Orion Starshoot Solar System Colour Imager 11 or SPC900?

[gfletcher]

Hi Guys

Would there be any significant difference in performance between these two?

Is the image quality of the Orion a step up from the SPC900 with respect to lunar and planetary imaging ?

thanks

Graham

[riklaunim]

Orion will give you bigger image, and probably better software control, but looking at the specs - StarShoot Solar System Color Imager II | Orion Telescopes - it's ir-blocked (it's usually better to shoot the moon with ir passing filter). SPC would be cheap. Or you can choose a HD capable webcam (MS/Logitech/Creative) which also has more pixels like the Orion SSSP...

but if you have:

QHY5 Guide Camera

Then use it link.

[russ]

I owned both at the same time and used them for different targets.

Found the Orion a much better lunar imager. Larger chip, smoother cleaner image. A pleasure to use with Craterlet. And USB 2.0.

The SPC is still a better planetary imager. The Orion was struggling with a poor lux rating and even with the gain cranked to the max, Saturn was faint.

[gfletcher]

Thanks for your comments guys

Therefore , already having an SPC880 (flashed to SPC900), would £50 for the Orion Starshoot Solar System Colour Imager 11 seem a reasonable buy ?

thanks

Graham

[riklaunim]

Use QHY5, it will do the same or better on the moon, and it's not ir-blocked

[russ]

Ah yes, i hadn't noticed you already have the QHY5. Not used the QHY5, but sounds like there would be no point in buying the Orion.

[sixela]

It's mostly a step down, because it has a fairly cheap CMOS sensor instead of the excellent CCD sensor of the SPC900N.

Yes, it has more resolution so one-shot colour pictures aren't hampered as much by the Bayer matrix colouring that reduces the resolution. But once that bothers you on the SPC900, chances are that for planets you'd rather be ready for a good 640x480 monochrome sensor (like the ICX618ALA-E) and filters than for that Orion CMOS sensor, and you already have a QHY5 for moon photos.

Some people even hack these more recent monochrome sensors onto their existing Philips webcams, but otherwise DMK and others make good monochrome sensor webcam-like planetary cameras.

[riklaunim]

It's mostly a step down, because it has a fairly cheap CMOS sensor instead of the excellent CCD sensor of the SPC900N.

QE of ICX098 (in SPC900N) is lower than QE of Micron MT9M001 from QHY5. QHY5 and better 5v can perform nearly as DMK21 + with extra advantage of better IR/red sensitivity. They only lack electronics as good/better than TIS D*K cameras.

Some people even hack these more recent monochrome sensors onto their existing Philips webcams, but otherwise DMK and others make good monochrome sensor webcam-like planetary cameras.

Difference here is electronics. D*K cameras are USB 2.0 and use lossless Y800/other format.

Ultimate planetary camera would be something with that ICX618 (incoming QHY IMG0H, Basler Ace, Point Grey Flea 3, or modding other camera with it.). But that's currently choosen by most advanced (and most demanding) planetary imagers. Some also use ICX445 for lunary and planetary work in one. It's 1/3" with very small pixels and sensitivity close to ICX618.

[sixela]

QE of ICX098 (in SPC900N) is lower than QE of Micron MT9M001 from QHY5.

No argument from me; just to be clear the "step down" was from the SP900 IXC098 to the CMOS sensor in the Orion.

[riklaunim]

It could have worse electronics so you didn't got better results with it. It's very hard to do it right for CMOS cameras like for a progressive CCD.