Recommendations on my next imaging Camera after years with modded DSLRs?

[g__day (Matthew)]

Hi all,

I am thinking I would like to step up from imaging with modded DSLRs and would love advice as to good options to match my gear, seeing and imaging targets.

I currently use two IR modded Canon 40D Dlsr's - a cool boxed one on a F10 C9.25 for DSOs and a uncooled one on a Williams Optics 110 FLT for wider field shots of similar targets. I use Hutech IDAS light pollution suppression filters on both - which probably mean for my night skies I can capture 10 minutes light frames on the WO and 15 - 20 minute subs max on the C9.25 on really dark nights before things just totally blow out the pixel wells.

What I love to try and image are nebulaes like M74, 77, the Helix Nebulae, the Eagle, Trifid or NGC 2070 - things with lots of coloured gas rather than just oodles of stars in them

I am aware that at its native resolution the Canon 40Ds with the slow F10 C9.25 - each pixel is seeing 0.44 arc seconds - and the sky here is only fair to average at best - so I am way over sampling the sky.

I don't mind going one shot colour or Mono + filters - I would just like something that can capture more detail, a bit faster and make capturing objects like say M77 which in my locale isn't much above the luminance of the no moon night sky.

At my current location I don't know if this is possible - city glow may be a hurdle if I don't wish to go narrow band - and I don't know if I want to go direcly there.

Budget wise - don't mind anything from $2K - $8K so long as its fit for purpose and will go well with my existing gear. Eventually once I have all the skills I may retire and move to somewhere with darker skies - so the gear can come with me. I want to gain all the skill sets to capture the rather dim objects I am hunting well. Again if folks think to really capture my targets I need darker skies and both larger, and faster OTAs - please do share your insights!

My currently mount (Atlux with the SkySensor2000-PC) guided has no trouble pointing and tracking objects really well for long periods of time, especially guiding thru an OAG - 30 minute shots blow out the pixel wells - but the stars are all lovely and round. ALso since moving to The SkyX witj Tpoint, Dome and Camera add on - using its closed loop slew - targets are dead centred on the Cameras every single time so far.

So I am very keen to hear everyone's advice.

Matthew

[glend (Glen)]

The ASI1600MM-C, just released in June, is a real game changer camera, extremely low noise, -40C Ccooling, high sensitivity with full gain control.; and less than $2k. Plenty of images from them already, check out the ASI1600 Astrobin group for examples.
Its pixel size is probably best suited to sub-1000mm focal length, so would be a good match for the WO 110. Imaging at f10 is another matter.

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

+1 ASI1600 is at an attractive price point. I bought the mono although I've barely been able to use it because of the weather.

I intend to try it with my C8@f/7 which amounts to ~1400mm focal length, sure it's a little oversampled for most seeing, but with the shorter subs necessary with this camera it should capture whatever sharpness the sky chooses to give. So maybe it's worth considering getting one of the 0.63x reducers for your C9.25?

I also reckon it'd be a cracker with the 110.

The advantage with a mono chip is that you can get into narrowband while living in the city and do RGB when you're out.

The other thing about the 1600 is that it's at the lower end of your budget...so if you decide it's not for you, sell it on and you've not lost much.

[Atmos (Colin)]

At at FL of near 2400mm you'll definitely want larger pixels than that of the ASI1600 which would give you a scale of ~0.33"/pixel. You're better off with a pixel size around the 8+ micron. Although it is very noisy, the 11002 sensor is fine for LRGB imaging.

If you want to keep doing OSC imaging then the ASI1600 colour isn't too bad because you want to over sample anyway.

[billdan (Bill)]

Hi Matthew,

I went from a DSLR to a QHY12 OSC and have been very happy with the results. However I want more resolution and also do narrowband imaging so I am saving up the pennies for a QHY-16200A. This is an integrated camera with OAG and 2in filter wheel.

http://www.gamaelectronics.com.au/qhy16200a.html

Cheers
Bill

[Shiraz (Ray)]

reckon I would bite the bullet and change both the scope and the camera. A Mak Newt with a ZWO1600 mono cooled would be great on that mount for high res imaging. The camera needs filters, but you can use 1.25s with the 1600, which is a huge saving if you go narrowband.

of course, the 9.52 would be readily saleable, but if you decide to keep it for imaging, agree with Colin that you will need big pixels. An 11002 or 16200 would seem to be a good way to go, but either is way more expensive than the ZWO approach. An alternative would be to use a ZWO1600 with software binning, but you would end up with only 4m of 7.6micron pixels - still plenty for many DSOs, but not all. In other aspects, a software binned ZWO would be better than alternatives, with lower read noise, slightly better QE (possibly) and much better dynamic range.

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

16200 looks a nice sized chip, but the read noise is horrendous by 2016 standards

[Mosc_007 (Charles)]

I bought an Entry Level CCD about 12 months ago. A QHY10 CCD. Is a nice camera but still expensive. Recently I bought a ZWO 1600MC and am very happy with it. And the price is good for such a camera. The Noise on the ZWO 1600MC is so low I dont even bother with Darks.

[RickS (Rick)]

Originally Posted by Camelopardalis

16200 looks a nice sized chip, but the read noise is horrendous by 2016 standards

O noes! I better go and delete all the substandard images I took with that noisy old KAF-16803

More seriously, Matthew said he's able to do long subs so the option of a noisier but larger Kodak/Trusense sensor is still worthy of consideration if he's after a larger FOV.

Cheers,
Rick.

[lazjen (Chris)]

The recent M20 I posted was done at about 1350 mm using the ASI1600MM-C. It seemed to work ok. I do plan moving the camera on to another scope soon (around 700 mm) for its main work, but I was pleased that it did well at 1350 mm.

Keep in mind that if you go mono (highly recommended) you need to budget for all the filters (LRGB, plus Ha, SII, OIII if you make the leap to narrowband), plus a filter wheel. The camera choice may also constrain what filter wheel and filters you can use.

Another thing to keep in mind is the weight of the gear hanging off the back and if that could impact your focuser. Is it up to the task of handling it all? You may find you need to upgrade that as well as some of the CCDs out there aren't that lightweight.

[Slawomir (Suavi)]

Hi Matthew,

It might be worthwhile seeing what people have been able to produce with the new ASI camera : http://www.astrobin.com/groups/31/

IMO CCDs still have the edge over CMOS when in comes to DSO imaging, but CCD-based astro cameras are also more expensive. If it was me and if budget would allow for it, I would be seriously tempted to grab a camera with the 16200 chip.

But as it has been already mentioned, a good focuser as well as the cost of filters and FW all need to be taken into account as well.

I'm sure you will have fun with whatever dedicated astro camera you choose

[gregbradley]

A KAF16200 camera for sure. I am currently imaging with a FLI ML16200 and its a great sensor. I have lots of images with it but none posted yet. Soon.

11002 is no good to you with those scopes. It requires a scope with a wide corrected circle and a flattener. No way the SCT will handle it and the WO FLT perhaps. It needs a 3 inch focuser minimum.

KAF16200 is the best all round sensor for most imagers. Its got a good field of view, low noise (the high noise remark is incorrect) its clean like a Sony sensor, fairly deep wells so blown out stars don't occur as easily and 16mps for that size sensor is quite high resolution. The pixel size means it matches the average persons seeing with an average focal length up to 1500mm. Your SCT will require larger pixels and they are only on full frame or above and it won't handle a sensor that large.

You can always bin the 16200 images on the SCT if the seeing is not good.

As far as which 16200 camera to get your choices are FLI, SBIG (both fairly expensive in AUD). Moravian and QHY. My choice would be the Moravian with the enhanced cooling.

If you wanted a cheaper option then QSI 683 WSG 8's are suddenly fairly common on Astromart for about USD$3,500. I think a lot are upgrading to the 16200.

Greg.

[Slawomir (Suavi)]

Originally Posted by gregbradley

As far as which 16200 camera to get your choices are FLI, SBIG (both fairly expensive in AUD). Moravian and QHY. My choice would be the Moravian with the enhanced cooling.

Also, Atik claims they will release their camera with 16200 chip in early December, and they promise it will be similarly priced to QHY with the same chip. It will have nice 50 C below ambient cooling, but read noise most likely not as low as in the FLI...

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

Originally Posted by RickS

O noes! I better go and delete all the substandard images I took with that noisy old KAF-16803

More seriously, Matthew said he's able to do long subs so the option of a noisier but larger Kodak/Trusense sensor is still worthy of consideration if he's after a larger FOV.

just think of all the free hard drive space you'd have

Originally Posted by gregbradley

...low noise (the high noise remark is incorrect) its clean like a Sony sensor

Really? Maybe SBIG put the wrong values on their website then... https://www.sbig.com/products/cameras/stxl/stxl-16200/

And QHY are quoting 10e!

"clean" like a Sony sensor...ICX674/694 family are generally ~4e (QSI quote better). Just presenting the facts according to the interweb...

[billdan (Bill)]

I think the read noise figures are being interperated as some kind of boogie man. The 10e ( or 8e quoted from SBIG) is the same as the QHY12 and other CCD's from 4 years ago. It just means don't do 10sec subs with them, in the majority of sub lengths we do (3 plus minutes) read noise is never an issue.

What would concern me more is being a Kodak chip, RBI can rear its ugly head. I'll ask that question to Theo before I purchase one, if there have been any reports of RBI with the 16200 chip.

Bill

[Shiraz (Ray)]

Originally Posted by billdan

I think the read noise figures are being interperated as some kind of boogie man. The 10e ( or 8e quoted from SBIG) is the same as the QHY12 and other CCD's from 4 years ago. It just means don't do 10sec subs with them, in the majority of sub lengths we do (3 plus minutes) read noise is never an issue.

What would concern me more is being a Kodak chip, RBI can rear its ugly head.

Bill

I think that read noise can still be the limiting issue with narrowband under some circumstances Bill. With dark skies, very few systems get to be sky limited in NB and dark current can be low with qood cooling, so all that is left is read noise. low read noise is better.

Having said that though, many people do NB imaging under bright sky with moonlight - 10e will be plenty good enough for that.

[billdan (Bill)]

I have no experience with NB imaging so I trust what you say Ray. However the CMOS chips with very low read noise also have very low full well capacity, so I think that is more important for going deep and getting mag20+ objects.

Bill

EDIT: I forgot about anti-blooming so there probably is no difference - plus dynamic range = full well / read noise, which for the ASI 1600 is 20,000/3.8 and the 16200 is 60,000/10 slightly better.

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

Surely what's important for "going deep" is dynamic range and decent QE?

The full well capacity of the 1600 sensor is comparable to the Sony ICX674/694 series, and I don't here a lot of those owners complaining that they can't chase faint objects.

[billdan (Bill)]

You are right Dunk, it took a while for the penny to drop, but I got there, refer to my edit.
Bill

[g__day (Matthew)]

I am of course happy to upgrade the current focuser - a Meade focuser controlled thru a JMI box to my PC. The C9.25 is carbon fibre so it holds focus extremely well. On the back of the OTA is the Meade, a Lumicon giant OAG, a Meade DSI II Pro Mono and the Canon in a cool box - so that is quite a bit of weight. I did originally have a focal reducer in the OAG - but it introduced coma and Lumicon couldn't explain why so I removed it.

Given I keep the OTA - I would probably go to a Moonlight focuser (had great experience with the last one) into an ONAG into filters (AO if warranted) then primary imaging Camera. I assume with the current set-up I would want large pixels with deep wells, or just bin 2x2 or 3x3 something with smaller pixels?

I'd like to match the camera to my gear - if I were to upgrade OTA - well I would probably upgrade mount as well - then reviewing today's technologies I would go C14 or maybe Riccardi Honders - which could mean all new imaging gear again? I don't plan to go there directly - I want to cut my teeth on this one step at a time.

Given my desired target choice and fact that my night skies aren't that dark - is it all achievable? Do I need faster gear if my targets are only a tad above the night sky luminance?

Appreciate all the thoughts given so far. I notice a lot of Cameras for sale at the moment in the IIS trades - but ponder they aren't quite right for my objectives.

Cheers all,

Matthew