short FL.

In any case, for EEVA with said x0.66 reduction you will have 1.77"/px system (very good for AzGti mounted scope for EEVA) and following FOV:

That is ~ 1.5 x 1 degree field - quite good.

In any case - you have "tools" to decide now, but if you have any more questions - just shoot.

[Bobby1970]

1 minute ago, vlaiv said:

You are rather limited in your budget and requirements that you listed (planetary, lunar, solar, EEVA) although at first look similar, have some differences that make choosing camera very hard task to do.

I will start by listing things requirements for all types of imaging and then we can see how any particular camera model suits that.

- all of these require camera that has low read noise and high quantum efficiency, so that is common thing

- planetary, lunar, solar require fast download rates (meaning USB3.0 camera, ROI capability for planets, high FPS in any case)

- for planetary it is easier to work with color sensor (limited budget, no need for filters, filter wheel, and recording with change of filters is a bit difficult).

- for lunar and solar due to lack of color - mono sensor is better option. For H-alpha solar it is much better option (although color sensor can still be used - it will be only 1/4 effective since only 1/4 of pixels register that wavelength - red pixels).

- for planets you are fine with very small sensor - something like 1/3" sensor

- for lunar and solar, you want larger sensor, but not too large. Well, that depends on what sort of telescope you have. It needs to have diffraction limited field large enough to cover sensor. This is not a problem for smaller sensors, but could be problematic on a larger sensor like 1" sensor. If you attempt to shoot full disk images or mosaics - you don't want your images/panels to be soft at the edges because scope is no longer diffraction limited there.

- For EEVA mono is better than color in terms of getting image on screen quicker - more sensitive, but color provides you with color of object - something that is interesting with stars / clusters and nebulae (planetary in particular).

- For EEVA you want your sensor to be as large as possible or you need a scope that can be reduced well (by reduced - I mean focal length reduction).

- cooled camera will only be beneficial for EEVA (although many people work with non cooled cameras, having set point cooling, even if you don't use sub zero temperatures - enables precise calibration, which is beneficial).

Now we can begin comparing sensors

If I go by your signature and conclude that you have Skymax127 and AA 72ED-R, and want to do everything equally well - I would say go for 178 - color model.

For that camera and Skymax127 you will need x2 barlow to get to critical sampling rate (for color camera). Since it is Mak, I doubt you will be doing Solar Ha, so color model is fine - for lunar and planetary it is fine as well.

For 72ED-R and EEVA, you will benefit from focal reducer, although you don't need field flattener. Something like x0.79 FF/FR will make that scope into F/4.8, but even better would be GSO x2 simple reducer (1.25" version, you don't need full 2") - mounted to give you something like x0.66 reduction to make your system F/4. You could try to use it at full x0.5 and F/3 but I believe your edge of field will suffer greatly - that small scope has quite a bit of curvature due to short FL.

In any case, for EEVA with said x0.66 reduction you will have 1.77"/px system (very good for AzGti mounted scope for EEVA) and following FOV:

That is ~ 1.5 x 1 degree field - quite good.

In any case - you have "tools" to decide now, but if you have any more questions - just shoot.

Thanks for the excellent information. I had a feeling that the 178 colour may be best suited to my needs. It's good to see that confirmed by an expert 🙂

i realise it will be a jack of all trades and probably master of none. 😞

But my gut feel was that it could suit my needs. 

i do like the sound of mono in terms of the higher sensitivity. But I really do not want to be messing around with filters etc to get a colour image. 

[vlaiv]

11 minutes ago, Bobby1970 said:

i realise it will be a jack of all trades and probably master of none.

That really depends on how you look at it

It is quite good planetary camera. If we match it against ASI224 - being most recommended planetary camera, you will see it is not lagging much behind on features:

- pixel size is not important because you will be matching critical sampling (if you want to go for highest possible detail) with use of barlow. For Asi224 that should be x2.5 while for ASI178 - that should be x2 barlow if you pair them with your SkyMax 127

- ASI224 wins on read noise

vs ASI178

first going down to 0.7e while second staying at almost twice that much just below 1.4e

- however, ASI178 might compensate that by being BSI and having slightly higher quantum efficiency at 81% vs 75-80% (quoted by ZWO).

- 178 does not lag behind 224 much in FPS department either - 250fps vs 300fps for 8bit 640x480 ROI - quite good enough for planetary work

Going with 178 is going to save you from having to purchase UV/IR cut filter, but will limit you in use of IR pass filters for IR photography (good for lunar for example if you want to avoid much of the seeing as it depends on wavelength and longer wavelengths are less affected).

All in all - pretty decent camera, and not too bad for DSO work either. It is small sensor, but when paired with short FL fast optics, it can produce some very interesting results - like this for example:

This was taken with ASI178mcc (cooled color version) and 80mm F/6 scope reduced to ~ F/4.8 (x0.79 FF/FR) from rather strong LP ~ mag18.5.

I have not done much planetary work with this camera, but yes, it will deliver:

This was taken with RC8 scope - larger secondary obstruction, and hardly planetary instrument - but still works good enough

[oymd]

38 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

You are rather limited in your budget and requirements that you listed (planetary, lunar, solar, EEVA) although at first look similar, have some differences that make choosing camera very hard task to do.

I will start by listing things requirements for all types of imaging and then we can see how any particular camera model suits that.

- all of these require camera that has low read noise and high quantum efficiency, so that is common thing

- planetary, lunar, solar require fast download rates (meaning USB3.0 camera, ROI capability for planets, high FPS in any case)

- for planetary it is easier to work with color sensor (limited budget, no need for filters, filter wheel, and recording with change of filters is a bit difficult).

- for lunar and solar due to lack of color - mono sensor is better option. For H-alpha solar it is much better option (although color sensor can still be used - it will be only 1/4 effective since only 1/4 of pixels register that wavelength - red pixels).

- for planets you are fine with very small sensor - something like 1/3" sensor

- for lunar and solar, you want larger sensor, but not too large. Well, that depends on what sort of telescope you have. It needs to have diffraction limited field large enough to cover sensor. This is not a problem for smaller sensors, but could be problematic on a larger sensor like 1" sensor. If you attempt to shoot full disk images or mosaics - you don't want your images/panels to be soft at the edges because scope is no longer diffraction limited there.

- For EEVA mono is better than color in terms of getting image on screen quicker - more sensitive, but color provides you with color of object - something that is interesting with stars / clusters and nebulae (planetary in particular).

- For EEVA you want your sensor to be as large as possible or you need a scope that can be reduced well (by reduced - I mean focal length reduction).

- cooled camera will only be beneficial for EEVA (although many people work with non cooled cameras, having set point cooling, even if you don't use sub zero temperatures - enables precise calibration, which is beneficial).

Now we can begin comparing sensors

If I go by your signature and conclude that you have Skymax127 and AA 72ED-R, and want to do everything equally well - I would say go for 178 - color model.

For that camera and Skymax127 you will need x2 barlow to get to critical sampling rate (for color camera). Since it is Mak, I doubt you will be doing Solar Ha, so color model is fine - for lunar and planetary it is fine as well.

For 72ED-R and EEVA, you will benefit from focal reducer, although you don't need field flattener. Something like x0.79 FF/FR will make that scope into F/4.8, but even better would be GSO x2 simple reducer (1.25" version, you don't need full 2") - mounted to give you something like x0.66 reduction to make your system F/4. You could try to use it at full x0.5 and F/3 but I believe your edge of field will suffer greatly - that small scope has quite a bit of curvature due to short FL.

In any case, for EEVA with said x0.66 reduction you will have 1.77"/px system (very good for AzGti mounted scope for EEVA) and following FOV:

That is ~ 1.5 x 1 degree field - quite good.

In any case - you have "tools" to decide now, but if you have any more questions - just shoot.

That is an excellent bit of information...

I will be following this thread..

[Bobby1970]

Well. I took the plunge and bought the ZWO 178MC. 

Been watching lots of videos on YouTube. Looks like it will be a good purchase. 

I think I will also end up using it with just a lens. I have a few old M42 fit lenses. 

Thanks again for the info guys. 🙂