Choosing between IMX455 and IMX571 cameras.

[tooth_dr]

1 hour ago, gorann said:

Is there a mono APS-C that can be bought now?

Due for delivery in Jan 2021. 

[Ken82]

13 hours ago, Stuart1971 said:

I have the FSQ85 and no way will you get 44mm image circle, not without the new flattener for the 85 and a full frame sensor...

You will get 30mm at best with native FSQ85 scope....👍

Sounds about right for the Fsq 85 without the additional flattener. The Fsq 106 is much better in this respect, assuming you have a good tilt adapter then the whole frame is usable with the asi 6200 and fsq 106. 

I've yet to buy the additional flattener for the baby Q but id expect it to be similar to the 106. Or ill just continue software binning/cropping my images until i find the perfect scope haha. 

 

Here is the fsq 85 and asi 6200. Ill have a look for some images i took with the fsq 106 and CTU tilt adapter but they are much better. 

 

Id definitely get 50mm unmounted filters especially if your scope is faster than f5! I was getting huge star reflections where the star was hitting the metal frame of the filter until i changed to 50mm unmounted. 

Ken 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Ken82

[tooth_dr]

1 minute ago, Ken82 said:

Sounds about right for the Fsq 85 without the additional flattener. The Fsq 106 is much better in this respect, assuming you have a good tilt adapter then the whole frame is usable with the asi 6200 and fsq 106. 

I've yet to buy the additional flattener for the baby Q but id expect it to be similar to the 106. Or ill just continue software binning/cropping my images until i find the perfect scope haha. 

 

Here is the fsq 85 and asi 6200. Ill have a look for some images i took with the fsq 106 and CTU tilt adapter but they are much better. 

 

Id definitely get 50mm unmounted filters especially if your scope is faster than f5! I was getting huge star reflections where the star was hitting the metal frame of the filter until i changed to 50mm unmounted. 

Ken 

Thanks Ken. I’m pretty sure now this has confirmed to me that the FF sensor isn’t suitable. The additional cost of filters etc isn’t something I can absorb.  I’ve £4100 to play with, some of which will come from sale of a 2 x CCDs that I currently own. 

[Allinthehead]

I reckon you won't go wrong with the imx571 and the 180. If you're after the mono version too then get your name down with your favorite supplier as this camera will be in very high demand. 

[tooth_dr]

1 hour ago, Allinthehead said:

I reckon you won't go wrong with the imx571 and the 180. If you're after the mono version too then get your name down with your favorite supplier as this camera will be in very high demand. 

I think you are right.  I just need to decide which model now.  I’ve been set on the QHY268 but I’d need to read into the other variants. 

[Allinthehead]

I think it's the right call, the imx455 with the size of the pixels would drive you nuts trying to get the corners sorted on your Epsilon. 

I can vouch for the Zwo version as it's been flawless for me so far and the qhy version is supposed to be excellent too. The Qhy has more options in the driver settings but it's not something I miss. I was set up for the backfocus of the Zwo so that's why I chose it.

[gorann]

@Allinthehead @tooth_drWhere do you line up for these APS-C mono cameras? I cannot even find them on the ZWO, QHY or ATIK web pages. Are you sure they will ever be produced?

[Allinthehead]

1 minute ago, gorann said:

@Allinthehead @tooth_drWhere do you line up for these APS-C mono cameras? I cannot even find them on the ZWO, QHY or ATIK web pages. Are you sure they will ever be produced?

No queue yet, but I'm sure most suppliers would take your early interest into consideration when they become available, scheduled for Jan 21 I believe. Sony have a mono version of 571 and both Qhy and Zwo have confirmed they will be coming to market soon.

[Laurin Dave]

4 minutes ago, gorann said:

@Allinthehead @tooth_drWhere do you line up for these APS-C mono cameras? I cannot even find them on the ZWO, QHY or ATIK web pages. Are you sure they will ever be produced?

ZWO's Sam... (the owner I believe) has said on their Facebook page that they'll be out early next year..    and Sony have announced manufacture of the mono chip, we can but wait..  

Dave

[gorann]

1 hour ago, Allinthehead said:

No queue yet, but I'm sure most suppliers would take your early interest into consideration when they become available, scheduled for Jan 21 I believe. Sony have a mono version of 571 and both Qhy and Zwo have confirmed they will be coming to market soon.

 

1 hour ago, Laurin Dave said:

ZWO's Sam... (the owner I believe) has said on their Facebook page that they'll be out early next year..    and Sony have announced manufacture of the mono chip, we can but wait..  

Dave

If it finally happens, it will for sure be a bestseller. I just wonder why the rumors about this have been going on for so long and so far it has not materialized. There is even this supplier saying that it is temporarily sold out.....

https://cloudbreakoptics.com/products/268m

[Adam J]

ATIK are bound to come out with a varient too i would think.

[tooth_dr]

Just now, Adam J said:

ATIK are bound to come out with a varient too i would think.

Is there any advantage to waiting for an Atik variant to go along with my Atik EFW3

[Adam J]

2 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

Is there any advantage to waiting for an Atik variant to go along with my Atik EFW3

you may be waiting 6 - 12 months based on their past releases relative to ZWO, but i like the idea of local service and their build quality / accessable tilt plate design.

[tooth_dr]

Just now, Adam J said:

you may be waiting 6 - 12 months based on their past releases relative to ZWO, but i like the idea of local service and their build quality / accessable tilt plate design.

Thanks for the info. Too long for me I think 

[tooth_dr]

With regards to colour versions - the ZWO 2600MC seems like the better choice out of the two versions (QHY and ZWO).  But it mentions M42 and possible vignetting on fast systems.   Is this an issue at F2.8?

Will it be possible to use 1.25” filters with the mono sensor, or will the vignetting be uncorrectable.  Say at around F5-F6.  Essentially what I’m trying to establish is can I get away with my current 9x1.250 EFW or do I sell the filters and buy a new carousel and bigger filters.

Based on the current images on here with the colour version of the 571, is it even beneficial to have two mono. And simply run one mono and one OSC, and use the latter for supplemental NB along with the mono.

 

[DaveS]

1.25" filters will vignette at any f-ratio.

[tooth_dr]

2 minutes ago, DaveS said:

1.25" filters will vignette at any f-ratio.

Indeed but I was asking if it’s correctable with flats or not?

Edited November 15, 2020 by tooth_dr

[DaveS]

I think you will need 36mm unmounted to be safe.

[DaveS]

According to the FLO site the diagonal is 28.3mm, while a ZWO 1.25" filter I had around measured 25.8mm, therefore not correctable as it's smaller than the diagonal.

[Ken82]

It’s also depends on the distance from the sensor. For aps-c type sensor I’d go for 2” mounted to be safe. 
 

Personally I’d go for the zwo version over the qhy but that’s personal bias having owned 4 zwo cameras without issue. Also I’m sure I was reading some problems with qhy drivers but please don’t take that as gospel and make your own judgement. 
 

Ken 

[gorann]

I would also recommend 2" filters. Then you also have the filters you need if you get a full frame APS. The Esprit 150 with ASI6200 images I posted above was through a 2" Baader IR/UV filter and vignetting was minimal. Also, using APS-C on a fast system you need 2" filters.

Edited November 15, 2020 by gorann

[Ken82]

5 minutes ago, gorann said:

I would also recommend 2" filters. Then you also have the filters you need if you get a full frame APS. The Esprit 150 with ASI6200 images I posted above was through a 2" Baader IR/UV filter and vignetting was minimal. Also, using APS-C on a fast system you need 2" filters.

Agreed Göran, I see you also have the star reflection issue to the bottom left of your image that i was fighting with. Although yours is very acceptable at F7 compared to my F5. 

Id honestly advise anyone looking to use one of the new full frame sensors with a scope F5 and under to get 50mm unmounted filters.

Lovely images BTW Göran and well corrected to the edges. 

 

Ken 

[tooth_dr]

Thanks for the info, I suspected as much but good for confirmation 👍🏻

I captured 4 hours of OSC data with my Nikon FF DSLR on the epsilon and (apart from the collimation issues) I found it better/equal to 4 hours from my KAF8300 in luminance.  Better is subjective, but after processing the lum and thinking of adding it to the colour, it added nothing of improvement to the image, the detail was already there. Perhaps it’s pixel size or lack of QE or bad conditions or ineptitude at processing or the scope...

So as a total curveball I was thinking of

1) buying an Esprit 120 with field flattener and using my Nikon D800E - it offers a 44mm imaging circle

and also 

2) buying the Mono IMX571 camera and using it with the Epsilon and existing 2” EFW setup.

 

It will be tight for the shutter width on the dome, being an extra 2cm wider, but I still have room, just.

Downside - lack of versatility on the RGB size, unmodified DSLR, lack of Ha.

 

Seems a decent match up in terms of field of view:

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Laurin Dave]

An even better fov match would be an Esprit 80 plus an ASI1600 or better still ASI294mm for slightly bigger fov  higher QE and no microlensing...  this will provide excellent NB performance..  and might fit your dome better

[tooth_dr]

9 hours ago, Laurin Dave said:

An even better fov match would be an Esprit 80 plus an ASI1600 or better still ASI294mm for slightly bigger fov  higher QE and no microlensing...  this will provide excellent NB performance..  and might fit your dome better

Thanks Dave It does seem like a better FOV match, at the expense of resolution.  I do have my solar scope mounted on my ED80, the Esprit 80 seems to lack space to do this, and comes with a foot rather than rings.

 

I did some measurements today with my other setup.  It uses an OAG mounted directly to an MPCC and replaces the epsilon during galaxy season, so it would be using the IMX571 camera for a few months:

 

OAG=16.6mm + EFW=22mm + allowing 1.0mm for filters means I've used up 39.6mm

Total backfocus requirements of MPCC from M48 ring = 57.5mm

This leaves me 17.9mm for the camera backfocus.

 

The QHY268M has something funny going on with the diagrams.  It looks like 17.5mm, but then there is another diagram with 23.5mm.  If that was the case then this camera wont work for me.  It looks like you need some additional adapter added onto it, seems odd saying it's 17.5mm backfocus if that the case.