Would like opinions on choosing a mono camera

[AndrewRrrrrr]

Hi All,

I've been using my modded Canon 40D for a year or so now and really enjoying the whole astroimaging thing after being visual only for many years.

I have a C8 with a 6.3 FR and also an Altair Astro Wave 80, with an NEQ6 mount.

I'm looking to upgrade my camera and have been given war office clearance to invest about a £1000 plus whatever I can get for selling my Canon plus the bits and bobs (l-enhance clip-in, lens etc) I have with it. 

I'll be happy to get just the camera and a wheel initially and then get the filters as I can save up for them - will get there in the end.

I think I would like to go mono as I love the techy side of it all and this seems to be more down that rabbit hole......

I'm looking at a QHY294M Mono which is on offer at Astrograph for 874 (with the wheel for 207) or maybe a Altair hypercam 183M pro tec or the equivalent ZWO 183 which is almost the same price.

I'm also not averse to buying 2nd hand at all, just doesn't seem to be a lot out there at the moment.

Both cameras look reasonably well matched on the CCD suitability calculator web tool.

Would be really interested to hear people's opinions please?

thanks

Andrew

 

[discardedastro]

On the C8, you'd be massively oversampled with the 183s at about 0.25"/px; the 294 would do better, but is still strictly oversampled at around 0.5"/px.

Practically you'd want to look at sensors with bigger pixels - but with a C8 you're going to be struggling to avoid considerable oversampling.

The wave 80 does much better being a shorter focal length system and would be comfortably undersampled with any of the above.

What are you trying to image, though? The C8 would do well for planetary/lunar with a fast camera, whereas the wave 80 is better suited to DSOs and wider field with a cooled slow camera.

[AndrewRrrrrr]

18 hours ago, discardedastro said:

What are you trying to image, though? The C8 would do well for planetary/lunar with a fast camera, whereas the wave 80 is better suited to DSOs and wider field with a cooled slow camera.

Thanks for the reply, DSOs primarily. If I have to choose a scope to be the one that the camera is best suited for, it would be the wave 80.  I was hoping I'd be able to image "smaller" objects (M13, M1, galaxies etc) successfully using the C8, maybe using 2x2 binning on the camera if necessary?

 

[discardedastro]

2 hours ago, AndrewRrrrrr said:

Thanks for the reply, DSOs primarily. If I have to choose a scope to be the one that the camera is best suited for, it would be the wave 80.  I was hoping I'd be able to image "smaller" objects (M13, M1, galaxies etc) successfully using the C8, maybe using 2x2 binning on the camera if necessary?

 

You could certainly bin with that, yes, but it's still a pretty long FL - you definitely need to be guiding if not already. I'd start with the Wave 80 and optimise for that - it's a good FL for a lot of objects. Something with a bigger sensor would be better suited to both, but you'll need to check the flat field size in both - bigger sensors might well need optical flatteners/correctors.

Don't forget you'll want more than just the camera - a basic LRGB set is a must-have I think but don't sweat the narrowband to start. Also consider processing and acquisition software - if you want to get seriously into the nerdy nuts-and-bolts then you may want to drop some cash on PixInsight or other commercial software. There's lots of good free acquisition tools these days though with filter wheel support. A reasonable autofocuser (so long as it's a stepper) is also a huge quality-of-life win, if you ask me. If you can save some cash on a second-hand camera and keep an eye out for second-hand focusers, filter sets/wheels etc you can get a good set of bits in that budget!

[AndrewRrrrrr]

thanks again discardeastro, yes am currently guiding: with a ZWO 120MM mini in a guidescope on the wave 80 and an OAG on the C8, seems to work well enough. I have a 1X flattener on the 80. Am getting 0.5" RMS.  Using APT which looks like it will cope OK with the new kit. pixinsight - i can see it happening at some point for sure. good shout about the autofocuser, best put one on the shopping list!!! 

[rickwayne]

Actually with an 0.6X reducer you're more in the "slightly oversampled" region of 0.39"/pixel.

With its teeny-tiny pixels, the 183's sweet spot is really more in widefield. The 294 will give you a bigger field of view and won't undersample too much with the short scope. Full disclosure, I got a 183 for a short scope precisely because I wanted finer-grained detail in my images, e.g. I "felt" undersampled with my DSLR, which had pixels about the same size as the 294's.

I'm sure not going to attempt to dissuade you from turning to the Mono Side, I really enjoy it but like you, I revel in nerdliness. However if you can only afford either filters or a wheel at first, may I counsel you to get the filters? All the wheel does is make it simpler to use multiple filters in a session. Personally I've had a lot of fun doing Ha-only imaging, and you can always use successive nights to collect data at the other wavelengths (or just resign yourself to a lot of unscrewing).

[AndrewRrrrrr]

2 hours ago, rickwayne said:

Actually with an 0.6X reducer you're more in the "slightly oversampled" region of 0.39"/pixel.

With its teeny-tiny pixels, the 183's sweet spot is really more in widefield. The 294 will give you a bigger field of view and won't undersample too much with the short scope. Full disclosure, I got a 183 for a short scope precisely because I wanted finer-grained detail in my images, e.g. I "felt" undersampled with my DSLR, which had pixels about the same size as the 294's.

I'm sure not going to attempt to dissuade you from turning to the Mono Side, I really enjoy it but like you, I revel in nerdliness. However if you can only afford either filters or a wheel at first, may I counsel you to get the filters? All the wheel does is make it simpler to use multiple filters in a session. Personally I've had a lot of fun doing Ha-only imaging, and you can always use successive nights to collect data at the other wavelengths (or just resign yourself to a lot of unscrewing).

thanks Rickwayne, I like your point about nothing wrong with just doing Ha to start and building up. Makes sense! 

[rickwayne]

Plenty of challenging monochrome H-alpha targets out there!

The very first image I shot with my mono camera, before I owned a wheel, is still one of my favorites. Wildly saturated bright-red Horseheads are a dime a dozen but a I really like how the black and white tones bring your attention to the complexity of the cloud wisps: https://www.astrobin.com/397555/.

(OK, fine, I confess I'm aiming to shoot my own Very Colorful Horsehead someday.)

The Elephant's Trunk is also fun: https://www.astrobin.com/48w7a8/.

[Adam1234]

I won't make any suggestions on actual cameras as I don't have any experience with the C8 and have only used the ASI1600mm, however, as has been pointed out you want to make sure you don't choose a camera that will result in you significantly over or under sampling. 

 Astronomy tools ccd suitability calculator here https://astronomy.tools/calculators/ccd_suitability will help you determine if you will be hitting the right mark with a telescope camera combo.

Adam