ATIK 16ic-s Mono

[Si W]

Hi all

Please can you help . Does anyone own the ATIK 16ic-s Mono CCD, i'm thinking of getting one at the end of the month, i just want to find out if it's a good camera, your experience with it, and the quality of the images it capture's, i've read the review's on the net, but it's not as good as getting the info first hand.

Thanks in advance

Simon

[davy999]

I would be interested too as i am also thinking of a similar camera I was looking at the 16ic mono

[Si W]

Dave

To be honest, i've read a few treads on the net, and some say the 16ic is better when it come's to detecting Ha, however the 16ic-s has more depth. Is the smaller chip better ?, i do know the pixel size on the one your thinking about is smaller than the 16ic-s, i wonder if that make's the difference.

Simon

[Deneb]

Hi

The Atik 16ic, is a nice starter CCD camera. the only difference I can see with the 16ic-s is the resolution is slightly bigger 782x582 then the 16ic at 659x494. You have a slight bigger area to play around with.

Also it can work as a guide camera if you decide to move onto a better ccd camera or DSLR afterwards.

You might want to read the Craig Stark review of the camera.

Nadeem.

[davy999]

Hi Simon

You seem to be under the misapprehension that I have a clue what I am talking about:icon_confused:

I am just after a good starter cam, my scope isn't ideal for dso imaging so thought a basic cam would be ok for practising and getting a few images and basically learning how to setup capture and process the data.

Sorry for slightly hijacking your thread, I will await the replies to ur question and see if any of it is relevant to my needs.

Dave

[Si W]

Thanks for the link Nadeem, it's very good, i'm considering the larger chip, i've got the Meade DSI ii colour, but the dark frames are a pain, and if i've not got the frame's in my dark frames folder for a certain temperature , the software give me a warning to take more darks , that's why i'm looking at the ATIK 16ic-s Mono, as it's cooled to about -20 below ambient temperature, and the chip size is the same as the DSI ii.

Sorry about the confusion Dave, i was trying to get the answer's for both are question's.

Simon

[Glider]

If the number of pixels and their size is the same on both cameras could you shoot luminance and say Ha with the Atik and save time by using the DSI II to shoot RGB in one go, then layer the whole lot in Photoshop?

[ncjunk]

Just to add,

I had the Atik 16ic-s and it is a great little camera. I used it when starting and didnt bother with darks (i have a dsi as well and, obviously, no comparison the atik has very low noise on the darks)

If you do get the atik then i would suggest you dont do what i did and sell it when you want a bigger camera. Keep it and use it as a guide camera or on another scope for close ups.

I should not have sold mine.

I am not sure if a qhy would be better value for money but i can say you wont be disappointed with the atik.

Remember that for most galaxies the atik, even though it has a small sensor size, is the right size to fit most on screen with a arcsec per pixel as good as you could practically use taking into account "seeing".

For larger targets like m33, m31 or the rosette then it will need a mosaic.

If you want me to send you some example pics then let me know.

Neil c

[Si W]

Thanks for your advice, i feel a lot better about buying one now.

[ollypenrice]

If the number of pixels and their size is the same on both cameras could you shoot luminance and say Ha with the Atik and save time by using the DSI II to shoot RGB in one go, then layer the whole lot in Photoshop?

If you use Registar (not cheap) then there is no need for the pixels or images to be the same size. It will combine anything. It is an instaneous process and quite marvellous.

I have two 16ics, one mono and one colour, though I only use them for guiding. However, I have tried them for imaging. Mine have been dead reliable over the last three years and when you run an astro B and B that means a lot of hours in use. Maybe they'll have logged up over a thousand or so hours each.

For imaging the chip is very small. You could have a larger chip with the 320E without going mad on price. Personally I would go for the largest chip you can in order to get some field. One of the best 16ic imager I know of is John Punett who is here;

Astrophotography by John Punnett

His images will show you what's possible.

I don't find one shot colouur to be as fast as mono and filters for an equivalent image quality but however you go about it Regstar is great for small chip users because it makes mosaic making a cynch.

Oh, and Artemis Capture, the Atik software, is brilliantly logical. I'm a software numpty so if I like it anyone will!

Olly

[GuillermoBarrancos]

I would also seriously take a look at the QHY6 tho.

I am in the same boat. Looking at the Atik 16ic-s.

The QHY6 has comparable specs as the Atik 16ic-s. Has even USB 2.0, instead of USB 1.1.

The QHY6 also comes with a ST-4 guide port. So can be used as guide cam later on as well. Just like with the Atik 16ic(-s).

That's why I probably go for the QHY6 myself. It's a really good value for money camera.

[Si W]

Just been on there web site (QHY), also what i have noticed is the QHY6 pro has the Sony EX-View ICX429AL chip, i havn't seen any reference to the ATIK 16ic-s chip, other than it's a Sony ICX415AL. I think i need to look at the review for both. If it is the case and the QHY6 pro has a better chip, then the QHY will be the choice as they are both about the same price.

Simon

[ollypenrice]

Just been on there web site (QHY), also what i have noticed is the QHY6 pro has the Sony EX-View ICX429AL chip, i havn't seen any reference to the ATIK 16ic-s chip, other than it's a Sony ICX415AL. I think i need to look at the review for both. If it is the case and the QHY6 pro has a better chip, then the QHY will be the choice as they are both about the same price.

Simon

Okay but think about reliability and software. I have no experience of the QHY.

Olly

[Deneb]

I still second the Atik Camera, the software is really dummy proof (not offending anyone here) & the build quality of the camera is very solid..

Nadeem.

[davy999]

Ordered Atik Titan yesterday, received today, will let you know what I think when I get a few nights usage.

[Si W]

To be honest, I like the sound of the ATIK, not read a bad word about it, everyone that's made any comment about it give's it a thumbs up, not saying the other camera is better or worse, but there's limited information on the net about it, if something good, it's worth singing about, and thats where the ATIK wins, i think the ATIK is going to be my choice, and a big part of that choice is down to you guy's, I've only been a member of the group for a week and the support, and people's willingness to help others is fantastic .so a very big thanks to you all.

Simon

[Deneb]

Well, the final choice is yours - Whatever you feel happy with, Remember it's your Money..

Nadeem..

[Si W]

Congrat's Dave, on your new camera, i've only been into AP for about 12 month myself, and the first camera i got was the DSI ii Colour, i've really enjoyed using it, but it's time to step up to the next level, i'm going to use the DSI as an auto guider which fits in well with the Meade software on my scope, and start taking long exposer's in LRGB with the ATIK, the start of another learning curve begin's.

Simon

[GuillermoBarrancos]

To be honest, I like the sound of the ATIK, not read a bad word about it, everyone that's made any comment about it give's it a thumbs up, not saying the other camera is better or worse, but there's limited information on the net about it, if something good, it's worth singing about, and thats where the ATIK wins, i think the ATIK is going to be my choice, and a big part of that choice is down to you guy's, I've only been a member of the group for a week and the support, and people's willingness to help others is fantastic .so a very big thanks to you all.

Simon

There is a lot of singing about QHY too tho. The QHY8 and QHY9 are very popular cameras and people have been making incredible images with it.

The Atik 16ic is an entry level camera. Just like the QHY6 is.

As you most likely will upgrade to a higher resolution camera within a year or two (when the AP virus catches you). Both Atik 16ic and QHY6 will serve you as excellent guiding cameras.

So it's up to you how much you are willing to pay for an entry level camera.

The QHY6 is comparable with the Atik 16ic-s when it comes to image resolution (752x582 pixels).

QHY6 is around £299 and the Atik 16ic-s is around £580.

[Glider]

For the price of the Atik 16IC-s I could buy the QHY6 with manual filter wheel and Astronomik RGB filters as a package from ModernAstronomy.

The difference I see from comparing specs is the QHY6 has slightly higher noise in terms of -e and smaller pixel dimensions.

I'm trying to see what this means in real terms to me, given the 8" OTA I aim to be using. Has anyone got any comments.

[Si W]

I have been having a good look around on the net for the last hour or so, and found the spec for all four camera's that would be considered as beginner's for QHY and ATIK.

You both have a valid point, however the QHY6 has only a 1/3 ins chip, the same size as the ATIK 16ic, i certainly would say the QHY6 has a far better spec than the ATIK 16ic and £60-70 cheaper.(just the camera's)

QHY6

Sony ICX259AL, Total pixels: 795x596, Active pixels:752x582 (440k pixels), Pixel Size: 6.5µm x 6.25µm, 1/3 inch Mono Exview CCD, Readout noise: 7 -10 e @600 Kpixel/s, QE: 65% at 580nm, Microlensing on chip, ABG: -115dB, Low noise 16bit ADC with CDS and Preamp.

USB2.0 High Speed interface, Built in 6pin Guide Port, One stage Peltier cooled.

ATIK 16ic

ATIK 16ic chip spec

Device Structure

• Interline CCD image sensor

• Image size: Diagonal 6mm (Type 1/3)

• Number of effective pixels: 659 (H) * 494 (V) approx. 330K pixels

• Total number of pixels: 692 (H) * 504 (V) approx. 350K pixels

• Chip size: 5.79mm (H) * 4.89mm (V)

• Unit cell size: 7.4μm (H) * 7.4μm (V)

• Optical black: Horizontal (H) direction: Front 2 pixels, rear 31 pixels

Vertical (V) direction: Front 8 pixels, rear 2 pixels

• Number of dummy bits: Horizontal 16

Vertical 5

You would certainly get a better resolution on the QHY6.

The QHY6 is tempting, but if poss i would rather have a 1/2 chip (more sky), The QHY6pro and the ATIK 16ic-s are both 1/2 ins chips, and there is not much in it on price (about £580 give or take a few quid) and spec.

QHY6pro

Main Features

Total pixel :795*596

Active pixels:752*585 440kpixels

Pixel Size: 8.6um x 8.3um

Typic 1/2inch Exview CCD sensor ICX429AL

Readout noise: 6-8e @600 Kpixel/s

Preview Speed: 5Mpixel/s

Peak QE: 68% @620nm 62%@Ha

Microlensing on chip

ABG: -126dB

16bit ADC with CDS and Preamp

USB2.0 High Speed interface

Optic communication with QHY Color Wheel(No wire)

2-Stage TEC cooling

ATIK 16ic-s

• Interline CCD image sensor

• Image size: Diagonal 8mm (Type 1/2)

• Number of effective pixels: 782 (H) × 582 (V) approx. 460K pixels

• Total number of pixels: 823 (H) × 592 (V) approx. 490K pixels

• Chip size: 7.48mm (H) × 6.15mm (V)

• Unit cell size: 8.3μm (H) × 8.3μm (V)

• Optical black: Horizontal (H) direction: Front 3 pixels, rear 38 pixels

Vertical (V) direction: Front 8 pixels, rear 2 pixels

• Number of dummy bits: Horizontal 19

Vertical 5

Simon

[Glider]

Si W, thanks for bringing that all together, it's good to be able to compare when everything is clearly listed on one page like that.

Interesting, the Atik 16IC-s has the same pixel number and size as my DSI IIc, so merging its luminance with colour should be easy.

I'm thinking the 16IC-s is my choice.

[ollypenrice]

As long as you know that a focal length of 800mm or so on a small chip will give a very small field you won't be disappointed. It's a shame that so much of the camera price is the chip price, making large chip cameras expensive!

Olly

[Glider]

Olly, yes, I've been running things through CCDCalc to get an idea of what to expect. Basically it's the same as I'm getting now with the Meade DSI IIc.

The thing for me is that the Atik is cooled, the Meade has steam coming out of its ears at this time of year!

[Si W]

Hi Glider, Wouldn't the lower sensitve chip on the DSI ii Colour cause problem's when merging with the lum's of an ATIK ?. Chip and pixel size are the same, thats ok, it's the image quality i'm concerned about. It's only because i've seen a thread on cloudy nights a few weeks ago, you can see the side by side comparison between the DSI-Colour and the DSI Pro, the Pro ii has a very similar chip the the ATIK we've been talking about, as you can see i to have a DSI ii Colour as well, but i dont know anyone who's tried merging images.

Google Image Result for http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/PaulRix/Astronomy/Drizzlengcm51seldrizb3rs.jpg

Simon