I'd really appreciate some advice for upgrading my AP

[sagramore]

Hi everyone. Thanks for reading my post; I'll try to be as brief as possible!

I presently use the following setup for AP:

• Skywatcher 130-PDS - This is mostly stock, but I have moved the primary up the tube a little as this stops the focus tube from protruding into the aperture too much when imaging with my current camera. I'd prefer not to have to un-do this mod if possible...
• NEQ6 mount - no mods (yet?)
• Canon 550D, unmodified
• Skywatcher 0.9x coma corrector
• Powered either by mains (when at home) or by a home-made 12V leisure battery box with laptop power adapter (when in the field)
• I use a Startravel 80 and ZWO120-MC to guide with PHD2
• All connected via USB to my laptop, which is getting on a bit now but was a high spec gaming rig with Windows 10 when originally bought so reasonably beefy still

Now - the problem. I've always had some issues with the Canon 550D disconnecting during imaging. Originally it was pretty minor, and some sessions I'd have no problems at all. However, lately, it has become unusable as it disconnects CONSTANTLY, which means that even setting up and focusing is infuriating, and once I manage to frame a target, usually I have to quit anyway because I can't run any subs longer than a few seconds without manually reconnecting the camera to the laptop. I have tried different USB cables and different USB ports, I've also tried with and without a USB hub. It's always the same. I can't be 100% sure it's not the laptop, but it feels a lot more like a camera problem than a laptop problem.

As such, I am considering an upgrade to the camera. Again, without too much information, I came into some inheritance money recently and so cost isn't an "issue" but I also really don't want to waste my money or my time and so I'd really like some advice!

So - the questions:

• I could go for a modded DSLR as a direct swap-in for my current camera. I use Astrophotography Tools at the moment and I've been considering something like a full-spectrum modded Canon 60D from DSLR astromod. This option sits somewhere around the £550 mark I think. However, given that I have some money, I could delve deeper and move into something like a ZWO1600-MM with filters. I can see kits with LRGB, Ha, SII, and OIII narrowband filters with filter wheel for around the £1800 mark. Given that the vast majority of my photography will be from my backyard (south Oxfordshire, in a town, moderate light pollution) I imagine that the ZWO camera would give me much better results. Can anyone comment on this?
• Also, if I were to move to the 1600, would I likely need to undo moving the primary up the tube on the scope or should it still work fine? Will the CC also still work? 
• Additionally, my current processing relies mostly on DeepSkyStacker and Photoshop. I have heard some horror stories about how much harder it is to process images from mono+filter cameras vs "one-shot" DLSR imaging. I like to think I'm a reasonably smart guy, with a scientific background, but how much steeper is the learning curve?? I don't want to spend the money on the great kit and then find out I can't actually use any of the data!
• Second to that - I've heard everyone say PixInsight is worth it. I'm assuming that's still true? Is it more true for narrowband/filter imaging?
• How worthwhile is the belt-mod for the NEQ6? I have to put up & tear down the kit every time I want to image so my alignment does vary from session to session, however usually with some time taken over it I get pretty decent PHD2 statistics (sorry I don't have the numbers to hand on this PC). I do sometimes struggle with locating targets though and I wonder if this is a backlash issue with the mount, as slewing large distances often means I have to recalibrate. The cost of the belt mod doesn't worry me, but having attempted to loosen some screws on the mount previously and them being so stuck as to feel like they're starting to strip the heads, this worries me a bit. Any comments on belt modding?

Any other thoughts or comments are gratefully received because I have this great equipment sitting in a shed and right now I just can't get it out to use because the camera is so unreliable and I'd love to get back into the hobby properly. 

Here are a few of my best shots taken to date using the 550D (when it worked!) on the 130-PDS and NEQ6.  I'm guilty of pushing the subs too hard and not suppressing the noise enough probably, but.. sue me

Thanks a lot for looking!

 

M42

M1

M51

M31

Flame & horsehead

Edited August 9, 2020 by sagramore
Added one more question!

[ollypenrice]

Let's start here:

• Additionally, my current processing relies mostly on DeepSkyStacker and Photoshop. I have heard some horror stories about how much harder it is to process images from mono+filter cameras vs "one-shot" DLSR imaging. I like to think I'm a reasonably smart guy, with a scientific background, but how much steeper is the learning curve?? I don't want to spend the money on the great kit and then find out I can't actually use any of the data!

With minimal knowledge of how to use a computer I went straight into mono-with-filters imaging and got results on the first night.  I do my stacking and calibrating in AstroArt 5 (cheap, simple, fast and effective.) This is the procedure: stack your reds, your greens and your blues separately. Open them. Click to 'align all images.' Open Colour-Trichromy, tick White Balance, put the red file in the red box, the blue in the blue box etc and say go. That's your RGB. How can that be difficult?  You then stack your luminance.  My next two step are in Pixinsight but they can be done in Ps if you buy the plug-in Gradient Xterminator (which you should anyway if you don't have PI.) The idea is to balance colours and remove gradients which you have to do with OSC images as well.

Now you process the RGB and luminance separately. This makes life much easier and is often done by OSC imagers who extract a synthetic luminance from their OSC file. The colour does not need detail. Really it needs strong colour and low noise and little else so it's a dead simple process. No sharpening, no need to worry about careless noise reduction, no need to extract fine details. Next the luminance. Because this was captured with all the light hitting all the pixels it is very strong in signal to noise so it is easy to extract faint signal and easy to sharpen the bright. Paste the L onto the RGB in blend mode luminance and that's it. In my experience it is easier to get a good image from LRGB than from OSC.

Caveat: I just processed 32 panels for a mosaic from a new generation QSI CMOS OSC camera and this was nothing like any OSC camera I've ever used before. The data were sensational. However, if you are fighting LP and want to do pure narrowband then mono remains best.

Regarding upgrades, a cooled astro camera will beat a DSLR. If you want to stay with OSC you can with a CMOS chip. If going for CCD I remain convinced that mono wins quite easily.

Olly

[Whistlin Bob]

I can help in some points.

Moved from a 550d to an asi1600mm with the ZWO LRGB and narrowband filter kids at Christmas. It performs superbly:  much more responsive than the 550d in most respects, although I did find my 550d has excellent Ha response. 

I use it on a 130pds and a 200p- I did need to trim a little more off the drawtube on the 130, the 200p was fine. The focus lock must be in to prevent tube sag I've found though. But these are minor challenges: overall I'm very happy with the outcome.

For processing I can't help you so much: I use Pixinsight which has excellent tools for mono- although it does take longer. But you see plenty of excellent mono pictures processed with other packages, so it's clearly not impossible.

[groberts]

8 hours ago, sagramore said:

Now - the problem. I've always had some issues with the Canon 550D disconnecting during imaging. Originally it was pretty minor, and some sessions I'd have no problems at all. However, lately, it has become unusable as it disconnects CONSTANTLY, which means that even setting up and focusing is infuriating, and once I manage to frame a target, usually I have to quit anyway because I can't run any subs longer than a few seconds without manually reconnecting the camera to the laptop. I have tried different USB cables and different USB ports, I've also tried with and without a USB hub. It's always the same. I can't be 100% sure it's not the laptop, but it feels a lot more like a camera problem than a laptop problem.

I wonder how you power your camera? Some years ago when using a Canon DSLR powered by a mains power adapter the camera went down and after weeks of searching I finally discovered that it was probably a microscopic crack in the cable from the adapter to the camera - new adapter and it was working again, see here for more   https://watchthisspaceman.wordpress.com/2016/08/11/the-eagle-has-landed/

Good luck.

  

Edited August 10, 2020 by groberts

[carastro]

Moving from a DSLR to a cooled camera will be a big improvement, but moving to a mono camera rather than a OSC will give you much more detail and flexibility. 

I did this some years ago and would never now go back to a coloured camera.  Mono gives you much more detail than a coloured camera, and you also have the option of imaging narrowband as many targets revealed themselves better in Narrowband.

I haven't read through Olly's post, as I know we are in perfect harmony over mono imaging so I can safely say I agree with him. 

Regarding processing, lots of people love Pixinsight, but I decided to stick with Photoshop as it suits me, and does everything I need.  So no need to move unless you really want to.

The coma corrector should be fine for other cameras. 

Combining mono filters takes a little longer to do than simply processing a OSC image, but well worth it when you see the results.   If I can do it, you can do it. 

Carole  

Edited August 10, 2020 by carastro

[sagramore]

5 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Let's start here:

• Additionally, my current processing relies mostly on DeepSkyStacker and Photoshop. I have heard some horror stories about how much harder it is to process images from mono+filter cameras vs "one-shot" DLSR imaging. I like to think I'm a reasonably smart guy, with a scientific background, but how much steeper is the learning curve?? I don't want to spend the money on the great kit and then find out I can't actually use any of the data!

With minimal knowledge of how to use a computer I went straight into mono-with-filters imaging and got results on the first night.  I do my stacking and calibrating in AstroArt 5 (cheap, simple, fast and effective.) This is the procedure: stack your reds, your greens and your blues separately. Open them. Click to 'align all images.' Open Colour-Trichromy, tick White Balance, put the red file in the red box, the blue in the blue box etc and say go. That's your RGB. How can that be difficult?  You then stack your luminance.  My next two step are in Pixinsight but they can be done in Ps if you buy the plug-in Gradient Xterminator (which you should anyway if you don't have PI.) The idea is to balance colours and remove gradients which you have to do with OSC images as well.

Now you process the RGB and luminance separately. This makes life much easier and is often done by OSC imagers who extract a synthetic luminance from their OSC file. The colour does not need detail. Really it needs strong colour and low noise and little else so it's a dead simple process. No sharpening, no need to worry about careless noise reduction, no need to extract fine details. Next the luminance. Because this was captured with all the light hitting all the pixels it is very strong in signal to noise so it is easy to extract faint signal and easy to sharpen the bright. Paste the L onto the RGB in blend mode luminance and that's it. In my experience it is easier to get a good image from LRGB than from OSC.

Caveat: I just processed 32 panels for a mosaic from a new generation QSI CMOS OSC camera and this was nothing like any OSC camera I've ever used before. The data were sensational. However, if you are fighting LP and want to do pure narrowband then mono remains best.

Regarding upgrades, a cooled astro camera will beat a DSLR. If you want to stay with OSC you can with a CMOS chip. If going for CCD I remain convinced that mono wins quite easily.

Olly

Thank you Olly, that has certainly helped alleviate some fears I had and is very useful information RE: AstroArt 5 and your processing methods.

 

5 hours ago, Whistlin Bob said:

I can help in some points.

Moved from a 550d to an asi1600mm with the ZWO LRGB and narrowband filter kids at Christmas. It performs superbly:  much more responsive than the 550d in most respects, although I did find my 550d has excellent Ha response. 

I use it on a 130pds and a 200p- I did need to trim a little more off the drawtube on the 130, the 200p was fine. The focus lock must be in to prevent tube sag I've found though. But these are minor challenges: overall I'm very happy with the outcome.

For processing I can't help you so much: I use Pixinsight which has excellent tools for mono- although it does take longer. But you see plenty of excellent mono pictures processed with other packages, so it's clearly not impossible.

It sounds like we have (had?) incredibly similar setups as I have both the 130pds and a 200P dob to go with my 550D. It's comforting to hear that moving from the 550D to the ZWO1600 should be feasible without needing to modify the 130pds itself, or at least only minimally, as I've already been through that process once and while I could do it again if necessary I'd prefer not to. Thanks for the comments!

 

5 hours ago, groberts said:

I wonder how you power your camera? Some years ago when using a Canon DSLR powered by a mains power adapter the camera went down and after weeks of searching I finally discovered that it was probably a microscopic crack in the cable from the adapter to the camera - new adapter and it was working again, see here for more   https://watchthisspaceman.wordpress.com/2016/08/11/the-eagle-has-landed/

Good luck.

  

Thanks for the comment. I still power my 550D by battery (sometimes with the double battery pack, other times with just the single battery in). It's interesting that you mention power because historically, when I first encountered the disconnections, I found that freshly charged batteries helped the issue. That being said, either it was coincidence or the batteries have all degraded together over time, as now it doesn't matter how many batteries or how charged they are - the disconnections are constant and consistent. I had considered buying a mains power adapter for the 550D, but I don't want to sink costs if I am likely to upgrade to a beefier mono camera, especially if it doesn't help!

 

2 hours ago, carastro said:

Moving from a DSLR to a cooled camera will be a big improvement, but moving to a mono camera rather than a OSC will give you much more detail and flexibility. 

I did this some years ago and would never now go back to a coloured camera.  Mono gives you much more detail than a coloured camera, and you also have the option of imaging narrowband as many targets revealed themselves better in Narrowband.

I haven't read through Olly's post, as I know we are in perfect harmony over mono imaging so I can safely say I agree with him. 

Regarding processing, lots of people love Pixinsight, but I decided to stick with Photoshop as it suits me, and does everything I need.  So no need to move unless you really want to.

The coma corrector should be fine for other cameras. 

Combining mono filters takes a little longer to do than simply processing a OSC image, but well worth it when you see the results.   If I can do it, you can do it. 

Carole  

Hi Carole. Thanks for your comments, I often see your posts in the 130PDS thread and enjoy your images. It's helpful to hear that the coma corrector should be fine and that you get your good results with Photoshop. I have bought a few addons for Photoshop (like Gradient Xterminator) so I'd probably stick with it at first regardless of what I choose to upgrade. 

I will admit that, as someone with a scientific background (chemistry and a bit of physics), the idea of narrowband imaging really appeals to me as it would allow me to "see" specific elements emitting or reflecting out there. Maybe cheesy, but it's a nice thought

 

Sorry - I forgot to ask one specific question about this potential setup. Were I to buy in to the ZWO1600MM-Pro with filter wheel and filters (I would probably go for LRGB + Ha + SII + OIII complete set from FLO or similar), I understand that there are differences in the filter diameters. From my limited reading I believe this is all to do with vignetting and illuminating the whole frame of the camera and smaller filters can cause some issues here. Would it be worthwhile opting for the 36mm filters given my setup (using the 0.9x reduced 130PDS)?

 

Thank you all of you for your help so far. You've helped me personally, and probably doomed my wallet as I draw ever closer to pulling the trigger on the mono camera (and probably a belt mod to ensure I don't have any issues with my guiding).

I'd still be very grateful if anyone else has anything more to add to the discussion! Thanks.

Edited August 10, 2020 by sagramore
Added a question about filter sizes!

[groberts]

34 minutes ago, sagramore said:

Sorry - I forgot to ask one specific question about this potential setup. Were I to buy in to the ZWO1600MM-Pro with filter wheel and filters (I would probably go for LRGB + Ha + SII + OIII complete set from FLO or similar), I understand that there are differences in the filter diameters. From my limited reading I believe this is all to do with vignetting and illuminating the whole frame of the camera and smaller filters can cause some issues here. Would it be worthwhile opting for the 36mm filters given my setup (using the 0.9x reduced 130PDS)?

Go to the following attachment and fill in the appropriate numbers to calcukate the minimum filter size for your set-up:

http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/astronomy-calculations/minimize-vignetting/minimize-vignetting.html

which I calculate to be 23.72mm without a Reducer/Barlow.  I use the ZWO1600 + EFW & FF wich gives a similar number and I use 31mm filters + flats with good results. 

[sagramore]

8 minutes ago, groberts said:

Go to the following attachment and fill in the appropriate numbers to calcukate the minimum filter size for your set-up:

http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/astronomy-calculations/minimize-vignetting/minimize-vignetting.html

which I calculate to be 23.72mm without a Reducer/Barlow.  I use the ZWO1600 + EFW & FF wich gives a similar number and I use 31mm filters + flats with good results. 

Thanks for that link! Very useful. 

When I enter my details for the 130PDS, 0.9x CC, the 1600MM sensor (and use the value of 10mm for filter-sensor distance from the FLO website) it says minimum filter diameter should be 24.04 mm (very similar to what you suggested). It sounds like either 1.25" or 31 mm would actually be perfectly sufficient then and there's no need to go all the way to 36 mm diameter ones. That does help (very) slightly with the cost!

[groberts]

The general recommendation from ZWO is :

So 1.25″ filters won’t have vignetting up to F5 focal ratio scope and 31mm filter won’t have vignetting up to F2 lens.

I believe your scope in f5? so borderline + the extra size to 31mm is probably the way to go.  They're a bit fiddly to fit but do a good job - here's my write up of First Light with the camera & FW - you will not regret the move to mono, except for even less sleep! 

https://watchthisspaceman.wordpress.com/2017/03/28/first-light/

 

 

[sagramore]

1 hour ago, groberts said:

The general recommendation from ZWO is :

So 1.25″ filters won’t have vignetting up to F5 focal ratio scope and 31mm filter won’t have vignetting up to F2 lens.

I believe your scope in f5? so borderline + the extra size to 31mm is probably the way to go.  They're a bit fiddly to fit but do a good job - here's my write up of First Light with the camera & FW - you will not regret the move to mono, except for even less sleep! 

https://watchthisspaceman.wordpress.com/2017/03/28/first-light/

 

 

A question on this - when I do the conversion between 1.25" to mm you get 31.75 mm - which would suggest the 1.25" filters are actually larger. However, this clearly isn't the case. Is this because the 31mm filters are "unmounted" and the 1.25" filters include a ring and therefore the filter itself is actually smaller?

[groberts]

Yes you're correct , it's due to the mounting which produces the 1.25" but a smaller effective filter area - the useable aperture of the 1.25" filter is +/- 26-27mm.

Edited August 10, 2020 by groberts

[Allinthehead]

I used 1.25 filters with an Epsilon at f3.3 and a Samyang 135 F2 without issue. You should be fine at f5.

Richard.

[tomato]

Here is my contribution based on my own experience:

I was blown away by the sensitivity of a cooled OSC CCD camera compared to an un-modified DSLR when I made the switch. I then moved to a cooled mono CCD with filters and saw another positive step change in the quality of my images. Having said that, as Olly mentioned, there are some excellent OSC CMOS based cameras available now, this might offer better value for money vs mono camera, filter wheel and filters.

If you are looking at purchasing some dedicated image processing software, please take a look at APP and Startools, the former does a great job of calibration and stacking (both LRGB and OSC files) and has a very good gradient removal tool, while Startools is an easy to use and powerful image processing package. 

There are some good YouTube how to videos on the belt mod procedure, but if you are not comfortable with doing this I wouldn’t make it your top priority.

Your images taken with the DSLR are excellent BTW, and clearly demonstrate you have got to grips with all of the key elements of AP, so I am sure you will achieve the improvements you are looking for, whichever option you go with.

[ollypenrice]

9 hours ago, carastro said:

 

I haven't read through Olly's post, as I know we are in perfect harmony over mono imaging so I can safely say I agree with him. 

 

Carole,

I've just spent a week working through 32 panels of Yves' capture of the Cepheus/Cygnus region.  This was with his QHY full frame CMOS OSC camera. My feeling is that this camera has changed the game - big time. His data bears no resemblance to any OSC data I've ever worked with before and my finger is twitching over the 'spend' button...

https://www.astrobin.com/full/g82xf7/B/?real=&mod=

The Squid has OIII data added. The rest of the image is OSC, pure and simple. No added Ha.

The times they are a'changin'...

Olly

[sagramore]

Thanks again everyone for the really positive and helpful comments. I think... as I said my wallet does not thank you, haha. I'm getting more and more tempted to go for it, especially as I watch some processing videos. It seems that a lot of my previous experience with OSC DSLR is directly applicable and it just needs some other extra steps.

 

 

6 minutes ago, tomato said:

Here is my contribution based on my own experience:

I was blown away by the sensitivity of a cooled OSC CCD camera compared to an un-modified DSLR when I made the switch. I then moved to a cooled mono CCD with filters and saw another positive step change in the quality of my images. Having said that, as Olly mentioned, there are some excellent OSC CMOS based cameras available now, this might offer better value for money vs mono camera, filter wheel and filters.

If you are looking at purchasing some dedicated image processing software, please take a look at APP and Startools, the former does a great job of calibration and stacking (both LRGB and OSC files) and has a very good gradient removal tool, while Startools is an easy to use and powerful image processing package. 

There are some good YouTube how to videos on the belt mod procedure, but if you are not comfortable with doing this I wouldn’t make it your top priority.

Your images taken with the DSLR are excellent BTW, and clearly demonstrate you have got to grips with all of the key elements of AP, so I am sure you will achieve the improvements you are looking for, whichever option you go with.

Thanks, especially for the kind words on the DSLR images!

 

The setup I'm looking at grabbing would be something like this:

• ZWO ASI 1600MM-Pro USB 3.0 Mono, EFW7 Filter Wheel, 31mm LRGB & Ha/SII/OIII Filters
• ZWO 240V AC to 12V 5A DC Power Supply Adapter for Cooled Cameras
• Rowan Astronomy Sky-Watcher EQ6 / NEQ6 / NEQ6 Pro and Orion Atlas EQ-G Belt Mod Kit (with a spare belt in case I screw up and with the Bearing Ring Retainer Removal Tool too)

Can anyone see any serious issues with putting this onto a 130PDS, NEQ6, etc as described in my original post?

[tomato]

I think it is noteworthy that Olly who is a strong advocate of mono + filters is now seriously considering making a OSC camera purchase, food for thought indeed...

On your specific question re the set up, I cannot comment from my own experience as all my recent imaging has been with refractors, however, this  looks to me to be a sound combination based on the FOV calculation, OTA all up weight vs mount capacity, etc.

[sagramore]

16 minutes ago, tomato said:

I think it is noteworthy that Olly who is a strong advocate of mono + filters is now seriously considering making a OSC camera purchase, food for thought indeed...

On your specific question re the set up, I cannot comment from my own experience as all my recent imaging has been with refractors, however, this  looks to me to be a sound combination based on the FOV calculation, OTA all up weight vs mount capacity, etc.

I think you're right RE: OSC - although as I mentioned above, I love the idea of narrowband as well and I imagine that's not as simple with a OSC camera?

Edited August 10, 2020 by sagramore

[tomato]

Until I saw the Yves Van den Broek/Olly Penrice Cepheus/Cygnus mega mosaic I would have agreed that capturing narrowband data was easier with a mono camera, but that image looks for all the world as if it has been supplemented with Ha data. I guess what we need to know are which CMOS cameras currently available display this level of sensitivity, given that the data was captured with what I would call a high end (£3k) CMOS camera, but of course it is a full frame sensor which are always at the top end of the price range.

[sagramore]

That makes sense. Although if the OSC CCD option is going to be notably more expensive than ~£1800 for the ZWO 1600MM pro then I'm probably going to stick with mono for now as that's already really stretching what I'm happy to spend

[DaveS]

Until I needed Maxim DL for my ASA mounts I used AstroArt 5 for my capture as well as stacking and post. I still use AA7 which has some brilliant gradient removal tools, only moving to Affinity Photo for final polishing.

As for cameras, although the QHY OSC sounds interesting I would always go with mono as it is more versatile with NB.

Don't discount AstroArt. Although there are new "Flavour of the Month" packages it punches well above its price point, and is still being developed and supported.. SP4 is pout now for AA7.