IMX432 for deep space astrophotography?

[matija]

Hi,

I'm in the process of upgrading my astrophotography setup and considering the Apollo-M MAX camera with the IMX432 sensor for my 2000mm focal length RC telescope.

Currently, I'm using a ZWO 294MC camera and wondering if the Apollo-M MAX would provide a worthwhile improvement.

Primarily, I'm interested in capturing deep space objects. The 12-bit depth and lower resolution of the Apollo-M MAX caught my attention. I'm concerned about how these specifications might negatively impact my images compared to the ZWO 294MC.

If anyone has experience with both cameras or insights into the potential drawbacks of switching to the Apollo-M MAX, I'd greatly appreciate your input. Additionally, any considerations specific to pairing this camera with an RC telescope would be helpful.

https://player-one-astronomy.com/product/apollo-m-max-pro-usb3-0-mono-camera-imx432/

Thank you for your time and expertise!

Matija

[CCD-Freak]

I am also interested in trying an ASI432MM for imaging galaxies, planetary nebulae and globular clusters and such with my long focal length scopes. 

I am also looking at the Player One cooled version. 

I wish ZWO or Player One would offer a cooled IMX432 OSC version.

 

I tried the ASI482MC non cooled "planet cam" with it's 5.8um pixels and it works very well. 

Here are some images made with my AT6RC at F7 and an ASI482MC and I am planning to shoot more images with this setup during "galaxy season".

 

Edited February 28 by CCD-Freak

[CCD-Freak]

I have been looking for a used ASI432MM with no luck.  )^8

I guess I will have to buy a new one so that I can give it a go with galaxy imaging with my AT10RC or C8 at 2000mm which is .93" / pixel.

I have yet to find any DSO images made with IMX432 sensors.

[Elp]

The 432MM is almost the same as pixel binning a 183MM sensor looking at it from the outset, it one of the reasons I invested into the 183, it's got small pixels when you need them, and large resolution to support the bin if you need to. The 294MM will also reach similar numbers when binned with the advantage of a larger FOV.

Edited March 3 by Elp

[catburglar]

The 432 does look interesting for long focal lengths. When I look at the 294 or 183 based cameras binned to 9mm pixels they seem to have much higher read noise than the 432, so would need much longer exposures to reach any given ‘shot noise swamp factor’. This may be one area where a 3 or 4x binned CCD is a better option than a similarly binned CMOS camera because the CCD maintains the same read noise when binned but the CMOS scales read noise with bin factor.

[CCD-Freak]

That is the main reason I want to try the IMX432 sensor.   Sony also makes a color version of this sensor and I would love to see a camera based on it.