Quote:
Originally Posted by cometcatcher
ASI174 wins. The comparison would be a lot closer with a modified DSLR.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atmos
It is an interesting comparison although not at all unexpected  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by luka
Good to see, although completely expected.
This is not just a comparison between a DSLR and an astro camera but also a comparison between an unmodified sensor with a Bayer matrix vs mono sensor.
The efficiency will be several times lower for the DSLR sensor:
1. The missing IR (expecially Ha from the Eagle nebula) is blocked by the filter in an unmodified DSLR.
2. The Bayer matrix. Mono will be about 2x more efficient (depending on sensor, Bayer matrix etc) and also will have a better resolution.
Apples and oranges I would say  |
What really blew me away was the comparison between un-processed subs.
The 60sec ZWO image (attached below) is straight out of the camera. No processing whatsoever.
The DSLR images in this thread are also un-processed.