ASI294MM-Pro vs ASI2600MC-Pro

[barbulo]

Thinking about moving to a dedicated astro-cam some day, I wonder which option would be better and why: ASI294MM-Pro or ASI2600MC-Pro. These are my thoughts so far:

1. The APS-C sensor of the 2600 size is very attractive: 26Mpx vs 11,7Mpx of the 294 (not taking into account the un-binned mode).
2. On the other hand, the pixel size of the 2600 is less suitable for my current scope (FL=1000), giving 0,78"/sec if I'm not wrong. Better seeing and/or more precise guiding would be needed.
3. Both have a fair QE and FW capacity, slightly better the 294 though.
4. ASI2600MC is about 200€ cheaper than the ASI294MM set (included FW, filters and OAG). Adding a 2" filter for LP to the 2600 would probably match the prices.

Comments are more than welcome.

[CloudMagnet]

Both are good cameras so I don't think you would go wrong with either. From reading reviews, the 2600 is the better camera overall but has the bigger price to match.

I had the same decision when I moved to a dedicated astrocam, using my Skywatcher 200p means my setup is very similar to yours and I ended up going the a third option, the ZWO 071MC Pro. Never really regretted it as it's a good halfway mark between the other two. Some have reported in the past that the 294 has difficulties with calibrating so leaves artifacts on images and I didn't want the smaller pixel size as you suggested with the 2600.

Something to consider -if you are also going down the mono route, then I would also look at the ZWO 1600 Pro, has been used for a good few years now and is fairly popular.

[Budgie1]

I'd have thought the first thing to decide is whether to you want a colour or mono camera. Then look at which of the available cameras suit the scope you have or intend to get.

If you want to go with colour then the ASI294MC-Pro has the pixel size to suit your scope and so does the ASI071MC, as mentioned above. Of the two, I would be looking at the ASI071 for the larger sensor and no amp glow. You've sort of ruled out the ASI2600MC due to the match with your FL=1000 scope, although if you think you can work with it then this would be a good option as well and also lacks the amp glow of the 294.

If you want to go with a mono camera and are worried about the pixel size then you're limited to the ASI294MM-Pro or a lot more money for the ASI6200MM-Pro + filter wheel + filters. The ASI1600MM has a pixel size very similar to the ASI2600MC and there are plenty of deals around for this camera which include the filter wheel and LRGB + Ha, Oiii & Sii filters, all of which are cheaper then the ASI2600MC.

It's a large outlay so careful consideration is needed to make sure you get what's right for you.

[barbulo]

Thank you @CloudMagnet and @Budgie1

I was considering the ASI294MM and the ASI2600MC because they are the latest models in each segment, for a similar price (reachable in the mid term).

38 minutes ago, Budgie1 said:

I'd have thought the first thing to decide is whether to you want a colour or mono camera.

That’s the big dilema. I’m not afraid of the relative complexity of the mono set compared to the OSC. Some people refuse to add another chance of failure and follow the OSC path, but I consider it as part of the joke. However, I’ve seen astounding images from the 2600MC. And the FOV would be wider. 
What I’d like to find out is with which one I could obtain better results. 🤯

[vlaiv]

I think that OSC vs Mono debate should be settled by asking following question: do you intend to do anything other than just pure color imaging?

If you think of doing:

- Narrow band

- Spectroscopy

- Photometry

and really need mono - then yes, mono is logical choice.

If you think solely in terms of imaging - then: Yes, mono will be faster - but only if you make it faster. In order for mono to actually be faster and produce deeper image for same imaging time - you need to be careful of how you shoot and process your data. Simple LRGB 1:1:1:1 vs normal OSC for same total imaging time - will make minimal distinction in quality. In fact - accurate color is easier to get with OSC camera than mono + interference filters.

For mono to be significantly faster - you need to shoot more luminance and bin your color data and then compose data in particular way.

I would not worry about sampling rate of either camera - both will over sample - but both are CMOS cameras and can be binned in software to match actual resolution. What you need to consider is:

1. Is your scope capable of illuminating APS-C sized sensor properly and

2. Is your scope corrected properly for APS-C sized sensor

That of course depends on how good you want your images to be. If you don't mind imperfect stars in the corners and less SNR - if you crop your data anyway - then get APS-C sensor. Otherwise, I think that 4/3 is better match for newtonian scope up to 8".

[barbulo]

Thank you for your answer @vlaiv, precise and illustrative as always.
As you mentioned in other post, we shouldn’t be obsessed with mega pixel and pixel size but with other aspects. 
Two drawbacks of the 294 I have read about are the high Amp Glow and the Flats issues.
I will follow those threads since the decision will not be imminent, but for the moment mono path is ahead. 

[Budgie1]

With the 294MC that I have, the amp glow has never been a problem because the dark calibration files deal with it during stacking. I would imagine the mono version will be the same. 

As for the flats, I have had issues in the past when using the L-eXtreme filter but a bit of research and trial & error managed to sort that out as well. It's a different technique to taking flats with a DSLR. I use about 5 layers of a white T-shirt and a cloudy sky, which seems to work for me. Admittedly, other cameras are easier to use for flats, but I haven't got one of those!