QHY5 or QHY5-ll L

[5ash]

Which of these would be best for auto guiding ? The QHY5-ll is supposed to be more sensitive but has a smaller chip than the QHY5 , anyone using the new QHY5-ll? I Am using an Orion starshoot autoguider ( rebadged QHY5) and am looking at the QHY5-ll as an upgrade , would it be worth it despite the smaller chip?
Philip

[kosh]

I can't compare it to the Orion Starshoot because I've never used one,
But I have the qhy5l-ii mono and it is very, very good. I find it has no trouble finding guidestars and it is really very sensitive. I am led to believe that it is more sensitive than the original, but that's not first hand. I have also not been impaired my the smaller chip than it's predecessor, that's just my experience though.

Goran.

[Amaranthus]

I just checked out the new Orion Starshoot Autoguider Pro:
http://www.telescope.com/Orion-StarShoot-AutoGuider-Pro-Mono-Astrophotography-Camera/p/106545.uts

PDF manual here: http://www.telescope.com/assets/product_files/instructions/29529_05-14.pdf

It seems to me that this is identical to the QHY-5L II:
http://www.gamaelectronics.com.au/QHY5L2.html

Am I right? If so, I wonder what the pros/cons of the Orion-packaged version is -- it does have an ASCOM driver but appears to be more pricey.

[kosh]

I'm pretty sure its exactly the same hardware wise. Software/drivers might be the only upside to the Orion package. Is it worth $100 though?

[Amaranthus]

How have you found the sensitivity of your QHY5L - always possible to find a guidestar in your FOV? I've been guiding with a colour NexImage 5 planetary cam, and its low sensitivity is frustrating me! (my guidescope is 80mm)

[Merlin66]

I was using the trusty ol' original QHY5 as a "back up" guider for the Lodestar....
Now gone over to the QHY5IIL mono - smaller FOV but certainly does the job of guiding very well....
I use an "on axis" type guide system on the spectroscope - no problems finding stars!

[Shiraz]

I use both, but the QHY5L2 always sees more stars than the QHY5, even though the field of view is smaller - the QHY5L2 is more than twice as sensitive. The QHY5L2 has small pixels and will sense smaller movement - it is the best choice for short fl guidescopes (I use mine with a 180mm and successfully guide an imaging system with 0.91 arc sec pixel scale).

If you intend to use an OAG or ONAG with a long focal length scope, something with bigger pixels might be a better bet (eg lodestar)

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=119075 might be worth a look?

[Poita]

No question, the QHY5II is so much better than the old QHY5 as a guide camera that I wouldn't consider the old QHY5 even if it was free.

[Amaranthus]

I ended up getting an ASI120MM-S for autoguiding - same sensor as the QHY-5L II and works perfectly with Metaguide

[Merlin66]

Longer focal lengths..... you can use the 2 x 2 binning option.

[Amaranthus]

Good point Ken.

Using the ASI120MM on my C8 with a f/6.3 FR fitted would yield a FOV of 13x10' using an OAG (but only 0.6 arcsec/pixel, so 2x2 binning would help).