Mono Camera Advice - Sony vs Kodak

[Andy01]

Hi Everyone, I'm looking for some expert help and advice please. :)

After 12 months using my SBIG 8300c OSC I'm almost ready to move up to a mono camera system.

I've done lots of reading of this topic on these forums, but since many of those threads were written we've seen the release of the new Sony ICX814 sensor to rival the venerable Kodak KAF 8300 sensor. I'm looking for a system to suit my current gear, that I can use for many years.

Much as I would love the extra real estate on the KAI11000 chip, the need to upgrade the focuser, flattener, (mount?) and get the 2" filters will likely blow my $5k budget.

My current gear is a William Optics FLT 110 f7.0 with .8 flattener/reducer (ie:FL 616mm f5.6) EQ-6 mount, Mac computers & laptop
Location - Melbourne Suburbs, occasional trips to the country, hot summers
Preferred subjects - Nebulae, Globs, the odd Galaxy

I'd prefer a mac compatible camera system with built in OAG to suit long narrowband exposures, a 7 position built in FW and 2 stage cooling for summer.

Sony chip cameras
Starlight Xpress Trius SX-814 (2 stage cooling)
QSI 690 wsg-8 (2 stage cooling)
ATIK One 6.0 (6MP ICX694AL single stage cooling 5 position FW)

Kodak chip cameras
QSI 683 wsg-8 (2 stage cooling)
Moravian G2-8300 (2 stage cooling)
SBIG 8300m (single stage cooling)

So unless I've missed anything, that's the shortlist. I'm also very interested in peoples' after sales experience with repairs and service.

Your thoughts and advice welcome please :help:

Cheers,
Andy

[PRejto]

Hi Andy,

Well, I own 2 of the cameras on your two lists! (Moravian G2-8300 and the Trius). Each has advantages! The Kodak chip is bigger so might suit your nebula desires and anything wide field. But, it's much noisier than the Sony chip and a bit less sensitive. I've been able to use my Trius without darks or flats so that is very nice!. In my view if your primary interest was shooting galaxies or PN targets the Sony might win, but for a good field I'd still go with the 8300 chip.

Peter

[Shiraz]

good advice.

I would not get too hung up on cooling for the Sony chips Andy - my SX694 ran at 0C throughout the summer with no noticeable thermal noise.

The Australian seller provided no real support when a Peltier failed in my SX camera - it had to go back to the UK and was "do it yourself". However, SX home provided top notch warranty service, repairing the camera in a few days and getting it back quickly.

[Andy01]

Hi Peter, thanks for your insights. Having used the KAF 8300 chip in my SBIG i must agree its a noisy thing. Might be nice to move on from that if I go with a Sony. I'm confused by your comment about size though, Sony 3388x2712px
Kodak 3326x2504px surely the 9.1MP is bigger in the Sony, or have I missed something?



Thanks Ray, mmmm no noise sounds very appealing! Thanks for the heads up about the Sx service too :)

Next question- re: pixel size. I often seem to overexpose bright stars with my current Kodak camera, which has bigger, (deeper?) pixels than the Sony. Have either of you experienced this with your Sonys?

Cheers
Andy

[Shiraz]

the 8300 and the Sony chips have similar dynamic ranges - the Sony spec is slightly better, but not by a whole lot.

If you are worried by overexposure of stars, reduce the length of subs - the relatively low read noise of the Sony chip will allow subs about 1/3 as long as those needed by the 8300 for the same signal to noise ratio in the integrated image. If you use short subs, you can use more of them and significantly increase the total dynamic range. Despite what you will read in advertising material and elsewhere, large pixels with deep wells are not necessarily better for dynamic range, since they are often accompanied by high read noise.

The larger pixel size of the 8300 will give you more sensitivity with the same scope, but at the cost of reduced ability to resolve the finest detail - this is not a huge issue with nebulae etc, so the 8300 is best for these targets. If you want to image fine detail in galaxies, the Sony chips will definitely do better, but the scope aperture and chromatic aberration will be the limiting factors - 110mm is not quite big enough to take full advantage of very good seeing with small targets, regardless of which chip you have. Even so, the Sony chips will produce larger galaxy images, due to their smaller pixels - the 9mp chip would be best for this type of imaging with your scope.

For clarification, the 694 does not have zero thermal noise, it is just that it is so quiet that thermal noise is not an issue after minor processing (eg hot pixel removal or dithering) - even at 0C.

[gregbradley]

Per your list of requirements there is only one camera that meets that and that is the QSI660 or 690WSG. I think that is around US$4,100 which would be outside your budget.

The SX Trius would come in under the budget with the USB filter wheel and OAG.

Sizewise the Sony is not that much smaller than the KAF8300. Well depth is similar with the Kodak a bit deeper. KAF8300 is about 15 x 12mm and Sony ICX694 is about 12 x 9mm.

I have had problems with star bloat but others have not so not sure what that is about. Shorter exposures do work as a strategy with this camera.

There are 2 areas where the Sony is considerably superior - much higher QE -77% and still 66% in Ha for the 694 and about 6 % less for the 814.

Low noise, the Sony is very clean indeed. I have a FLI Microline 8300 and it is also very noisefree at -15C on. I don't agree the KAF8300 is very noisy. You may be looking at poor quality electronics and confusing that with the chip. Older SBIG cameras were like that, the latest STXL are clean and the higher SBIG 8300 cameras have better electronics.
My Microline 8300 is pure clean at -20 and I run it at -35 to -40 where its super clean.

The Sony would be the one for narrowband. Its way more sensitive than the KAF8300 for narrowband. I am finding it is giving me superior results when using narrowband filters.

You'd have to work out the cost of the Trius 814, the USB filter wheel, the OAG and the larger filters (36mm) versus QSI all in one package with 31mm filters (the filters are closer to the sensor so they get away with smaller filters). Its probably much the same and if you add in the lower cost of 31mm narrowband filters, especially 3nm ones the QSI may be a tad cheaper. My choice would be the QSI as I find these all in one packages like the SBIG STL very appealling clean and simple solution. The 814 would be a good match for a shorter focal length refractor. Say US$4100 plus US$475 for some Astrodon I series LRGB, plus an SBIG STi or Lodestar X2 (Lodestar does not like CCDsoft and is oriented towards Maxim DL).

Greg.

[PRejto]

Judge for yourself. I just used my TEC140 as a reference.

[phomer]

Andy,

There is very little noise when running the QSI583 cooled to -10 and lower and what little there is is easily removed by using darks. I normally use -15 as it gets there all year round, whereas -20 or lower are not able to be achieved in Summer. The 683 improves the cooling over the 583 so it should be able to reach -20 year round. I cannot comment on the support, however, as it has not given me any issues in the 3 years I have owned it. In fact I know of noone that has had any issues. It would need to be returned to the USA though.

Regarding the different sensors, the Kodak has larger pixels 5.4 microns vs 3.69 and that is why the detector is larger and will give a wider field, with slightly fewer pixels. The sensors are 17.96mm x 13.52mm vs 12.48mm x 9.98mm which is significantly larger.

In addition each Kodak pixel can hold about 25,500 electrons as against 18,000 or so (this figure was hard to find and is a bit uncertain). The pixel dark current is 0.025 vs 0.002 at -10. This should give a greater dynamic range to the 8300 as the read noise is essentially the same but lower for the Sony ICX814.

One other thing is the Sony 9mpix takes about 2 seconds longer to download, 12 against 16 seconds although I would not let that influence me.

Just one further thing is that it is probably no longer valid to call it a Kodak Sensor as they are now produced by Truesense imaging.

Regards

Paul

[gregbradley]

The bottom line is both are good. You'd be happy with either.

The Starlight Express 814 got camera of the year last year so that also says something.

Both are close to ideal pixel/arc sec seeing. Around 1 pixel/arc sec is good and both are close to that.

The Sony would be better for narrowband but you are losing a bit of field of view.

Greg.

[Andy01]

Thanks for your insightful comments Greg. Much as I like the look of the QSI's it's made me have a good long look at the Starlight xpress range today. Hmmm...



Um, er yeah - can't argue with that Peter! (Insert sheepish look) I didn't understand how more pixels gave a smaller FOV but i've been enlightened now- cheers!



Thanks Paul, that clears up a few misconceptions that I had. You guys certainly make a good case for the Sony chip cameras :)



Thanks Greg, I was really surprised by the smaller FOV of the Sony, but overall it seems a better fit for me. I guess I could always look forward to getting a shorter FL 'scope one day for a wider FOV ... those Tak 106's sure look nice, but the new WO 81 might be a more realistic proposition to run by SWMBO in the short to medium term.

I'll send off quote requests/wish lists to the Starlight & QSI reps this week and see how it all pans out from there. Much will depend on the cost of the camera, OAG, FW & filters together.

Meanwhile if anyone has a second hand one they would like to sell I'm interested :)

Cheers
Andy

[gregbradley]

The FOV is governed by the chip size not the pixel size.

Greg.

[Andy01]

Thanks so much for your input, opinions and suggestions everyone :thumbsup:

I have ordered a new QSI wsg-8 (that's with the Truesense KAF 8300 chip) with a full set of LRGB & NB Astrodon 31mm filters.
I picked up a lodestar guide camera here last week so now its just the waiting game.

Feels great to have finally made the decision too :)

I apologise in advance if the weather clouds up after the next 4-6 weeks as is always the case when one gets a new toy!

Getting exited now, woo hoo!. :jump:

Warmly
Andy

[Octane]

Congratulations. :)

H

[Amaranthus]

Good choice, I'm sure you're going to love it. I'm jealous, but will get a QSI wsg soon enough :)

What tipped you to go with the Lodestar rather than, say, a QHY5L-II?

[Andy01]

Barry, one of the guys in the ASV AP group was selling his at a reasonable price, so I bought it. It also gets a great rap from QSI here ... http://qsimaging.com/qsi-683-most-versatile-ccd-camera.html