Formal comparison Colour vs Mono

[ollypenrice]

Sorry, this isn't a review, it's a request. I am very keen to write a review comparing OSC with mono, ideally using the same make and model of camera in all but the chip. I would run tests in the same scope on the same object and try both longer and shorter focal lengths to see if it made a difference to the diffference, so to speak.

Would you think such a review interesting? Your answers will help me sell the idea to camera makers and editors. And, of course, if you could put me onto the scent of a handy OSC camera for the duration of the test I would feel I owed you one!

Olly

[SteveP]

Olly

As you say, for the reviews to be bona fide A-B, you're going to need two similar models form the same manufacturer operated under the same conditions. Here is a comparison of the mono SBIG ST2000 vs the colour version, ST2000XCM which might be helpful to your own review

ST2000XM-XCM Camera Match

Although this is a Ha comparison, I've also seen a straight RGB vs OSC comparison of the same cameras... unfortunately I can't recall where I saw it!

Good luck with your own review.

Steve

[SteveP]

I should have looked a little harder!

ST2000XM-XCM Camera Match

Steve

[ollypenrice]

Thanks very much Steve. That wll be a good read. I have also found something by Dietmar Hager, the Austrian imager who takes such great pictures.

Olly

[roundycat]

Olly, I think everyone will find it interesting but you will have to be very careful about mixing subjective and objective impressions. Many people are under the impression that OSC cameras offer a quick way out of the colour imaging problem. One exposure does it all, right?

I think the only really valid comparison is where you compare picture quality based on the smoothness of tone or, put another way, the signal noise ratio. Unfortunately this always shows the OSC camera as needing a lot more exposure than it normally gets.

Dennis

[RobH]

I actually did this, using my TMB.

I'd borrowed my old Atik 16HRC colour camera back for a while, and decided to get colour data for M106 with it. The idea was that I'd then add a mono lumimanace layer to it.

I shot 45 x 6 minutes but in the end I didn't use any of it and reshot the whole thing with my 16HR mono camera as I wasn't happy with the resolution or sensitivity of the OSC.

I may still have the data around somewhere.

Cheers

Rob

[ollypenrice]

Yes I remember you saying you hadn't thought much of this technique. On the other hand Dietmar Hager says it works for him. One thing may be focal length, where the Bayer Matrix is easily undersampled.

However, I don't want to pre-empt the review! And I agree, Dennis, that an objective comparison is essential. I was thnking of doing the same object in the same scope and seeing what you got after, say 2 hours, four hours and six hours using each device.

If anyone has any ideas on a test format I'd be glad to hear them.

Olly

[RobH]

It certainly does work for Dieter.

From what I've seen, the best results from OSC's seem to be with folks using the MX25C, as Dieter does.

The result I got fom the 16HRC wasn't bad, I just wanted better, and a mono cam with filters gave me that.

Cheers

Rob

[Psychobilly]

If you can "persuade" soemone to lend you the gear for the reviews then wouldnt two identical scopes side by side guided by another with OSC cam on one and mono on the other be the best way to collect the data ?

Enjoying your series of articles in Astronomy Now Olly...

Peter...

Peter...

[arad85]

Enjoying your series of articles in Astronomy Now Olly...

Yup.. me too

[ollypenrice]

Most kind, gents. I'm not sure they count as a 'series' though!

I agree that the same night - so the same scopes on one mount - is the scientific approach but - er - where do I get all this stuff from?? Anyway, one night's the same as another isn't it? (Chortles to complacent self while admiring the week's weather forecast....)

Olly

[Psychobilly]

It's all about controlling the variables I suppose... so both cameras would "see" the same atmospherics... same guiding etc...