No real new imaging sensors 2012

[gregbradley]

2012 was a big year for DSLRS with both Canon and Nikon releasing several models.

But it was a different scene in the CCD world being relatively stagnant.

Kodak sold its sensor business to True Sense Imaging and they have added a couple of sensors that most likely would not be used for astrophotography.

I hope they get on top of their new business and look to developing new
CCDs this year.

There was a development with the new Scientific CMOS sensors that may end up being very good once the price comes down.

Otherwise your 8300 or 16803 chipped camera is still cutting edge for now.

Greg.

[clive milne]

Hi Greg,
This may be a fair statement for camera manufacturers targeting our specific demographic.
However, it might be more accurate to acknowledge that the real cutting edge of sensor technology isn't trickling down to our level yet.

ie)
http://fairchildimaging.com/main/documents/Wafer-scale_scientific_CCDs_at_Fairchild_ Imaging.pdf

http://www.sta-inc.net/update-of-sta1600-10560-x-10560-high-resolution-ccd/

best
~c

[Shiraz]

There have been a few interesting developments for shorter fl systems Greg.

The Sony icx674 and icx694 have spectacular specs and are just starting to come on line in astro cameras. Although they are rather expensive, it is pretty hard to ignore the 75%+ quantum efficiencies (65% Ha) and very low noise levels on offer. early images are startling.

the QHY12 OSC with a 14.2m chip, 55% peak QE and low noise is also a very interesting development that seems to be worth a look - not identified which Sony chip it uses, but it has pretty good specs

In the planetary imaging/guiding world there has been a veritable tide of interesting developments, with very high QE, high framerate and larger pixel count chips appearing in CCD and CMOS. Of these, the 70%+QE 1.3mpix Aptina MT9M034 is notable.

regards ray

[Peter Ward]

Ditto. It also is worth mentioning that most amateurs don't have telescopes that can handle say, a 9.3 kg plate mounted camera with 61mm square array.

Pricing also makes 16803 sensor based cameras look cheap.

[gregbradley]

In the planetary cam world yes. In the astrophotography world Sony has several generations of sensors to catch up to the old Kodak chips. Sony seems to specialise in small sensors. Funny that when the Nikon D800 has a full frame 36.3mp CMOS chip that is state of the art and Sony has at least one if not several full frame 24mp chips (Nikon D600, Sony A99, Sony RX1). I have yet to see a Sony chipped based camera image that comes close to a good Kodak CCD image.

Also there is a question about Sony QE values. These are not apples to apples comparisons with Kodak measured QE. Its a game of definitions.
The Sony chips may not be anymore sensitive.

I look forward to seeing some of the True Sense chips showing up in astro cams. These are one shot colour but with a clear microlense instead of 2 green. So its an LRGB matrix rather than RGGB. It is claimed 2 to 3 times more sensitive to light as a result. Could breath some life into one shot colour cameras.


Greg.

[Shiraz]

I guess that the small size of prevous Sony chips has worked against them - nobody with a top quality tracking mount and well corrected big scope is going to be bothered with a 1.3mp chip with 6 micron pixels. Thus, almost by definition, none of the best images will have been taken with Sony chips. However, the icx694 is 6mp, which is getting serious for smaller objects such as galaxies with the new fast scopes. maybe this new chip will help redress the low numbers of good images from Sony chips - I think it could turn out to be a bit of a game changer for the owners of small to medium refractors and medium to larger sized fast Newtonians.

re the QE, I do not understand the basis of the widely held suspicion over Sony QEs. Since Sony does not provide QE for any of their chips, the camera manufacturers all have to measure it themselves - that should make the published QEs more reliable, since nobody can just quote the chip manufacturer's data. Apogee, FLI, Andor, Pt Grey etc measured QE for the old generation Sony ICX285 and all got 60+% absolute using in-house methods. Point Grey shows that the new chips are significantly more sensitive than the 285 - the 75% figure quoted by a couple of camera manufacturers for the icx694 looks quite reasonable and should be directly comparable to the Kodak QE data - unless these guys have all got it wrong.
http://www.andor.com/pdfs/specifications/Andor_Clara_Series_Specifications.p df
http://www.ptgrey.com/support/downloads/documents/TAN2008006_Sensor_Response_Curve_Co mparison_for_ICX445.pdf
http://www.ccd.com/pdf/A285.pdf
http://www.flicamera.com/spec_sheets/MLx285.pdf

yes, hopefully the new Kodak owners can get the company back on track and not dump the amateur market in the process - they have been the only company willing to provide a remarkably wide range of non-consumer type chips to amateur astronomers at reasonable prices.

regards ray

[Bassnut]

Yes, im looking to finally get back into imaging after a long hiatis and the choices for a new cam are more confusing than ever. Improvements in sensor dont seem to be the main criteria these days given they havent changed much. SBIG STXL looks the most promising with built in before-the-filter internal guide (backfocus issues alone should make this a success), but they are taking forever to get to market, and the choice of 11002 or 6303 chip choice is very odd, both old sensors, although the 6303 version is still attractive to me, if I could actually get it. 16803 does appear to be the sweet spot these days, though mainly on bang for buck rather than outright performance.. I have it on good inside goss that FLI version has the best performance/reliablity and support these days, and yet many astroimaging rockstars seem to prefer Apogee U16m/F16m, I have no idea whats going on there.

Im still hard pressed to ditch the absolutely ancient ST10, I cant believe there isnt a larger sensor now with the same or better QE.

[gregbradley]

I think the FLI Microline 16803 is a good body choice as its the smallest and lightest for large chips as well as small. The downside is FLI do not have any guiding solutions. That is all SBIG or QSI. MMOAG works fine and can be attached to a FLI as I do. Its not pretty but it works fine.

I think a lot of astrophotographers have gone for these large chipped cameras and faced a lot of problems with weight and the resulting flex. The Microline is only slightly less powerful at cooling (3C I am told) so no big deal. You don't really need the USB hub and extra power outlet on the Proline.

I had Apogee U16M and its a good camera. Perhaps it also flexes less as its a bit lighter and narrower putting less stress on the focuser. Downside with U16M is the slow cooling but its not a big deal. Everything else with it is very good. Their filter wheel is fantastic and its a lot cheaper as well. But its still a fairly large and heavy camera.

SBIG and QSI seemed to close the gap in the electronics with FLI which was a big advantage FLI had. Now they both do fast downloads and cleaner AD with the right model.

Weight is the modern issue. These imaging trains from most are just too heavy for anything without an AP sticker on it just about. Even Taks struggle sometimes.

Greg.