Hi gang, I built my ROR at GMARS (Landers, CA) back in 2015 and used it almost daily while I lived in California. Well, kids started to happen in 2017 so we moved back "home" to Georgia and we now have a 3rd baby coming any day now. I have the observatory setup for remote operation which is still working fine. It's just hard to find time to use it! With paternity leave coming up, and me of course volunteering for the night shift with the baby so I can image, I have started getting back in the game and reading up. I see that my current camera (SBIG STF-8300m) was discontinued long ago and it appears has been replaced with the SBIG Aluma series. I'm having a hard time finding a source on the internet that compares and contrasts the current best/popular astrophotography cameras. Does anyone know of a review-type site that goes through the ins & outs of the ASI, QHY, SBIG, etc cameras that are being produced today? I have the itch to buy a new camera/filter wheel combo and would like to read up. Thanks and clear skies, Dustin www.StarCampObservatory.com |
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
I don't know what's the best review site. What I do know is that since 2020, the word "top" and the word "CCD" do not co-exist in the same sentence. CCD is so 20th century. Now we move to CMOS.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
There doesn't seem to be a consistent single website for reviews on cameras on all cameras. The best place to learn about the current best is any popular astronomy forum, and here of course.
With that said, my recommendation is to determine the field of view you want, and if your telescope can support it. If it can, pick a camera from any brand that has the current generation Sony BSI (backside illuminated) CMOS sensor. They are objectively superior to anything that came before in full well, dynamic range, read noise, and sensitively. Those sensor names would be (from smallest to biggest) IMX533/571/455/461/411. All of these sensors use the same 3.76 micron Starvis BSI pixels that are the best in the business.
For example if you wanted APS-C FOV, that's the IMX571 sensor. ZWO sells that in their ASI2600MM model. QHY sells that as QHY268M model. You'd buy the matching filter wheel from each brand and be on your way.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
If you're looking for a modern CMOS camera with a shutter, you can fast track your research to Moravian's offerings.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
With that said, my recommendation is to determine the field of view you want, and if your telescope can support it. If it can, pick a camera from any brand that has the current generation Sony BSI (backside illuminated) CMOS sensor....For example if you wanted APS-C FOV, that's the IMX571 sensor. ZWO sells that in their ASI2600MM model. QHY sells that as QHY268M model. Thanks for the info! I did see those cameras but the price tag struck me as odd. That's not a bad thing of course, I was just expecting to see prices from the old days ($4500 for the camera and another $1500 for the filter wheel, etc). Guess prices have came down on this stuff? About time! FYI my scope is a ES127 apo with 0.7x focal reducer/flattener. Seems to pair well with my 8300m which has a 17.96 x 13.52mm sensor. I see that's a good bit smaller than an APS-C sensor though.....
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
I wouldn't hesitate to recommend ZWO cameras (ASI2600MM or the full-frame ASI6200MM), but you may not want to get sucked into the ZWO ecosystem.
Having said that, I am very happy in that ecosystem, and if other parts of your system also need upgrading, then it is not a bad direction to go.
Whatever you decide, I wish you all the best with your growing family!
CS Brian
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
Dustin Smith:
FYI my scope is a ES127 apo with 0.7x focal reducer/flattener. Seems to pair well with my 8300m which has a 17.96 x 13.52mm sensor. I see that's a good bit smaller than an APS-C sensor though..... I am aware of several people using APS-C cameras successfully on the ES127.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
"Top Camera" can mean either the most popular or the best--and those aren't necessarily the same thing. ZWO makes some very nice cameras that fall into the category of "most popular" CMOS cameras. They work pretty well and they are cheap, which makes them popular. Their high-end ASI6200 camera is a good camera but it doesn't offer very many operating modes for running the IMX455 sensor and it comes with the "consumer grade" sensor (rather than the industrial grade sensor). If you want to step up from ZWO, the QHY600 is at the next level up. You can read about many of the differences between the QHY and ZWO cameras here: https://astrograph.net/How-To-Guides/QHY600M-Why. QHY is a step up but in my opinion, QHY still does not reach the level of quality that FLI used to have. I have two QHY600s and they perform well. Unfortunately one of them is dying and trying to get QHY to address the problem was like pulling teeth. That story is still ongoing but in my view, customer service is a factor in picking a vendor--and in rating the camera. If you want the best camera, I agree with Bill Long that Moravian cameras have to be considered. I hear VERY good things about Moravian from the folks at Obstech in Chile and I have one on order. I am told that they are well built, super reliable, and have great performance. Moravian may be the successor to FLI but until I've had a chance to run one for a few years, I'll withhold making such a sweeping declaration. The ultimate problem with your question is that you didn't specify what you want to do with the camera. My personal "top camera" for guiding is the old ZWO1600. It is uncooled, it has a big sensor that's a good match to my ONAG guider, it is very small, and it's cheap. At the high-end of main imaging cameras, my top pick might be one with an IMX411 sensor like the Moravian C5A-150M, but in that case, you can't care about bandwidth. Each image file is over 300MB! That's why I have a Moravian C1x61000 on order. I suppose that the fact that I've committed around $6,500 to trying it out must mean that it's my current top pick! Since I'm still waiting for it to be delivered, I can't fill in the blanks about how good I think it actually is so stay tuned. John
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
Dustin Smith:
FYI my scope is a ES127 apo with 0.7x focal reducer/flattener. Seems to pair well with my 8300m which has a 17.96 x 13.52mm sensor. I see that's a good bit smaller than an APS-C sensor though.....
I am aware of several people using APS-C cameras successfully on the ES127.
I'm one of them! Love my 127 + 0.7x reducer/flattener + ASI2600MC Pro. I get round stars to the corners. It's not good for full frame, though. That being said, OP — the IMX571 sensor cameras are likely the best option for you. That would be the ZWO ASI2600MM Pro or the QHY 268M. There are smaller sensor cameras that come close to matching your sensor size, like the ASI294MM Pro for example, but their sensors are inferior to the IMX571 (amp glow, much higher read noise, etc).
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
John Hayes:
"Top Camera" can mean either the most popular or the best--and those aren't necessarily the same thing. ZWO makes some very nice cameras that fall into the category of "most popular" CMOS cameras. They work pretty well and they are cheap, which makes them popular. Their high-end ASI6200 camera is a good camera but it doesn't offer very many operating modes for running the IMX455 sensor and it comes with the "consumer grade" sensor (rather than the industrial grade sensor). If you want to step up from ZWO, the QHY600 is at the next level up. You can read about many of the differences between the QHY and ZWO cameras here: https://astrograph.net/How-To-Guides/QHY600M-Why. QHY is a step up but in my opinion, QHY still does not reach the level of quality that FLI used to have. I have two QHY600s and they perform well. Unfortunately one of them is dying and trying to get QHY to address the problem was like pulling teeth. That story is still ongoing but in my view, customer service is a factor in picking a vendor--and in rating the camera.
If you want the best camera, I agree with Bill Long that Moravian cameras have to be considered. I hear VERY good things about Moravian from the folks at Obstech in Chile and I have one on order. I am told that they are well built, super reliable, and have great performance. Moravian may be the successor to FLI but until I've had a chance to run one for a few years, I'll withhold making such a sweeping declaration.
The ultimate problem with your question is that you didn't specify what you want to do with the camera. My personal "top camera" for guiding is the old ZWO1600. It is uncooled, it has a big sensor that's a good match to my ONAG guider, it is very small, and it's cheap. At the high-end of main imaging cameras, my top pick might be one with an IMX411 sensor like the Moravian C5A-150M, but in that case, you can't care about bandwidth. Each image file is over 300MB! That's why I have a Moravian C1x61000 on order. I suppose that the fact that I've committed around $6,500 to trying it out must mean that it's my current top pick! Since I'm still waiting for it to be delivered, I can't fill in the blanks about how good I think it actually is so stay tuned.
John Good points here John. I have chatted with a number of European Astrophotographers over the years, and one thing they tend to repeat to me fairly often, is why Moravian cameras are not more popular in the US. It may have something to do with support, I am not quite sure though. When designing the CDK14 system for deployment to Ed's Remote imaging site in New Mexico, I knew a shutter was going to be a hard requirement for me. I was debating deploying the FLI PL16803 camera I already have with the scope, then I was pointed to the Moravian C5-100, which is a great value for such a large (55mm) chip. It was also usable with the 50x50 square filters I already have -- thus why it ended up at the top of the list (and on order). The C5-150 would of course be really nice, but getting new filters was not something I wanted to do from a budget perspective. I have used both the ASI6200 and QHY600 cameras, and out of the two I had a better experience with the QHY600. I plan to use two of them for my systems remaining at home. I think they fit that use case pretty well, and if one of them dies and needs support -- at least my remote system is not impacted and troubleshooting a camera in your hand, is always easier than troubleshooting one miles away. I think the modes on the QHY600 are pretty neat and allow for one to dial in the camera pretty nicely. This is not on the C5 from what I can tell from the site, which I will miss, but other factors of the C5 design will help cover that. -Bill
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
Wei-Hao Wang:
I don't know what's the best review site. What I do know is that since 2020, the word "top" and the word "CCD" do not co-exist in the same sentence. CCD is so I presume that20th century. Now we move to CMOS. That probably explains why Adam Block’s images are so bad
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
His images are great, but it’s his skills that overcome the disadvantage of CCD.
I also use CCD cameras. However, if I am going to buy a new camera, I will never consider the CCD one.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
Wei-Hao Wang:
His images are great, but it’s his skills that overcome the disadvantage of CCD.
I also use CCD cameras. However, if I am going to buy a new camera, I will never consider the CCD one. I agree. I wouldn’t buy another ccd either
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
You can equipment search on Astrobin and look at images from scopes and cameras and check how they frame. Don’t know if this is your exact scope. https://app.astrobin.com/equipment/explorer/telescope/4136/explore-scientific-ed127-127mm-f75-carbon-fiber |
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
You can equipment search on Astrobin and look at images from scopes and cameras and check how they frame. Don’t know if this is your exact scope.
https://app.astrobin.com/equipment/explorer/telescope/4136/explore-scientific-ed127-127mm-f75-carbon-fiber That does seem to be a logical approach. But - as far as I can see - having tried a search for my particular set up out of curiosity - that apart from framing and sensor size a range of modern cameras seem all to be so good as to be indistinguishable on the basis of image quality. The best pictures were great and factors other than the camera itself must be making most of the difference.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
Geoff:
Wei-Hao Wang:
His images are great, but it’s his skills that overcome the disadvantage of CCD.
I also use CCD cameras. However, if I am going to buy a new camera, I will never consider the CCD one.
I agree. I wouldn’t buy another ccd either While I generally agree, I want to point out that the 16803 is still a superb camera—even though it’s a CCD. In fact, the IOTD today was taken with a 16803 based camera. They aren’t made any more but if you can find one on the used market, they are a really good match for many imaging systems that can handle a large sensor. - John
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
Just my .02 on Moravian.
Deep Space Products used to sell them and I bought a class one 16200 based CCD camera from them a number of years back. I had terrible trouble with the filter wheel rubber bunching up and jamming (I now suspect it was a bad rubber ring). What was worse is that the chip was not installed properly and had a lot of tilt. It had to go back to Europe to be fixed and in the process Moravian refused to pay shipping despite it clearly being their fault. The result was that Ed at Deep Space stopped selling their cameras (he did pay the shipping himself, which is why I have continued to order things from him including a CDK 14 and L-350 - he clearly had the integrity that Moravian lacked).
There were other issues as well:
1) Their OAG sold with the camera had flexure as well and I eventually replaced that with a MMOAG.
2) The power socket plug literally melted and fused itself to the power plug one night. I had to remove the socket from the board and bypass the issue by soldering a pigtail power cord direct to the board.
Having said that, once all those issues were sorted (which took about a year), the camera functioned very well and has continued to do so for years. I will probably sell it this year but probably to replace it with a CMOS, not because it is not working well.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
CCD is 'dead', move on to cmos if you want to buy new astro cameras. Simple decision. This is the opinion who is still the user of two CCDs at his own observatory.  Yuexiao
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
I have used 3 16803-based cameras in professional observatories and all of them had issue of one sort or another at times, most frequent being signficant changes in defects (column and clusters). This can be dealt with (but requires extra effort) but it was and is very annoying. Otherwise they do work OK (but not for short exposures).
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
I'm also one who uses the ES127ED APO with an IMX571-chipped camera (QHY 268M+FW). With the ES 3" FF/FR, this combination yields an image scale of 1.16"/pixel, right in the sweet spot. When I first started using this camera in early 2022, I was getting egg-shaped stars in the corner of all my images. However, using NINA's Aberration Inspector plugin, I measured the tilt and curvature of the critical focus zone and was able to flatten the field enough to get round stars into the corners of the APS-C sensor. This required only a small adjustment to the camera's built-in tilt adjuster, and spacers to extend the back focus aft of the FF/FR from 55 to 67.5mm. The cost to get a flat field with reasonably good stars was trivial: about $4 for some stainless steel machine screws (the spacers came with the camera).
You mentioned you have a young family so presumably have significant financial priorities outside the hobby, but if you are thinking about a replacement for your SBIG, I would add one more vote for the APS-C CMOS mono option.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
Pros and cons, CMOS VS CCD always a hot topic.
I recently purchased a Moravian G4 16000 (ccd) new and love it.
living in London I have very little clear skies to be fussing over camera specs.
If it’s fast action you require then a cmos that supports 3.0 usb would be a good step forward.
good luck
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
Yuexiao Shen:
CCD is 'dead', move on to cmos if you want to buy new astro cameras. Simple decision. This is the opinion who is still the user of two CCDs at his own observatory.
Yuexiao *** Type your reply here ** lol it’s not dead yet buddy
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
Jaspal Chadha:
Yuexiao Shen:
CCD is 'dead', move on to cmos if you want to buy new astro cameras. Simple decision. This is the opinion who is still the user of two CCDs at his own observatory.
Yuexiao
*** Type your reply here **
lol it’s not dead yet buddy ***I am not saying I do not like CCD. I am a CCD fan. The point is the resell value is extremely low now. I guess I cannot sell my current too ccds with 1/3 of the prices. I will use them until they go 'dead', haha. Now for the 16803, the best ccd, who will buy a second hand one if that 2nd hand price is larger than zwo6200 or QHY600 ***
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
Jaspal Chadha:
Yuexiao Shen:
CCD is 'dead', move on to cmos if you want to buy new astro cameras. Simple decision. This is the opinion who is still the user of two CCDs at his own observatory.
Yuexiao
*** Type your reply here **
lol it’s not dead yet buddy They are certainly "dead" in the sense that if you buy a CCD today over a CMOS you are almost certainly reducing the quality of your images before you even see stars. If you already have one on a scope, it will work just fine. But you should consider planning to replace it soon. As I've said before, on the market CMOS astronomy cameras available to amateurs today are objectively superior to amateur CCDs . You will get better quality data for each minute of exposure from a CMOS, period. You don't even need to care about specs at all. Just buy a whatever brand camera has a 571/455 sensor and slap it on your scope. Done, you now have the best.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
As I've said before, on the market CMOS astronomy cameras available to amateurs today are objectively superior to amateur CCDs . You will get better quality data for each minute of exposure from a CMOS, period. Honest question, out of curiosity, is there an actual specification today where a modern CCD is better than a state of the art CMOS, an actual reason why someone starting from scratch should choose CCD? Today, CMOS has, on a per area basis, lower read noise, higher full well capacity, higher QE, no pattern noise, and faster download speed. It is also available at much lower cost and at higher resolution. It is about as comprehensive a superiority as I can tell.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
