View Single Post
Old 27-06-2011, 09:45 AM
CoolhandJo's Avatar
CoolhandJo (Paul)
Registered User

CoolhandJo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,330

In my experience with both DSLR (I have modded Canon 350d) and CCD (I started with DSI and now use Atik 314L), the biggest difference is really in the megapixel amounts, well depths, and resolution per pixel.

Basically a DSLR will give you an "overall" pleasing image becuase they are high in pixel count, have a medium well depth (models before 500), and are one shot colour. This makes things easier when you are starting out. BUT, the learning curve for a DSLR image is slightly different to that of a CCD - so if you start out with DSLR you will have to re learn some stuff differently when you move to a CCD.

High End CCD's emulate the above benfits of a DSLR. So if you wanted to start out with an Atik 1100 or similar you will get similar results (if you choos a one shot colour version). The Kodak 8300 are medium priced, high megapixel and are also good starting point (but not exactly cheap for a beginner).

So my suggestion would be go straight to any CCD you can get your hands on if you think you will be pursuing image excellence (on going) as CCD's are designed for Astro imaging and allow you to constantly refine your skills both in hardware usage and image processing a lot more than a DSLR.

This is my opinion only and I am sure others would disagree with any or all points I raise

BTW I still like taking iamges with my DSLR!
Reply With Quote