Cost vs Results (OSC to Mono)

[JonHigh]

Hey all. Hope someone can advise me…

I have been using a ASI585MC that has produced excellent results whether it be captures of the Moon, Sun, Planetary or even some DSO’s. However, for what I want to do, mainly Lunar and Solar I know that capturing them using a mono camera produces better results purely because the camera is mono. That I get, so I’m looking at the ASI678MM thinking is this going to give £350+ worth of better results? Is it going to knock my socks off wondering what I’ve been missing all my life? Or will it just be slightly better? Value.
I know it’s not as simple as that as physics plays a big part as well, as end user capabilities etc, but to speak plainly, is it worth spending the extra money to what I already have? Your thoughts and expertise are appreciated! 

Edited June 22 by JonHigh

[wimvb]

17 minutes ago, JonHigh said:

is this going to give £350+ worth of better results?

What does £350+ better results look like? What does having better results mean to you? I don't do solar imaging, but if I did, I would probably at some point want to capture narrow band data. For dso's, you can use osc with dual band filters if you want to capture the occasional nebula. But if you want to go really deep (and don't own a RASA), nb filter on a mono camera are hard to beat. I think that in the end, your personal satisfaction will be what counts.

[JonHigh]

Hi. Thanks for the reply.  Probably should have qualified it better. I already have Hypercam 26C that I use for DSO’s on my triplet Frac and now EdgeHD 8” and I am extremely happy with it.
This was specifically aimed for use with my EdgeHD, mainly Lunar and some planetary, solar captures. The 585 is an awesome and very capable camera.  I know my technique is pretty much there but could always do with improving but in the end is spending the money on a mono really going to improve the overall output that dramatically where I will be pleased I spent £350 or more over and above what the 585 pushes out? 

[Elp]

Are you doing WL solar or HA?

To put it simply, no you won't really see that much improvement, it's there but you have to think whether £350 is added value to you or not. It helps with DSO because you're collecting data faster, but with bright solar system objects this point is moot.

Imaging ha solar you'd get a marked improvement, but you'd also get more of an improvement by stopping the f ratio of the scope down. Or with WL combined with using a larger aperture scope, mono would help with getting a little more granulation on the surface.

Edited June 22 by Elp

[JonHigh]

1 hour ago, Elp said:

Are you doing WL solar or HA?

To put it simply, no you won't really see that much improvement, it's there but you have to think whether £350 is added value to you or not. It helps with DSO because you're collecting data faster, but with bright solar system objects this point is moot.

Imaging ha solar you'd get a marked improvement, but you'd also get more of an improvement by stopping the f ratio of the scope down. Or with WL combined with using a larger aperture scope, mono would help with getting a little more granulation on the surface.

Hi ya, 

Yup just white light with a Solar Continuum with a UV/IR cut filter. So if it’s a case where it’s only a slight improvement over and above then I might just leave it and continue to enjoy the 585. Maybe putting that money towards something else might be better spent. 
 

Out of interest would changing the mode from raw8bit to Mono8 make any difference? I ask as I’ve never used that mode before. 

Edited June 22 by JonHigh

[Elp]

I think raw will still contain more information, you'll be able to tell with the file sizes if you compare them.

[JonHigh]

Probably just desaturates! I will check it out though.  
So moving on from Solar to Lunar. Would you expect similar small benefits from the 585MC to 678mm using a 642IR Pass filter?  I would just like to make sure I’m spending wisely rather than throwing money at something that is only going to be marginally better! Thanks and do appreciate the advice. 

Edited June 22 by JonHigh

[Elp]

I've never used an IR filter for solar system, I did try it for deep sky.

I find the moon is so bright you don't necessarily need any filter, image it long enough and you'll have enough frames to stack to get a sharp image anyway. I think the most benefit might be when using your EHD8 and imaging it in high native resolution. You'll see an improvement in mono, but for the price of the camera improvement, I'm not so sure. Even with mono cameras at hand I still revert to my 224 for solar system other than when doing solar.

What sort of result are you getting with the 585 at the moment? I had a 485 which is practically the same camera but for solar system I only managed a quick Mars and Jupiter acquisition, it worked well.

[JonHigh]

I’m very happy with the 585 but I just felt that I might be missing something not going Mono. But by all accounts it’s apparently not as much as I thought… These are taken recently with the 585 save for Jupiter that was captured about a year and an half ago. 
The solar image was taken with my ETX90 with an Orion WL filter both about 25years old with a stacked Baader Solar Continuum and UV/IR cut filter.
The lunar capture was taken with the EdgeHD at  native FL with a Baader neodymium IR cut filter. 
Jupiter was taken with my SkyMax150 with an old Baader Uv/IR rejection filter. 
Thanks for your input by the way! 

Edited June 22 by JonHigh

[Elp]

I think they're pretty good as they are with the current camera. If you want, you could still try the 585 with a 650 IR pass filter for planets/moon, the QE graph shows it to be still sensitive in that bandpass range. Upon processing you'd have to split the RGB channels and just use the red data.

Edited June 22 by Elp

[JonHigh]

Thanks. This is the reason for my quandary as the camera is an awesome bit of kit and always been pleased with the results.
Funnily enough I’ve literally just bought an Astronomik 642 IR Pass filter! Unfortunately the moon is too low now, obscured by trees 🙄

Edited June 22 by JonHigh

[Elp]

I have a different problem, whenever I want to image DSO the moon is always in the way...

[JonHigh]

I hear that. Or clouds roll in when it was apparently meant to be clear!! Lol

[PeterC65]

I do EAA with an IMX585 camera and find that an IR pass filter noticeably reduces atmospheric wobble when observing the Moon. I haven't found it useful for observing the Planets though as it filters out the colour and leads to a largely monochrome image which I find takes away much of the beauty of the Planets. I've used the Astronomik ProPlanet 742 in the past and now use the Optolong IR Pass685 (only because its parfocal with my other filters which are all Optolong).

 

[JonHigh]

I dabbled with EAA using my ASI585 achieving surprisingly good results. I chiefly bought the IR Pass for Lunar captures. Also heard it’s good for auto guiding when not using it in the meantime. Interesting about the planets which was on my list for later this year. I’ll stick to my current filter setup then!
Must admit I’m really looking forward to using the newly acquired filter! 

A big thank you to you all for your input, it really is appreciated! I’ll keep the 585 and continue using it as I am and put the money towards some other astro gear as there is always something else to get! 😂

Edited June 22 by JonHigh

[bosun21]

The IR pass filter is good on the moon especially when the seeing is particularly poor. For the planets I much prefer a OSC camera however I have used my 685nm IR pass filter on Jupiter when the Jetstream is directly overhead and the seeing is bad. It at least allows me to get a semi respectable image at the end of those nights albeit in monochrome. I'm really looking forward to the planets and darkness returning.

[JonHigh]

4 hours ago, Elp said:

I think they're pretty good as they are with the current camera. If you want, you could still try the 585 with a 650 IR pass filter for planets/moon, the QE graph shows it to be still sensitive in that bandpass range. Upon processing you'd have to split the RGB channels and just use the red data.

Sorry Elp. Is there a way to just stack the red channel in Autostakkert or PIPP? 

Edited June 22 by JonHigh

[Elp]

Just stack as normal, then remove/copy the red channel in image editing software Photoshop/gimp/affinity etc.

[JonHigh]

Oh. Simple! 😂

[VNA]

18 hours ago, JonHigh said:

 but to speak plainly, is it worth spending the extra money to what I already have?

 

Hello, you are dealing with "the law of diminishing returns" good luck!

[ollypenrice]

11 hours ago, Elp said:

Just stack as normal, then remove/copy the red channel in image editing software Photoshop/gimp/affinity etc.

I've never done this but, assuming the stack has been debayered, the debayering algorithm will have made its 'educated guesses' as to what the red channel will be doing on pixels blinded by the green and blue parts of the array. Still, one piece of hard information in 4 seems a bit dubious in theory. If it works it works, though.

Then again, in lucky imaging, the red pixels will doubtless get a good random scattering across the target.

Olly

Edited June 23 by ollypenrice