ZWO…… mono or colour?

[alacant]

Hi

If you've somewhere permanent to leave the monochrome attached and loadsa clear nights, then maybe. If you've ever seen anyone setting up a mono camera and connecting it and a fw to a computer, you'll know what I mean. Unless you already have the rest of fw, filters, spacers and cables, I don't think you'll get a decent sized sensor within your 1500 budget though.

The gap between what a modern Sony colour sensor can do compared to monochrome I think is negligible. Go with the colour.

Just our €0,02

Cheers

[ollypenrice]

24 minutes ago, alacant said:

Hi

If you've somewhere permanent to leave the monochrome attached and loadsa clear nights, then maybe. If you've ever seen anyone setting up a mono camera and connecting it and a fw to a computer, you'll know what I mean. Unless you already have the rest of fw, filters, spacers and cables, I don't think you'll get a decent sized sensor within your 1500 budget though.

The gap between what a modern Sony colour sensor can do compared to monochrome I think is negligible. Go with the colour.

Just our €0,02

Cheers

A valid point about setup time and clutter for portable rigs. I regard ambulant astrophotographers as heroic in every case!

However, we've just been doing a faint Ha nebula in the very fast RASA and the emission signal is not very strong, this with an ASI2600 OSC. The fact is that the OSC is blind to Ha on three quarters of its pixels.

Olly

[Stuart1971]

9 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

A valid point about setup time and clutter for portable rigs. I regard ambulant astrophotographers as heroic in every case!

However, we've just been doing a faint Ha nebula in the very fast RASA and the emission signal is not very strong, this with an ASI2600 OSC. The fact is that the OSC is blind to Ha on three quarters of its pixels.

Olly

But the other 6.5 megapixels is still a lot more than many older CCD cameras have In total….👍🏼

Edited March 15, 2022 by Stuart1971

[ollypenrice]

5 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

But the other 6.5 megapixels is still a lot more than many older CCD cameras have In total….👍🏼

But but  they are smaller pixels.

But but but they are more sensitive than old CCD ones.

But but but but, we must compare like with like.

🤣lly

[Nrmh02]

5 hours ago, Adam J said:

When I talk about single night imaging its more a gauge as to how much effort the imager in question is willing to put into their imaging. With RGB I cycle my filters as you suggest, but I tend to run 1 hour then auto-focus on filter change as I find that most efficient in terms of productivity per hour.

For narrow band imaging with mono I will invariably only take one channel per night though and always multiple nights paying attention to the moon when selecting my filter for a given night. In narrow band I tend to find my absolute minimum integration is around 6 hour per channel and so not something I would do in a single night. The place I feel OSC shines is for mobile imaging at a remote / dark sky location when you may not get to return to that location for additional data, or want to keep your setup as light weight  / simple as possible reducing the chance of something going wrong. When you dont want to keep your filters spotless or take flats per channel, when you dont want the pain of combining channels in processing, or when your budget just dose not allow for filter wheels, filters and auto-focusers. Or even when you want a larger sensor for your budget. 

I should also be clear that I dont own a modern OCS but have considered it for the above use case, I also never do single night imaging as it would not support my imaging goals. Mono is faster for sure even in single night, but my gut feeling is that if you are the type of imager (and its perfectly valid) that wants to image a different target every night then move on to the next exciting object, then you are better off with an OSC, a duel band filter and a UV/IR cut or a combination of the two in as lower f-ratio scope as you can afford as you are also unlikely to want the extra work associated with mono. 

Adam 

 

 

To be fair, I’m keen to work on images and take my take….. isn’t that part of fun also? I personally think so myself. 
That way after spending the hours, getting something that’s “perfect” in my eyes reaps the benefits and job satisfaction 

[Nrmh02]

2 hours ago, alacant said:

Hi

If you've somewhere permanent to leave the monochrome attached and loadsa clear nights, then maybe. If you've ever seen anyone setting up a mono camera and connecting it and a fw to a computer, you'll know what I mean. Unless you already have the rest of fw, filters, spacers and cables, I don't think you'll get a decent sized sensor within your 1500 budget though.

The gap between what a modern Sony colour sensor can do compared to monochrome I think is negligible. Go with the colour.

Just our €0,02

Cheers

I live in Scotland lol. I don’t really need to say no more RE weather lol. 
I whilst I have an idea of budget I’m fully aware that they’re extras required to complete the set up. I had in mind 1.5k for camera then possible 500£ for extras purchased. 
it would be a start! I’m quite sure everyone made a start somewhere on the line and build up their kit from there 😊

[Nrmh02]

Again,

Thanks to everyone that’s commented. It’s great to hear different perspectives and opinions.  
Definitely food for thought 

[bottletopburly]

I went for a zwo533mc  osc  mainly due to uk weather combined with a LExtreme filter really happy with the results .

rosette Nebula with 9hrs of Data .

[Nrmh02]

23 minutes ago, bottletopburly said:

I went for a zwo533mc  osc  mainly due to uk weather combined with a LExtreme filter really happy with the results .

rosette Nebula with 9hrs of Data .

Wow. Cracking photo pal. It’s definitely a beauty!

I’ve actually heard great feedback about the 533mc osc 

Edited March 15, 2022 by Nrmh02

[Annehouw]

Reading this: "I’m prepared to spend up to £1500(ish) and ideally would like something that I can do planetary, solar and dso", my vote would be (like already noted) on a modern OSC camera with a duo narrowband filter. That is a versatile setup. I am very happy with my IDAS NBZ (at f/3).

I am fairly convinced that for the ultimate quality mono with high quality filters is king, but that takes a lot more money. Personally, I cannot use a filter wheel in my setup, making mono imaging a cumbersome process. I started with mono but switched to OSC because of the hassle. Results are fine.

[Snoani]

I currently own both a ZWO mono and OSC camera so I can make a direct comparison.  

After starting with a modified DSLR, I decided to go mono about 18 months ago and have been using the ZWO 1600MM to image LRGB, and I love it.  The difference in quality between the DSLR and mono is huge, example here.  I would note that I started with cheaper filters and then picked up some Baader filters which improved the images as well.  

Generally I don't find the requirement of imaging the different filters too bad, although there can be weeks between starting and finishing an image where I run out of time due to weather or the moon but I leave the camera on the scope and can just resume.  There has been lots of conversation in this thread about how to take flats.  I'm not going to suggest whether anyone is right or wrong, but I take flats for each filter and don't find it takes too long and will therefore continue.  

I do find that the very short nights in the summer mean that mono work can be spread over many nights to get enough data, but then the weather is generally better and so often I complete a project in the same amount of time once you factor in the winter weather.  

I have however very recently picked up a second hand ZWO 533MC for a couple of reasons.  First to give me a speedier option in the summer and second so that I could have a cooled option for my Skyguider Pro and lens setup.  I have tested this camera recently and was really happy with the results, example here. 

If I were to recommend one over the other it would definitely be the mono first, but if you did decide to save some money by buying a OSC I don't think you'd be too disappointed either.  

Jem

[ollypenrice]

10 hours ago, Snoani said:

I currently own both a ZWO mono and OSC camera so I can make a direct comparison.  

After starting with a modified DSLR, I decided to go mono about 18 months ago and have been using the ZWO 1600MM to image LRGB, and I love it.  The difference in quality between the DSLR and mono is huge, example here.  I would note that I started with cheaper filters and then picked up some Baader filters which improved the images as well.  

Generally I don't find the requirement of imaging the different filters too bad, although there can be weeks between starting and finishing an image where I run out of time due to weather or the moon but I leave the camera on the scope and can just resume.  There has been lots of conversation in this thread about how to take flats.  I'm not going to suggest whether anyone is right or wrong, but I take flats for each filter and don't find it takes too long and will therefore continue.  

I do find that the very short nights in the summer mean that mono work can be spread over many nights to get enough data, but then the weather is generally better and so often I complete a project in the same amount of time once you factor in the winter weather.  

I have however very recently picked up a second hand ZWO 533MC for a couple of reasons.  First to give me a speedier option in the summer and second so that I could have a cooled option for my Skyguider Pro and lens setup.  I have tested this camera recently and was really happy with the results, example here. 

If I were to recommend one over the other it would definitely be the mono first, but if you did decide to save some money by buying a OSC I don't think you'd be too disappointed either.  

Jem

Again, though, you are assuming that OSC must be faster than mono. Here's a quick sum, over-simplified by the fact that the green passband on OSC chips extends beyond green because it is intended to act as a partial luminance panel:

Hour 1:  OSC gets (effectively) 15 mins red, 15 mins blue, 30 mins green. Mono gets 60 mins red.

Hour 2:  OSC gets (effectively) 15 mins red, 15 mins blue, 30 mins green. Mono gets 60 mins green.

Hour 3: OSC gets (effectively) 15 mins red, 15 mins blue, 30 mins green. Mono gets 60 mins red.

Call it a draw so far. Now...

Hour 4:   OSC gets (effectively) 15 mins red, 15 mins blue, 30 mins green. Mono in luminance gets 60 mins red, 60 mins green, 60 mins blue.

(Hour 5 can reapeat hour 4, increasing the mono advantage.)

In one luminance hour, the mono has captured about three times the signal of the OSC.

The luminance hour does not differentiate between colours but it does not need to do so. This LRGB system was invented in order to save time precisely because its inventors realized that there was no need for colour differentiation across the full exposure time.

Shooting Ha: it matters not a jot what size your pixels are or how many you have. On two equivalent chips, one OSC and one mono, you obtain four times the signal with a mono. There's no way round that.

But, the modern dual and tri-band filters for OSC fight back by capturing two or three bandwidths of NB at the same time. They don't do it on all pixels, though, and the filters are not of comparable quality to the best dedicated NB filters.

I'm not arguing against OSC here, I'm only arguing against what I think is a common misconception about LRGB.

Olly

Edited March 16, 2022 by ollypenrice
Typo

[Macavity]

[Voice from the fourpennys] Weirdly the ASI120MC didn't give
Newtons Rings on H-Alpha? My ASI120M did! <randomly> 🥳
(MC Cams, for planetary, are more immune from "patterning"?)

Sometimes I have wished my "Solarite" friends had access to
the MONO version camera! But this is an interesting topic... 😎

Edited March 16, 2022 by Macavity

[inFINNity Deck]

There is another difference between mono and colour not mentioned here so far: the resolution. A mono camera with 3.86 micron pixels (ZWO ASI1600MM Pro Cool) has a pixel every 3.86 microns, but a colour camera with that same pixel size (ZWO ASI1600MC Pro Cool) has a red and blue pixel every 7.72 pixels and a green pixel every 5.46 micron. In other words: if you look at the real resolving power of the camera (presuming both are used with the same OTA), the mono camera wins (in a 16 megapixel colour camera, 12 red and blue megapixels and 8 green megapixels are the result of interpolation not of actual sampling).

It all depends on the OTA you want to use with the camera, whether or not you will actually loose detail (it depends on whether the combination is under- or oversampling). The optimum f-number can be calculated simply by multiplying the pixel-size with 3 for a mono-camera and by 6 for a colour one, so the MM camera needs about f/11.5, the colour f/23. Using the colour camera on a f/10 SCT will thus cause undersampling (which equals shorter exposure times), while the mono-camera is more or less on par.

If we want to compare image quality between a mono and colour camera, we should take a mono-camera with twice the pixel size of the colour-camera. We will then immediately realise that at this same actual resolution the mono camera will collect 4 times as much light in the same period and thus is it possible to reduce exposure times by a factor 4 by using a mono-camera (at this same resolution).

For more info see my article on determining the f-number (it is in Dutch, but Chrome should properly translate it): https://www.starry-night.nl/vergroting-onder-de-loep-hoe-bepalen-we-het-optimale-f-getal/

Nicolàs

[ollypenrice]

40 minutes ago, inFINNity Deck said:

There is another difference between mono and colour not mentioned here so far: the resolution. A mono camera with 3.86 micron pixels (ZWO ASI1600MM Pro Cool) has a pixel every 3.86 microns, but a colour camera with that same pixel size (ZWO ASI1600MC Pro Cool) has a red and blue pixel every 7.72 pixels and a green pixel every 5.46 micron. In other words: if you look at the real resolving power of the camera (presuming both are used with the same OTA), the mono camera wins (in a 16 megapixel colour camera, 12 red and blue megapixels and 8 green megapixels are the result of interpolation not of actual sampling).

It all depends on the OTA you want to use with the camera, whether or not you will actually loose detail (it depends on whether the combination is under- or oversampling). The optimum f-number can be calculated simply by multiplying the pixel-size with 3 for a mono-camera and by 6 for a colour one, so the MM camera needs about f/11.5, the colour f/23. Using the colour camera on a f/10 SCT will thus cause undersampling (which equals shorter exposure times), while the mono-camera is more or less on par.

If we want to compare image quality between a mono and colour camera, we should take a mono-camera with twice the pixel size of the colour-camera. We will then immediately realise that at this same actual resolution the mono camera will collect 4 times as much light in the same period and thus is it possible to reduce exposure times by a factor 4 by using a mono-camera (at this same resolution).

For more info see my article on determining the f-number (it is in Dutch, but Chrome should properly translate it): https://www.starry-night.nl/vergroting-onder-de-loep-hoe-bepalen-we-het-optimale-f-getal/

Nicolàs

Yes, though I tend not to include this argument in my advocacy of mono because the crux lies in the red highlight above. The statement is perfectly correct but I'm prepared to admit that the interpolation is so good that it all but eliminates the loss of resolution in question.  It requires a good debayering algorithm to restore the missing information and they are not all equal, but an enormous amount of research has gone into the interpolation procedures by which a very informed estimate is used to restore lost information.  In reality I don't think we can claim that a four-pixel RGGB pixel group has only a quarter the resolution of the same pixel group unfiltered. (By 'In reality' I mean in the context of amateur astrophotography rather than in photometric measurements for interpretation at pixel scale.)

Olly

[inFINNity Deck]

Hi Olly,

normally we will not see the difference due to seeing, which for most of us is well beyond the resolution of our set-ups. I image at 0.73"/px, but seeing conditions here in the Netherlands are usually about 2-3", so 3-4 pixels. So theoretically my statement is perfectly fine (I would say double the resolution though, not four times, but that depends if you look at it in number of pixels or distance between pixels), but seeing usually is the limiting factor in our long-exposure deep-sky captures. If our images would not be affected by seeing, I am pretty sure we would see the difference between mono or interpolated colour data.

Nicolàs

 

[Annehouw]

Let me throw in a bit of a grumpy statement.

You can argue forever about the pros and cons of gear. However, what matters most is mastery of the equipment. Any equipment that you have. And dedicate the hours in actually capturing light and getting results.

Better to start with "simple" equipment that you like to use and that gives you gratification than struggle with equipment that is too far into the learning curve (cameras and scopes). Perfect is the enemy of good. Also in this hobby.

Too much energy (and frankly said emotion) is dedicated to gearangst.

Just go out. Do it. Learn and grow. 

 

CS. Anne

 

Edited March 16, 2022 by Annehouw
Channeling grumpyness

[Ian McCallum]

26 minutes ago, Annehouw said:

Let me throw in a bit of a grumpy statement.

You can argue forever about the pros and cons of gear. However, what matters most is mastery of the equipment. Any equipment that you have. And dedicate the hours in actually capturing light and gettong results.

Better to start with "simple" equipment that you like to use and that gives you gratification than struggle with equipment that is too far into the learning curve (camera's and scopes).

Too much energy (and frankly said emotion) is dedicated to gearangst.

Just go out. Do it. Learn and grow. 

 

I can very much chime in with this!🙄  I went down the road from a 4.5" Newtonian reflector, to 8" Dob, then 120mm refractor with EQ5 Deluxe mount, then motor drives and finally a goto system.  That's not including the two ZWO cameras that I've bought and Raspberry Pi to run it all remotely.  At times, I've felt like pulling out my hair.  My bank balance is low and my 8" Dob is collecting dust from lack of use.  If I don't make a breakthrough soon, then I'll be putting most of the AP gear up for sale and going back to being a purely visual observer...

Edited March 16, 2022 by Ian McCallum
typo

[adyj1]

19 minutes ago, Annehouw said:

Too much energy (and frankly said emotion) is dedicated to gearangst.

Just go out. Do it. Learn and grow. 

Well said.

[ollypenrice]

33 minutes ago, Annehouw said:

Let me throw in a bit of a grumpy statement.

You can argue forever about the pros and cons of gear. However, what matters most is mastery of the equipment. Any equipment that you have. And dedicate the hours in actually capturing light and getting results.

Better to start with "simple" equipment that you like to use and that gives you gratification than struggle with equipment that is too far into the learning curve (cameras and scopes). Perfect is the enemy of good. Also in this hobby.

Too much energy (and frankly said emotion) is dedicated to gearangst.

Just go out. Do it. Learn and grow. 

 

CS. Anne

 

Hi Anne, I don't think that's a grumpy statement, it's just good sense. However, in defence of this thread, its content was determined by the question with which it began. We could, and perhaps should, have a thread on 'getting the best out of what you have.'

In my view this would not be a thread dominated by discussions of gear or methods of acquisition but by image processing. Although imaging gear isn't cheap, it has never been as affordable as it is now, nor has it ever been better. And capture is a mechanical process which can be learned and brought quite quickly to a standard which cannot be effectively improved upon.

Processing, however, is something which can be improved upon indefinitely. And it can be taken in different directions, allowing the same dataset to reveal different aspects of the objects imaged. In a nutshell we are 'guiding limited,' and 'seeing limited,' etc etc but, above all, I think we are 'processing limited.'

Olly

 

Edited March 16, 2022 by ollypenrice
Premature click!

[Elp]

31 minutes ago, Ian McCallum said:

I can very much chime in with this!🙄  I went down the road from a 4.5" Newtonian reflector, to 8" Dob, then 120mm refractor with EQ5 Deluxe mount, then motor drives and finally a goto system.  That's not including the two ZWO cameras that I've bought and Raspberry Pi to run it all remotely.  At times, I've felt like pulling out my hair.  My bank balance is low and my 8" Dob is collecting dust from lack of use.  If I don't make a breakthrough soon, then I'll be putting most of the AP gear up for sale and going back to being a purely visual observer...

Although not the same equipment I've done a similar process over a few short years and only really "cracked" DSO AP since last year when I got autoguiding working. Some of the standout pieces of equipment which have helped my process get more stable/satisfying, WO Z61 refractor, azgti mount, asiair. At the moment I now shoot mono. I started with widefield with an advanced compact camera, then modded dslr, planetary OSC to now. Most of my progress has been over the last year. But I do agree with @Annehouw, less dwelling and more doing. Any part of this hobby requires overcoming some issue or another, if it were easy anyone would be doing it.

[inFINNity Deck]

I do agree with most that has been said in the last few posts, but the OP was asking for the pros and cons of mono vs colour. The point I tried to make is that you need to understand the basics so that you can avoid 'serious' mistakes in the acquisition of new equipment. As @Elp wrote "...if it were easy anyone would be doing it." This hobby is for sure a steep learning curve for all of us. Using the wrong combination may result in unnecessary frustration (not to mention having spent money on the wrong horse). I fully agree with @ollypenrice that we are indeed for a great deal processing limited (I found out myself very recently, still am reprocessing most of my images now). The next one would be seeing limited, closely followed by (un)guiding limited and then diffraction limited. Sadly enough only a few of us will be in a situation where the latter is an issue... Somewhere in that order of limitations we should add 'money limited'... 😉

Nicolàs

[Annehouw]

@ollypenrice and others. You are quite right about the nature of the question, but color or mono was only part of it. As y'all know, a problem is easier to solve if there are clear boundary conditions. In this case there are a few and there are a few missing.  Missing is the location of the op. Bortle 9? Then mono with narrowband would be something to prefer.

Fast system? Slow system? That influences the cost of the filters required. And that brings me to what is in my opinion an important element: budget. GBP 1500,- is a sizable amount of money but in this hobby, it is spent before you know it. In view of a blanket statement from my side that with the current crop of sensors it is hard to go wrong, OSC of mono, what can you buy for GBP 1500? 

OSC: A good camera would be an ASI 533MC (or qhy equivalent). That is GBP 900,-

GBP 600 to spare for a 1.25" filter drawer and, a UV/IR blocking filter  and a good duo narrow band filter. Maybe even some money to invest in software and / or training. Downside is that the sensor is a bit smallish. Total investment expenditure would be  a bit below GBP 1300. Kudos from the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

For a bit more stretch in budget, the ASI 071 MC gives an  APS-C size sensor and  is GBP 1400,- IDAS NBZ (48mm) is GBP 250,- and then a GBP 110 simple filter drawer with extra holder and again a UV/IR blocking filter (GBP 50). Totalling GBP 1800

Mono:  All APS-C / LRGB/NB filter options are way out of budget.

The upcoming 533mono cameras would be a good quality choice. No prices yet, but let's assume GBP 1000,- ZWO mini electronic filter wheel GBP 180. ZWO LRGB filterset (1.25"): GBP 125 Optolong 6.5nm OIII filter (1.25"): GBP 115 Optolong 7nm Ha filter (1.25"): GBP 130. Optional a SII filter, but because I did not put it in the OSC calculation, I'll  leave it out here. So, in total GBP 1550. Not too bad. That is if you can live with the smallish sensor. Some can, some can't.  Note that I have budgetted relatively affordable filters. Especially on the NB side , one can spend a lot more (chroma, anyone?).

 

Any of the equipment choices above can give the OP excellent results.

 

Anne

 

 

Edited March 16, 2022 by Annehouw

[Adam J]

On 16/03/2022 at 13:08, Annehouw said:

@ollypenrice and others. You are quite right about the nature of the question, but color or mono was only part of it. As y'all know, a problem is easier to solve if there are clear boundary conditions. In this case there are a few and there are a few missing.  Missing is the location of the op. Bortle 9? Then mono with narrowband would be something to prefer.

Fast system? Slow system? That influences the cost of the filters required. And that brings me to what is in my opinion an important element: budget. GBP 1500,- is a sizable amount of money but in this hobby, it is spent before you know it. In view of a blanket statement from my side that with the current crop of sensors it is hard to go wrong, OSC of mono, what can you buy for GBP 1500? 

OSC: A good camera would be an ASI 533MC (or qhy equivalent). That is GBP 900,-

GBP 600 to spare for a 1.25" filter drawer and, a UV/IR blocking filter  and a good duo narrow band filter. Maybe even some money to invest in software and / or training. Downside is that the sensor is a bit smallish. Total investment expenditure would be  a bit below GBP 1300. Kudos from the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

For a bit more stretch in budget, the ASI 071 MC gives an  APS-C size sensor and  is GBP 1400,- IDAS NBZ (48mm) is GBP 250,- and then a GBP 110 simple filter drawer with extra holder and again a UV/IR blocking filter (GBP 50). Totalling GBP 1800

Mono:  All APS-C / LRGB/NB filter options are way out of budget.

The upcoming 533mono cameras would be a good quality choice. No prices yet, but let's assume GBP 1000,- ZWO mini electronic filter wheel GBP 180. ZWO LRGB filterset (1.25"): GBP 125 Optolong 6.5nm OIII filter (1.25"): GBP 115 Optolong 7nm Ha filter (1.25"): GBP 130. Optional a SII filter, but because I did not put it in the OSC calculation, I'll  leave it out here. So, in total GBP 1550. Not too bad. That is if you can live with the smallish sensor. Some can, some can't.  Note that I have budgetted relatively affordable filters. Especially on the NB side , one can spend a lot more (chroma, anyone?).

 

Any of the equipment choices above can give the OP excellent results.

 

Anne

 

 

I think you will be lucky if the ASI533mm pro is £1000, my guess is more like £1100 too much more though and you are pushing into the territory of the larger 4/3 sensors. 

Adam