Camera quandry for Redcat 51

[trailer]

A recent recruit to the astro world I am now looking at getting a dedicated camera for my Redcat. At present I have it set up with a Star Adventurer which is aligned with a QHY Polemaster and guided with a ZWO 120mm Mini camera/scope via an RPi4/Astroberry. The camera I am currently imaging with is a Sony A7iii. (I'm pretty happy with the Sony although for the life of me I cannot get EKOS to control the Sony imaging and am using an wired intervalometer but that's another issue!). I've had my eyes on a ZWO 294MC Pro for a while now but before hitting the buy button I am still not sure if the resolution / pixel size etc would be a good match for my set up. The more I read the more it becomes less clear when comparing the 294 to the 183 or the 533 for instance.

I'd be grateful for any advice from any of you wise owls and thanks in advance.

Jim

[Adreneline]

30 minutes ago, trailer said:

I've had my eyes on a ZWO 294MC Pro

I've recently bought the 294 to use with my RedCat and my Samyang 135 fully aware of the fact that the images will be undersampled. That said I've been more than happy with the results recognising the RedCat + 294 is a widefield imaging setup and I for one don't go in for pixel peeping on widefield images.

I also have a 6" RC with a .7 f/r which is a very good match for the 294 and although to date I have done very little with this pairing it has given encouraging results which will stand up to a fair degree of pixel peeping.

You never know what you might buy in the future but it might not be unreasonable to assume it will have a longer focal length than the RedCat.

HTH

Adrian

[CraigT82]

How happy with you with the detail/resolution from the A7iii on the redcat?  That has bigger pixels (5.93um from a quick search) than any of the ZWO offerings so if you are happy with that detail then you'll be more than happy with the 294 I'd imagine?

[trailer]

@Adreneline Thanks for your input and a great point with regard to future proofing. Something I hadn't thought of. I had a look at your images with the 294 and it looks perfectly good to me!

@CraigT82 I don't have anything to compare the Sony to at present but what I am getting seems to be OK I think. Anything better would be certainly fine as you said.

This is one I took a couple of weeks ago whilst getting the guiding set up. No filters or calibration frames and around 20ish x4 minute lights. My first nebula attempt so I don't think that it is too bad(!) - apart from the processing - work in progress.

[The Lazy Astronomer]

A suggestion for a slightly different direction: the 294MM has the option of either native 4.63um pixels (same as 294MC) or in "unlocked" mode, 2.31um pixels - this would allow you to choose pixel size for desired sampling rate. Obviously you'd have to also get filters and a wheel/drawer for colour imaging, but something to think about maybe.

[The Admiral]

6 minutes ago, The Lazy Astronomer said:

A suggestion for a slightly different direction: the 294MM has the option of either native 4.63um pixels (same as 294MC) or in "unlocked" mode, 2.31um pixels - this would allow you to choose pixel size for desired sampling rate. Obviously you'd have to also get filters and a wheel/drawer for colour imaging, but something to think about maybe.

I've read that too, but it has left me wondering whether this just applies to the mono version. I don't see how that can be compatible with a Bayer array of the OSC version. Perhaps a 294MC user can confirm?

DOH! Why didn't I read your reply properly 😀.

Ian

Edited March 28, 2021 by The Admiral
Got it wrong!

[trailer]

@TheLazyAstronomer@The Admiral Many thanks for the information. I think I had read that somewhere in the not so distant past about the MM and the MC but it didn't click with me. I think I understand why you would have the options now to give you the best choice for the set up that you have. I'm still not entirely sure if I'm ready for the step up to the Mono/filtering route quite yet but definitely more food for thought though 👍