Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_2.thumb.jpg.72789c04780d7659f5b63ea05534a956.jpg

Which Dedicated Astro Camera - Help Needed :)


Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, david_taurus83 said:

Its still a good camera.

 

 

The effect though undesirable is far from ruining the image in my opinion.

This was a 90min test shot i did last year. No Lum just RGB in 30s exposures. No calibration (flats) hence its not too good, but i think the stars are not too bad.

current-combine-RGB-tool-image-St-lpc-cbg-St.thumb.jpg.ee5eff3133aa88ccc3ef59a7acd5c752.jpg

Adam

Edited by Adam J
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yeah I've seen some very good OSC images from under heavy light pollution with  a decent amount of integration time and using the likes of the Radian Triad Quadband (stupidly priced) and Optolong L ex

In a "sport" that aims to make every photon count, you want to crop your sensor and throw away captured photons? Sacrilege!

First things first - don't worry about under sampling. Two reasons for that - first is that under sampling is not a bad thing in itself. It is just a working resolution and lower working resoluti

Posted Images

11 hours ago, david_taurus83 said:

Its still a good camera.

 

1073620667_M45LRGB2.jpg.9066e460ad7dba5ac249f45c6f14e8b9_optimized.jpg

Great image - I imagined that the M45 would be terrible for the microlensing but apparently not, at least with skilful processing👌

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

Great image - I imagined that the M45 would be terrible for the microlensing but apparently not, at least with skilful processing👌

Thanks. That was my first attempt at LRGB (1 hour each) when I got that camera. I think I was lucky though with my WO GT71 and 0.8 reducer as it seemed to tame the microlensing. I tried a Hotech SCA flattener and bright stars gave terrible kaleidoscopic artifacts so I guess its luck of the draw with whatever optics you have. Below is 4 hours of 15 minute Ha subs taken with the WO kit and its just starting to show through on Alnitak. Still well controlled.

 

IC434 4hrs_optimized.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, david_taurus83 said:

Thanks. That was my first attempt at LRGB (1 hour each) when I got that camera. I think I was lucky though with my WO GT71 and 0.8 reducer as it seemed to tame the microlensing. I tried a Hotech SCA flattener and bright stars gave terrible kaleidoscopic artifacts so I guess its luck of the draw with whatever optics you have. Below is 4 hours of 15 minute Ha subs taken with the WO kit and its just starting to show through on Alnitak. Still well controlled.

 

IC434 4hrs_optimized.jpg

Yes, you have been lucky with the optics👍. I can even just about see in there that Alnitak is a double star (that little brighter spot to the left).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been doing at bit more digging on this and mono is starting to win the race 😂

I've been looking at the ASI 1600MM Pro kit from FLO with the EFW and LRGB, Ha/OII and SIII filters, however I have read very mixed reviews on the ZWO filters ranging from rubbish to useable. Has anyone any experience with the ZWO filters and is it worth buying the kit or just buying everything separately and choosing a different brand of filter?

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I purchased the original ZWO filters with my 1600mm-cool a few years back and while there are plenty of threads that discuss the issues, I found them fine for my first excursion into mono imaging and they will produce very good images. The new Mk2 ZWO filters you would be getting if buying new, are an improvement and great value for someone transitioning to mono imaging and wanting to offset the cost.

Yes there are better filters but they come at a cost.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Xsubmariner said:

I purchased the original ZWO filters with my 1600mm-cool a few years back and while there are plenty of threads that discuss the issues, I found them fine for my first excursion into mono imaging and they will produce very good images. The new Mk2 ZWO filters you would be getting if buying new, are an improvement and great value for someone transitioning to mono imaging and wanting to offset the cost.

Yes there are better filters but they come at a cost.

Thank you @Xsubmariner that's good to know. Yeah the cost of certain filters are mental so it would be good to just buy a complete package initially and then upgrade if I ever felt the need to :) 

In terms of using a mono camera as far as I understand, I can image in:

1. Solely LRGB to build a full colour image of my intended target

2. Solely in Ha/S/O narrowband and assign each wavelength to the corresponding colour channel

3. Use LRGB plus Ha/S/O to bring out even more detail

Is this correct?

Additionally I don't have pixinsight so everything would need to be stacked in DSS and processed in photoshop so not sure if it would be worthwhile throwing pixinsight into the mix as well (I just don't want to deal with new processing workflow along with mono imaging at the same time). I have processed LRGB datasets using the colour composting within Siril then processing in photoshop so I'm guessing I could do the same. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stuf1978 said:

 

Additionally I don't have pixinsight so everything would need to be stacked in DSS and processed in photoshop . 

Hi Surf,

Pixinsight has a steep learning curve and starting mono imaging can be demanding.  I would recommend anyone starting out to use a simple processing application that will give good images, quickly.  Its all to easy for people to become disillusioned when they struggle with the software. I started out with Nebulosity 4.0 which is very intuitive, then migrated to pixinsight once my skills were ready for a more complex process.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Xsubmariner said:

Hi Surf,

Pixinsight has a steep learning curve and starting mono imaging can be demanding.  I would recommend anyone starting out to use a simple processing application that will give good images, quickly.  Its all to easy for people to become disillusioned when they struggle with the software. I started out with Nebulosity 4.0 which is very intuitive, then migrated to pixinsight once my skills were ready for a more complex process.

That's what I thought to be fair. I'd stick with with my current workflow for the minute as I don't want to take too much on at once. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Stuf1978 said:

I've been doing at bit more digging on this and mono is starting to win the race 😂

I've been looking at the ASI 1600MM Pro kit from FLO with the EFW and LRGB, Ha/OII and SIII filters, however I have read very mixed reviews on the ZWO filters ranging from rubbish to useable. Has anyone any experience with the ZWO filters and is it worth buying the kit or just buying everything separately and choosing a different brand of filter?

Thanks

Just check my astrobin page. I use zwo filters (lrgb) exclusively, atm.

https://www.astrobin.com/users/wimvb/

Edited by wimvb
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no need to wrestle with PI, AstroArt 7 can handle your capture, and the latest version has guiding and plate solving, plus is a very underrated image processing package, just not "flavour of the month".

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DaveS said:

There's no need to wrestle with PI, AstroArt 7 can handle your capture, and the latest version has guiding and plate solving, plus is a very underrated image processing package, just not "flavour of the month".

Thanks, to be honest as long as I can combine channels in Siril and process in Photoshop I'll be happy 👍

Link to post
Share on other sites

I second the vote for Astro Art 7.  I have been using it since v2 and it just keeps getting better.  I control the scope, plate solve, focus, guide and camera control.  Then I use it for pre-processing and post processing.  Not many use it over on this side of the pond but I sing it's praises whenever I can.  This image was done completely with AA7.  I processed OSC data like it was mono and was amazed at what I could pull out.   60 x 120 seconds. No filters 150mm F2.8 Hyper Newt astrograph. 

 

John Love
CCD-Freak
WD5IKX

 

M78-Cal-Sigma-crop-GR-Curves-DN-CS-2x2-mono-3-LBL.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/10/2020 at 17:24, Stuf1978 said:

Must admit that's a very nice image 👍

Out of curiosity:

which gear did you use?

Thanks

... I am in the same boat and I have window of ~5 days to get a deal-ish between 533 and 294

Thank you for your time
M

Edited by astrorg
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/10/2020 at 12:21, vlaiv said:

First things first - don't worry about under sampling.

Two reasons for that - first is that under sampling is not a bad thing in itself. It is just a working resolution and lower working resolution just means wider field of view (over sampling is a bad thing as you loose SNR and gain nothing in return).

Second thing - you are worrying about under sampling with camera lens. You should not. Camera lens are not diffraction limited and star image that they are producing is much larger than aperture would suggest.

To prove my point, here is measurement of Samyang 85mm F/1.4 lens that I did with artificial star:

No filter at F/1.4 - Red: 2.66, Green: 2.48, Blue: 2.30
No filter at F/2.0 - Red: 3.82, Green: 2.28, Blue: 2.42
No filter at F/2.8 - Red: 2.53, Green: 2.36, Blue: 2.31
No filter at F/4.0 - Red: 2.24, Green: 2.27, Blue: 2.29

Values that you see are FWHM of different channels expressed in pixels and pixel size is 4.8µm.

Best of these values are around 2.3px or if we convert that into microns - 11.04µm. FWHM of 11.04µm requires pixel size of 6.9µm to be properly sampled.

...

You always give straight answers ... i.e. First things first - don't worry about under sampling.
At first I thought it was under-sampling, I went back to look and it is in fact OVER-sampling. Getting happier by the minute!

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

Out of curiosity:

which gear did you use?

Thanks

... I am in the same boat and I have window of ~5 days to get a deal-ish between 533 and 294

Thank you for your time
M

I'm still completely undecided to be honest, although it is between the 294mc pro and 1600mm pro. I can see the benefits to going mono but I'm not sure I want to jump into or in fact if I'm ready for this just yet. It's a tough decision 😆

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stuf1978 said:

I'm still completely undecided to be honest, although it is between the 294mc pro and 1600mm pro. I can see the benefits to going mono but I'm not sure I want to jump into or in fact if I'm ready for this just yet. It's a tough decision 😆

Can I make it a bit tougher then? Add the ASI294MM to the list. Unfortunately no package deals yet, so about 200 £ more expensive than the ASI1600MM. Same sensor size as the 1600, but larger pixels, 14 bit ADC, and higher dynamic range, so those 14 bit are put to good use.

Edited by wimvb
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, wimvb said:

Can I make it a bit tougher then? Add the ASI294MM to the list. Unfortunately no package deals yet, so about 200 £ more expensive than the ASI1600MM. Same sensor size as the 1600, but larger pixels, 14 bit ADC, and higher dynamic range, so those 14 bit are put to good use.

Thanks 😂 Sounds good though

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.