Jump to content

stargazine_ep44_banner.thumb.jpg.6153c4d39ed5a64b7d8af2d3d6061f61.jpg

ASI6200 arrived


Recommended Posts

I ordered a camera for my friends observatory the other day, out with the old Moravian G3-16200 mono CCD and in with the ZWO ASI6200 mono CMOS!
Camera should arrive next week, unfortunately there's no filter wheels available so it will be used for luminance for a while, FW might not be shipping from ZWO to suppliers till April from i got when i asked.

The camera will be used on a Takahashi TOA150 with a 67-FL flattener and FSQ130ED with and without 645 0.7x focal reducer.

It will be interesting to see the difference between this and the already sold G3-16200 and the QHY163m he has on loan from me currently.

I will post some images when the cameras arrives and hope i can get some comparison shots of M81-M82 that i have imaged with the TOA150 with both the QHY163m and G3-16200 earlier.

6200.jpg

Edited by Xplode
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 27
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Here's an early luminance image taken over a few evenings, it's just been stretched. It includes some images that i don't have flats for, they will be removed for the final stack when i'm done gatheri

I ordered a camera for my friends observatory the other day, out with the old Moravian G3-16200 mono CCD and in with the ZWO ASI6200 mono CMOS! Camera should arrive next week, unfortunately there's

Camera and filter wheel arrived today. Everything mounted including the required extensions and a 3d printed M68 cover. Since the OAG might not be used for guiding i'm gonna

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Xplode said:

It will be interesting to see the difference between this and the already sold G3-16200 and the QHY163m he has on loan from me currently.

I will post some images when the cameras arrives and hope i can get some comparison shots of M81-M82 that i have imaged with the TOA150 with both the QHY163m and G3-16200 earlier.

 

As a 16200 chip camera user it certainly will be ..

Dave

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

I will post some images when the cameras arrives

Don't post too many. At 64MPix and 16 bit depth for a mono frame, I doubt the server has enough storage space for lots of raw images.

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

Don't post too many. At 64MPix and 16 bit depth for a mono frame, I doubt the server has enough storage space for lots of raw images.

Images are 120MB :D

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have enough trouble with 32MB raw files and 64MB XISF format in PixInsight.  Have to wait for entanglement computers to become available as well as win euromillions!!!  Well out of my league as an OAP!!!

As for filter wheel - build you own.  3nm NB filters...  !!!  Oh dear...  my mind has boggled! 🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites

The plan is to take 120s (like i've done with the QHY163m at 1100mm FL and unguided to avoid chasing the seeing) so dealing with so many of the large files will definitely be interesting, thankfully i got a pretty powerfull computer with a 16 core AMD Ryzen 3950x and 64gb of ram, but i might still have problems with PI using up all the RAM with the big files when i run many threads, i had problems with 32gb ram and 32 threads of 32mb files.

I did actually find a supplier with 1 filter wheel in stock that i ordered from and it should be here early next week,  i also found a UK supplier with 2 filter wheels in stock.
Yeah 3nm filters are expensive, i do actually co-own a setup with 3x 50.8mm 3nm Chroma filters, thankfully there's 3 of us sharing the cost. Comparing the cost between 3nm Chroma and Astrodon is interesting nowadays, Astrodon was like 40-50% more expensive last i checked.


My friend has a 7nm Baader filter already, but it might be replaced with a Baader 3.5nm Ha filter.
For a start he will loan the Baader SII and OIII filters we replaced with Chroma filters to see if works ok with his setup, they seem to create reflections/halos with some setups, but not others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ole Alexander,

that camera has been on my list of "things soon to buy" since I first heard of it, but ZWO seems to have had some trouble delivering it and dates have steadily been pushed foreward. I am now waiting eagerly to see your oppinion about its performance!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the 6200 do ROI? If it does then I would think of binning 2x2 for a full frame image, or else do a ROI crop at 1x1.

In any case, with 16 bit ADC and a healthy FWC I'd be treating it like CCD with fewer long (600 sec up) subs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, gorann said:

Hi Ole Alexander,

that camera has been on my list of "things soon to buy" since I first heard of it, but ZWO seems to have had some trouble delivering it and dates have steadily been pushed foreward. I am now waiting eagerly to see your oppinion about its performance!

I will post comparison images and probably raw data for people to look at too when it's up and running and i get some photons from the M81 area to hit the sensor.

 

28 minutes ago, DaveS said:

Does the 6200 do ROI? If it does then I would think of binning 2x2 for a full frame image, or else do a ROI crop at 1x1.

In any case, with 16 bit ADC and a healthy FWC I'd be treating it like CCD with fewer long (600 sec up) subs.

ASI6200 supports custom ROI.

I want to do shorter exposures to avoid guiding, longer exposures shouldn't be a problem unguided either, but it's better to stay on the safe side

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Xplode said:

I will post comparison images and probably raw data for people to look at too when it's up and running and i get some photons from the M81 area to hit the sensor.

 

ASI6200 supports custom ROI.

I want to do shorter exposures to avoid guiding, longer exposures shouldn't be a problem unguided either, but it's better to stay on the safe side

Does that mean that it coud be run as an APS-C, so 60 Mb files? Will the ASICAP program give that possibility?

Link to post
Share on other sites

At Astrofest yesterday I saw an Atik camera using this chip, some months away yet also worth considering..  about £500 more than the ZWO version..  Looks great for 550mm fl..   pixels a bit small for 1000mm or greater and once binned 2x2 read noise advantage over the 16200 chip becomes almost negligible.

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Laurin Dave said:

At Astrofest yesterday I saw an Atik camera using this chip, some months away yet also worth considering..  about £500 more than the ZWO version..  Looks great for 550mm fl..   pixels a bit small for 1000mm or greater and once binned 2x2 read noise advantage over the 16200 chip becomes almost negligible.

Dave

I've used both the 16200 and QHY163m which has the same size pixels as the ASI6200 on a TOA150@1100mm and i can definitely see more details in the QHY163m image.

At 0.71"/px it will definitely be oversampled most of the time, but that doesn't mean it can't result in a higher resolution image.
I definitely see larger variations in FWHM, but that's just they way it will be when oversampled and seeing varies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Camera and filter wheel arrived today.

image.png.1d336f2eae745e532bb8734af64ddb09.png

image.png.c67eff1e89017fc488244fd3419f0c80.png

image.png.8483e56bc3007c98c48028f778c737d0.png

image.png.11b7d16a1df8df16ed80f19c00dc371b.png

image.png.3bd4af7dcc3437e75bb61c9f0e00d7ea.png

Everything mounted including the required extensions and a 3d printed M68 cover.
Since the OAG might not be used for guiding i'm gonna try to 3D print a M42x0.75 cover for it in black PETG just because it will look better.

image.png.6fdc88e87d06a00793fe6a101c835366.png

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

First light...120s of the Pleiades, not centered or anything, but it shows of the still large FOV at 1100mm.
It has been downsized to 25%.
We also tried a 600s exposure and stars are still perfectly round, at 0.7" i would not have expected it, but i guess it's because of the stiffness of the setup.
Flattener to sensor distansce seem to have been pretty spot on by guessing the adapter length, i can see there is a little tilt thou, stars in the bottom corners are a little elongated.
225486538_firstlight.thumb.png.d0cbea80fbbd8b50b48b5ca5f1d077e4.png

 

Camera mounted on the TOA150.

A 3d printed M68 male-male adapter was used during testing so it won't be run unattended, a metal adapter arrives tomorrow together with a Baader 3.5nm Ha, this will be mounted at the same time as the 7nm Ha filter so a comparison can be made.

image.png.6dcbbcb51f4c712962f409af513c6852.png

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the moon is disturbing deep sky AP the moon itself is a target...
During testing i found that i can get a "lot" more than the avertised FPS for full resolution, i did actually get something between 3 and 3.5fps which isn't too shabby thinking that each frame is 120 MB.

To not fill the harddrive too fast and get higher fps i did choose to use ROI to fit the moon.
This is the best 15% of 2075 frames taken through a TOA150 with 67FL flattener.
Conditions where varying from average to what i would say is actually very good (for Norway).


Make sure to click on the image and check out the full version, it can even take zoom pretty well without getting blurry.
21_10_29__lapl4_ap2418_Drizzle30.thumb.png.e1ae657c1d1cceb1ea9fd76b5342ada4.png

Edited by Xplode
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Here's an early luminance image taken over a few evenings, it's just been stretched. It includes some images that i don't have flats for, they will be removed for the final stack when i'm done gathering data.
This is 70x120s, i'm up to around 200x120s and i'm hoping to get 500x120s
W7WMmbriooX4_1824x0_l5FMa6GE.png

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...

Awesome combination and great early results! Could you share the adapters you've used? I am looking to connect the ASI6200 to the TOA-130 but with the same 67-FL flattener, so I guess it would be the same.

Also, what is the use for the OAG in your setup, if it is not for guiding? My setup is typically used unguided, so an OAG would probably not be something I'd get. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 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.