The Future of Imaging - Is everything heading OSC

[Adam J]

On 12/09/2020 at 10:51, Dinglem said:

@Adam Jwhere have you seen that announcement?

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/zwo-cameras/zwo-asi-294mm-pro-usb-30-cooled-mono-camera.html

[Adam J]

On 30/05/2020 at 23:07, Adam J said:

Of that list the following are already currently avaliable for purchase in cooled astronomy cameras:

IMX 455 - 43.3mm - (likely to be the best anature astronomy sensor ever released)

IMX183 -  15.9mm

IMX 304 - 17.5mm

IMX 253 - 17.6mm

IMX 178

IMX 174

IMX 290

IMX 273

IMX 252 - 8.9mm

IMX 250 - 11.1mm

IMX 249

IMX 428 - 17.6mm

IMX 492 

IMX 571

You will likely see an IMX 542 based mono and OSC astronomy camera in the near future and IMX540 too.

8 of the sensors on Sonys list where added in the last 12 months so its likely that they are for pre order only. So I would say that evidence is that Sony at least are still investing in Mono sensors.

The IMX183 mono was listed as avaliable for 12 months before we saw a Astronomy camera with it in.

More new mono cameras will come within the next 12-24 months, I would bet on it.

The thing is thats just sony! If you start thinking about other makes there are more.

If you look at the 1 inch + sensors on that list then we have in effect had on average more than 1 new mono sensor type of useful size for DSO imaging per year for the last 4 years. I just dont follow how this can be considered a reduction when the last generation of CCD camera sensors where with us for between 8-12 years. Its only this year that ATIK have anounced that the 383L+ is going to be discontinued ad the sony CCD chips are still being sold with no end currently anounced. CMOS change over has if anything at all increased the rate of introduction of new Mono astronomy cameras significantly.

Adam

 

So as little as 5 months later we now have an APS-C (IMX571) aka ASI2600mm Pro and a 4/3 sensor (IMX492) aka ASI294mm Pro to add to my original list. 

I would put real serious money on there being a mono IMX533 at some point in the next two years also as it just makes sense for that chip due to its none astronomy based use cases. 

Anyone still believe that we will be seeing less and less mono cameras in the future as per OPs comments?

Adam

Edited October 6, 2020 by Adam J

[CCD-Freak]

I sure hope they come out with mono versions of the IMX533 based cameras.  I would like to pair one with my ASI-533MCP.

 

John Love
CCD-Freak
WD5IKX

[kirkster501]

I think the current generation of OSC are so good now that they can rival in UK skies anything that a mono could.  That said, i plan to get a mono QHy268 for luminance and maybe some narrowband.  I'll grab the colour with OSC and abandon separate RGB channels in the future.

[Adam J]

7 hours ago, kirkster501 said:

I think the current generation of OSC are so good now that they can rival in UK skies anything that a mono could. 

I think that statment deserves to be supported by some independent evidence from ASTROBIN or similar. Same scope and similar intergration show me a OSC image that is comparable to a mono image.

Personally i think that its more that they are getting to rival much older mono CCD cameras as opposed to rivaling the current generation MONO cmos equiverlents.

Adam

Edited October 6, 2020 by Adam J

[Davey-T]

We shouldn't loose sight of the fact that Sony don't produce these sensors for astrophotography per se so either for  "normal" cameras or industrial applications  which we get to benefit from

Dave

[kirkster501]

7 hours ago, Adam J said:

I think that statment deserves to be supported by some independent evidence from ASTROBIN or similar. Same scope and similar intergration show me a OSC image that is comparable to a mono image.

Personally i think that its more that they are getting to rival much older mono CCD cameras as opposed to rivaling the current generation MONO cmos equiverlents.

Adam

If at some point I can produce pictures with a OSC like Peter did here - I do not have his natural ability but you get my point - I will be a very happy person indeed.

Edited October 7, 2020 by kirkster501

[susan-parker]

Mono and Filters are still considerably better than OSC, the RGB filters on an OSC chip are simple dye filters compared to the multi-layer interference filters...

M17 comparisons...

[susan-parker]

... and

[susan-parker]

Particularly the Ha and SII in the red

[kirkster501]

Of course @susan-parker Even the Hubble uses filters with a mono sensor(s).  I've got two as well.    I don't think mono is going anywhere but OSC are a lot more popular now with their large sensors, high efficiency and bit depth.  They make an attractive device to get something in the can quickly.

Is mono dead?  No.  But are things heading towards OSC?  Possibly for many people.

[susan-parker]

2 hours ago, kirkster501 said:

Of course @susan-parker Even the Hubble uses filters with a mono sensor(s).  I've got two as well.    I don't think mono is going anywhere but OSC are a lot more popular now with their large sensors, high efficiency and bit depth.  They make an attractive device to get something in the can quickly.

Is mono dead?  No.  But are things heading towards OSC?  Possibly for many people.

Yes, absolutely - especially for doing anything with a RASA type telescope. But the mono-sensor version cameras are getting correspondingly better too and the RGB Bayer matrix filters are not-optimal for DSO imaging. At some point maybe there will be something better, but for me the big difference is the Ha sensitivity and the pragmatic situation of being in a Bortle 8+ zone.

[ollypenrice]

On 07/10/2020 at 01:30, Adam J said:

I think that statment deserves to be supported by some independent evidence from ASTROBIN or similar. Same scope and similar intergration show me a OSC image that is comparable to a mono image.

Personally i think that its more that they are getting to rival much older mono CCD cameras as opposed to rivaling the current generation MONO cmos equiverlents.

Adam

I recently processed a 32 panel mosaic (!) captured by Yves Van den Broek with a full frame QHY OSC CMOS camera and about 90 minutes per panel. When I compare regions of this image with the same regions captured in far longer integration with my mono CCD in HaLRGB I find Yves' results generally preferable. I'm astonished by this, quite honestly. Some relevant details in the comparison:

Site - the same. Yves' rig is in our robotic shed 20 metres from mine. Scopes: both FSQ106 Taks, mine the old fluorite, Yves' the new EDX. Mine at at native FL, Yves' with Tak reducer.  Mounts, both Mesu 200. Integration: can't remember mine but can't be less than 6 hours per panel, HaLRGB, Atik 11000 mono, Baader filters. The Squid in both cases comes from my rig's OIII data. No sign of it without an OIII filter. The small blue reflection nebula between Bat and Squid was better in my data so I blended it into Yves'. (Question: how good will Yves' camera be on blue targets? Don't know.) Mono CCD is the upper image.

 

How would a mono version of Yves' camera compare? Don't know. Send me one and I'll see what I can do!!!

The images have a different 'look' and I prefer the CMOS because it has gone deeper in the faint signal, particularly the dust, and allowed the nebulae to rise more naturally from the darkness.

Stars were smaller in the CMOS camera. (That's worth noting.)

Of course the processing was done several years apart and introduces its own effects. However, I hope this comparison is helpful.

Olly

[tomato]

So how can this be, given the simple dye filters on the OSC sensor and 50% of the pixels not recording any signal to speak of?
 

Has the processing software (Bayer matrix algorithms) got a lot smarter?

[Adam J]

1 minute ago, ollypenrice said:

How would a mono version of Yves' camera compare?

Thats the real question isnt it?

My feeling is that the performance gap will be just as wide as it is for any other camera, i.e. no matter how good that image is Olly it would have been even better if you had used a mono verion of the same sensor, or would have gone just as deep in less time.

Adam

[Adam J]

4 minutes ago, tomato said:

So how can this be, given the simple dye filters on the OSC sensor and 50% of the pixels not recording any signal to speak of?
 

Has the processing software (Bayer matrix algorithms) got a lot smarter?

No its just that a OSC CMOS astronomy camera has now in 2020 exceeded the performnace of the 10-15yo?? sensor mono sensor in Olly's Atik11000mono.

I would love to see what Olly could do with a ASI6200mm pro.

Adam

Edited October 8, 2020 by Adam J

[Cosmic Geoff]

What does OSC stand for? From the context is seems to mean 'colour' so why not just say 'colour'?

I Googled the meaning of OSC and found it could have over 120 possible meanings. 

[Adam J]

2 minutes ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

What does OSC stand for? From the context is seems to mean 'colour' so why not just say 'colour'?

I Googled the meaning of OSC and found it could have over 120 possible meanings. 

One shot colour, and its because you can still take a colour image with a mono camera in three seperate exposures.

Adam

[Pete Presland]

I guess its a quick way telling the reader that the colour image is not an RGB image captured with a mono camera, but a one shot colour image captured with a coloured camera.

[tomato]

3 hours ago, Adam J said:

Thats the real question isnt it?

My feeling is that the performance gap will be just as wide as it is for any other camera, i.e. no matter how good that image is Olly it would have been even better if you had used a mono verion of the same sensor, or would have gone just as deep in less time.

Adam

I don’t doubt that the equivalent mono sensor will beat the OSC every time, but if the OSC   images are getting that good, I think there will be some who have limited clear sky time and a finite budget (large format CMOS mono cameras still need big filters and a filter wheel) who will be content to stay with them.

 

[nfotis]

I think that I'll delay my DSO camera purchase for a year, to see if the current generation of CMOS sensors will yield a monochrome version.

Then we'll be able to see a head-to-head comparison and decide if the higher cost for the special order sensor and filters/filter wheels will be acceptable...

Comparing a current OSC sensor with a decade-old monochrome sensor isn't very enlightening.

Cheers,

N.F. (living under a Bortle 8 sky)

[Adam J]

4 minutes ago, nfotis said:

I think that I'll delay my DSO camera purchase for a year, to see if the current generation of CMOS sensors will yield a monochrome version.

Then we'll be able to see a head-to-head comparison and decide if the higher cost for the special order sensor and filters/filter wheels will be acceptable...

Comparing a current OSC sensor with a decade-old monochrome sensor isn't very enlightening.

Cheers,

N.F. (living under a Bortle 8 sky)

The super odd thing about it is that it has not been discontinued yet. 

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/atik-cameras/atik-11000-mono.html

Adam

[tomato]

When you look at examples of Olly’s work with this camera, I can see why it’s still on the market.

[DaveS]

3 hours ago, nfotis said:

I think that I'll delay my DSO camera purchase for a year, to see if the current generation of CMOS sensors will yield a monochrome version.

Then we'll be able to see a head-to-head comparison and decide if the higher cost for the special order sensor and filters/filter wheels will be acceptable...

Comparing a current OSC sensor with a decade-old monochrome sensor isn't very enlightening.

Cheers,

N.F. (living under a Bortle 8 sky)

If you can hang on until Feb there will be a mono version of the QHY268. Should be awesome.

[smr]

My Birthday in February. Quite a jump in performance that'd be if I were to go from an astro modified 600D to a QHY268 Mono. I agree, that will be an utterly stunning camera.