Ready For a Camera

[Sunshine]

Finally I am ready to buy a decent imager upgrade from my Neximage 5, I would like a better planetary imager and, one which can also do some deep space. My mount is a Vixen GP with one motor for RA which I feel will get me some half decent images as I can polar align fairly well. Maybe I won’t win any badges but, some starter deep space shots would light a fire in me. 
 

Regarding camera, I have used the CCD comparability software to figure out which cam would be best suited for my 115mm Orion Eon triplet 805mm, it seems seeing plays a big factor, the technical details which govern comparability are a bit dizzying.

These three cameras are within my price range, I have read the tech details but not all three mention whether they are designed for both planetary and deep space. Maybe some help from imagers is what I need here, thanks, the cameras I’m deciding on are as follows.

ZWO ASI385MC

ZWO ASI290MC

ZWO ASI224MC

When I think about it I can see why the compatibility software asks for a seeing parameter selection, during bad seeing, a particular camera would require a longer exposure to yield a good image and vice versa for good seeing, making for more accurate tracking during bad seeing a must.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Sunshine

[SyedT]

You might find this useful: https://compare.astronomy-imaging-camera.com/

[Sunshine]

3 minutes ago, SyedT said:

You might find this useful: https://compare.astronomy-imaging-camera.com/

That is a wonderful site, thanks!

[SyedT]

8 minutes ago, Sunshine said:

That is a wonderful site, thanks!

No problem! Drop ZWO an email as well if you wish, they're very helpful in my experience.

[noah4x4]

I suggest you also use this tool to check out field of view of each camera.

http://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/

The common challenge with all three of the budget cameras are that they have small sensors. That is fine for planets and smaller DSOs. However, as you will see from the FOV tool on larger DSOs they offer a narrow field. Think of these a bit like eyepieces. They are perhaps the equivalent of 12mm when for most DSOs you might be choosing 32mm. Using a focal reducer will assist. 

The other issue with a small FOV you need a very good alignment to get your target into FOV. You then need a decent quality mount with good tracking to keep the object in FOV.  I have the ASI224mc, but would use it only for planets. I would turn to my ASI294 or Atik Horizon for DSOs.

Unfortunately, there is no one size camera fits all. The ASI294 or ASI533 are probably the best all round compromises, but do require much more budget. But if you can't spend more, I suspect the ASI385mc would serve you best, albeit it has a 1/2" sensor and 2.12mp resolution. 

 

 

 

[Sunshine]

14 minutes ago, noah4x4 said:

I suggest you also use this tool to check out field of view of each camera.

http://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/

The common challenge with all three of the budget cameras are that they have small sensors. That is fine for planets and smaller DSOs. However, as you will see from the FOV tool on larger DSOs they offer a narrow field. Think of these a bit like eyepieces. They are perhaps the equivalent of 12mm when for most DSOs you might be choosing 32mm. Using a focal reducer will assist. 

The other issue with a small FOV you need a very good alignment to get your target into FOV. You then need a decent quality mount with good tracking to keep the object in FOV.  I have the ASI224mc, but would use it only for planets. I would turn to my ASI294 or Atik Horizon for DSOs.

Unfortunately, there is no one size camera fits all. The ASI294 or ASI533 are probably the best all round compromises, but do require much more budget. But if you can't spend more, I suspect the ASI385mc would serve you best, albeit it has a 1/2" sensor and 2.12mp resolution. 

 

 

 

Very good advice, I gave that software a go last night and did some FOV comparisons, I realized that larger DSO's simply do not fit into certain camera sensors. It seems that the largest possible sensor would obviously be best, the 385 should be a great planetary/lunar camera and, provide the best possible specs for whatever DSO's which will fit within its sensor. 

Thanks for the awesome advice!

[noah4x4]

20 hours ago, Sunshine said:

Very good advice, I gave that software a go last night and did some FOV comparisons, I realized that larger DSO's simply do not fit into certain camera sensors. It seems that the largest possible sensor would obviously be best, the 385 should be a great planetary/lunar camera and, provide the best possible specs for whatever DSO's which will fit within its sensor. 

Thanks for the awesome advice!

A larger sensor than the three small cameras discussed is generally an advantage. But too large a sensor for any particular scope and that can provoke vignetting. However, with something like an ASI294, if using Sharpcap, you can use region of Interest (ROI) to crop and mitigate this.

[Adam J]

Of the cameras you list the 385 will likely serve you best. Really to get better you need to spend more and get something like the ASI533mc pro.

Having said this though, if I was a betting man I would say its highly probably that ZWO will release an uncooled 533 at some point and with the low dark current and lack of amp glow that might be quite attractive.

Adam