Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

DSLR or CCD

greenkat

By greenkat
in Imaging - Discussion

Recommended Posts

russ

russ

Posted
Posted

Budget may have something to do with your decision perhaps? Or whether you would like the camera to be a more flexible option.

It's easier to justify a DSLR as it does so much more than any Astro CCD. Use it for normal daytime use, sunsets, moon..just about anything. But if money isn't an issue then it has to be an Astro CCD all the way. Look at the images Steve has taken with a dedicated Astro CCD!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Psychobilly

Psychobilly

Posted
Posted

I'm in the DSLR camp at the moment using a Moded 350D and when the sky clears a recently acquired 1000D... Ihave stopped using the Nikon D200, D50 and KM5D as they are so noisy compared to the two Canons...

Dont get carried away with the megapixel thing unless the physical sensor size is also increased.... 6-8 MP is fine for an APS-C sized sensor.

Billy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steppenwolf

steppenwolf

Posted
Posted

High pixel count is not the be all and end all of astro-imaging and some of the finest astro images I have seen have been taken with cooled astro-ccds with a pixel count of 1.3Mpixels - so much depends on what subjects you want to image - wide fields require larger sensors but the advantages of having a cooled astro-ccd with no nasty IR filter in the way make them a very attractive buy. You can, of course modify a DSLR to remove the IR filter problem but it will still be un-cooled.

That said, for a limited budget, a modified DSLR camera is a great compromise as you will have the opportunity of taking wide fields and yet still capture lots of nice red nebulosity.

What budget are you hoping to work to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
centroid

centroid

Posted
Posted

I had a 300D, and now a 30D, but neither of them has ever been attached to a scope.

Quite frankly, I wouldn't want anyone 'poking around' inside my 30D, and modifying it.

I have an SXVF-H9C (MX7C prior to that), and while not as many pixels as the 30D, it's much better suited for the job of astro imaging, as that's what it was designed for.

As Steve says, it you want 'cooled' and lots of pixels, then its the M25C or QHY8.

However, if you already own a suitable DSLR, and don't have the budget for a dedicated astro CCD camera, then all you have to decide is if you are happy to have your DSLR modified.

If you don't have a DSLR, and a limited budget, then there are plenty of 300D or 350D cameras available on the secondhand market, at a reasonable price.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Psychobilly

Psychobilly

Posted
Posted

With the way 2nd hand 300D and 350D prices are going its almost at the stage where its worth taking the risk of modding the cameras yourself... I did my own 350D -I havent repalced the filter with anything preffering to take care of filtering externally - using the Hutech IDAS P2 for both LP removal and UV and IR cut... seems to work quite well even if I say so myself - its turned the 350D into a Ha Hoover... teh fact that no optical element has been inserted inforn of the sensor does mean that the AF doesnt work and the focus scales on the lenses are out but seing as its dedicated to astro work nd occasional terestrial IR then its soemthing that I can live with....

There are lots of comprehensive guides for filter removal onthe web - but its got to be down to the individuals confidence in their abilities when deciding to take the job on... As I have said before if you need to buy any tools to do the job then its probably better if you dont take it on...

Obviously at some point int the future I would love to have a cooled mono CCd setup with auto filter wheels etc.. but thats not going to happen until finances improve dramatically....

Until then I will persevere with the DSLR's

Billy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sam

Sam

Posted
Posted

Without getting too technical, to mod a DSLR, do you have to take it apart, i.e. disassemble the case, etc..? Or is it a bit less drastic than that?

Yep, you have to pull it apart. But it's a cheaper option then buying the likes of a QHY8 - especially if you don't have the cash for one of those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChrisEdu

ChrisEdu

Posted
Posted

Without getting too technical, to mod a DSLR, do you have to take it apart, i.e. disassemble the case, etc..? Or is it a bit less drastic than that?

Yep, you have to pull it apart. But it's a cheaper option then buying the likes of a QHY8 - especially if you don't have the cash for one of those.

So, maybe not a job for the faint of heart or technically incompetent? I was just wondering, as I'm sure lots of people wouldn't know how much is involved in the process and it might make a difference to their choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ngc2403

ngc2403

Posted
Posted

the cooling effect is not as noticeable as you might think.

the noise is reduced on the background but you might not notice the difference at first, however the CCD is a better imaging device. it has improve sensitivity and a better responce to important astronomical spectral lines.

the LP will be less of a problem and if you are following my PTC graphs to determine the quality of the chip.

if i had the choice i would get the CCD if you think that in the future you plan to setup at Ur house in set place everytime and that you may want to guide the setup.

as good as the DSLRs are, they are not as good when you plan to image with a permanent setup

ally

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChrisEdu

ChrisEdu

Posted
Posted

OMG! Had a look at the links - that looks pretty scary for anyone that's a bit of an elephant with tools! I'm not sure I'd risk it, unless it was a camera I didn't care about too much.

The instructions did seem very clear and well explained, but the thought of fiddling with all those tiny components and delicate bits - no thanks! I think I'd opt for either buying one already modded (or just not bothering) or simply getting an astro CCD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Psychobilly

Psychobilly

Posted
Posted

yes that is why i have one but i wish that i had a CCD now cause the lack of power supplys and the LP problems are begining to make me thing that CCD is going to be the next thing i get

Both of which are very easily fixed...

Astronomiser do a range of PSU's allowing the camera to be run of a 12V supply and there are loads of different LP filters available ranging fro £20 to over £200 liek most things you get what you pay for...

Astro CCD's dontsuddenly make the LP problem go away as its only the filters that you use that gets rid of it with them as well...

Billy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ngc2403

ngc2403

Posted
Posted

true i have seen these power supplies and the filters are good but the CMOS chips are not as sensitive as the CCD chips.

the bigger problem is the LP and use of filters. yes you can filter out LP but the DSLR are poor at picking up hydrogen alpha, even with the filter inside replaced they have a poor responce compared to a CCD.

i was also thing that when you get to the guiding stage you might want to do things that you were not able to before like narrow band imaging.

Mono CCD's are the way to go IMHO because they give the greatest variety of applications.

CMOS (DSLR) are cheaper and larger but they lack the sensitivity of the CCDs

ally

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sam

Sam

Posted
Posted

CMOS (DSLR) are cheaper and larger but they lack the sensitivity of the CCDs

ally

Ally, all of your points are correct but cost is a significant factor for many folks, especially when just starting out. I think a DSLR is a good place to start (even unmodded) and when the techniques are refined and a stack of cash is saved up then a purpose built ccd is a great thing to move onto. If money was no object I'm sure we all buy the biggest and most sensitive CCD we could with the most expensive and versatile set of filters, but unfortunately money is an obstacle and a DSLR is a good compromise. :(

Sam

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ngc2403

ngc2403

Posted
Posted

CMOS (DSLR) are cheaper and larger but they lack the sensitivity of the CCDs

ally

Ally, all of your points are correct but cost is a significant factor for many folks, especially when just starting out. I think a DSLR is a good place to start (even unmodded) and when the techniques are refined and a stack of cash is saved up then a purpose built ccd is a great thing to move onto. If money was no object I'm sure we all buy the biggest and most sensitive CCD we could with the most expensive and versatile set of filters, but unfortunately money is an obstacle and a DSLR is a good compromise. :(

Sam

I agree with you Sam :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MartinB

MartinB

Posted
Posted

One of the massive advantages of astro CCDs over DSLRs is the 16 bit analogue to digital converter. Are any DSLRs 16 bit now or are they all 12 bit. You can keep stretching a 16 bit image and keep pulling out detail.

Mono cameras give much greater flexibility when it comes to narrowband imaging which is very useful in this country

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.