You can't do that !!!

[CCD-Freak]

Some say "You can't shoot DSOs with a non cooled camera !!"

Well....This is 120 x 2 minutes of NGC253 with an un-cooled ASI482MC camera with a Baader UV-IR filter.  It was shot with an AT6RC on an iOptron GEM45 mount.

Captured and processed with Astroart 8 at my SRO dark site last week.

Edited October 21, 2023 by CCD-Freak

[fireballxl5]

Oh yes you can! - great image

CS, Andy

[DaveS]

Pudding, proof of. That's a gorgeous image.

[carastro]

Agree

[Elp]

6 hours ago, CCD-Freak said:

Some say "You can't shoot DSOs with a non cooled camera !!"

If you know you know. I use uncooled probably more than cooled, sure some cameras are less suited as they amp glow quite bad due to the smaller sensor sizes (224 is one but I've seen excellent DSO images taken with that camera), others they just work and are quite comparable to their cooled versions once you've post processed the images. If you can image with a DSLR, why can't you use a non cooled astro camera?

Excellent result with yours.

[ONIKKINEN]

Looks pretty cool to me. Sorry, had to do it 🙂.

That's a very nice image, and presumably taken in warm Texas conditions too so i think you've proven the point that uncooled is not so evil as it used to be.

Edited October 21, 2023 by ONIKKINEN

[CCD-Freak]

Here is another image of NGC7293 made with the same setup.

[ollypenrice]

I can't say I've ever heard anybody say you can't shoot DSOs uncooled, but it's a very successful image.

Cooling remains an advantage, however.

Olly

[CCD-Freak]

54 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I can't say I've ever heard anybody say you can't shoot DSOs uncooled, but it's a very successful image.

Cooling remains an advantage, however.

Olly

I totally agree that cooled cameras are better.  I just wanted to make the point that good images can be captured using low cost cameras and good technique. 

The new cameras are so much quieter than the cooled CCD camera I built back in the late 90s not to mention smaller size and lower weight as well as lower cost. (^8

CB245 Project

Edited October 24, 2023 by CCD-Freak

[Ags]

I only have an ASI485MC and use it to image all types of targets - Sun, Moon, Planets and DSOs. My bad luck is barely a couple of months later the ASI585MC came out with NO AMP GLOW. I think the 485 had the shortest production run in camera history...

 

[Elp]

It's a capable camera, I've done a few DSOs with the 485.

[Ags]

I can't complain, I just take snapshots in alt-az mode and the 485 is perfect for me. Here  is my NAN from earlier this year.

[powerlord]

I was thinking of getting asi678mc for this sort of thing ?. Quite cheap and decent res.

[ONIKKINEN]

7 minutes ago, powerlord said:

I was thinking of getting asi678mc for this sort of thing ?. Quite cheap and decent res.

I use that for planetary and lunar, good camera for that. But my sensor analysis run with the camera suggests that it might not be the ideal choice for DSO because of how the sensor is laid out for its intended use of lucky imaging.

Linearity to 82,9% which isn't terrible but could be better, not sure how this will effect flats for example (never taken with mine, no need with planetary and lunar). I think the other new gen uncooled cameras would be a better choice for DSO work. Read noise also stays quite high at low gain, which would not be ideal for longer exposures. For planetary and lunar, no objections so far from me.

[tomato]

16 minutes ago, powerlord said:

I was thinking of getting asi678mc for this sort of thing ?. Quite cheap and decent res.

I image small galaxies with ASI 178 mono cameras retro fitted with Peltier coolers to achieve better temperature control for dark frame calibration. The 678 is billed as the successor to the 178 so I purchased one to see if collecting RGB data would complement an existing 178 for Lum data. I also want to try it out on my RASA8 but alas so far there have been nowhere near enough clear nights at my location to evaluate it.

If nothing else I can use it to try and image the ISS…

[powerlord]

20 minutes ago, ONIKKINEN said:

I use that for planetary and lunar, good camera for that. But my sensor analysis run with the camera suggests that it might not be the ideal choice for DSO because of how the sensor is laid out for its intended use of lucky imaging.

Linearity to 82,9% which isn't terrible but could be better, not sure how this will effect flats for example (never taken with mine, no need with planetary and lunar). I think the other new gen uncooled cameras would be a better choice for DSO work. Read noise also stays quite high at low gain, which would not be ideal for longer exposures. For planetary and lunar, no objections so far from me.

What models were u thinking of instead ? I noted the lower efficiency, but I suppose it's a pay off for the higher mp vs a 2mb job.

[ONIKKINEN]

14 minutes ago, powerlord said:

What models were u thinking of instead ? I noted the lower efficiency, but I suppose it's a pay off for the higher mp vs a 2mb job.

The 585 seems like the ideal sensor for this kind of thing. There is a lengthy thread here :

The 2 micron pixels in the 678 are probably also not too useful for DSO work. Maybe with some very fast systems, but seems a bit too high a resolution for DSO work. Not that there is a huge difference to the 2.9 micron of the 585, but every bit helps.

[CCD-Freak]

I forgot to process this image I took of M1 Crab Nebula back in October.  This is another image taken with my ASI482MC non cooled planet cam.

60 x 60" with a UV-IR filter
AT6RC at F7
GEM45 mount   Dithered every 3rd image
Captured and processed with Astroart 8

I am still a bit amazed at what the ASI482MC can do. (^8
 

[CCD-Freak]

I also reprocessed the NGC253 and NGC7293 images to bring out more detail and clean up the noise a bit.

If the weather will ever clear I plan to do a more careful job with the ASI482MC and this time I will get Flats too.