QHY600m Spider

[Peter Ward]

Conditions were remarkably pleasant last night and allowed first light of my new QHY600m-lite CMOS camera.

There are many bouquets and brick bats I could throw at QHY, but for now I'll refrain and simply say, while the overall experience was very positive, but at low flux levels, unlike CCD's, with CMOS low-level pattern noise needs to be worked around.

First light image is here (http://www.atscope.com.au/BRO/gallery504.html)

No noise reduction or sharpening was applied to the image stack. Darks and Flats both applied.

For those who are interested, I'm happy to field questions about the QHY600.

P.S.
Curiously, with my CCD based cameras Cosmic ray hits were common seen when collecting dark frames. I would have thought sCMOS would also detect these interlopers. Nup. Not a one. Very mysterious. :question:

[John W]

Very nice detail Peter (almost 3D). Which mount did you use?
Thanks. John W.

[Decimus]

Wow....There is much to be said for a monochrome image, Peter. A fascinatingly detailed panorama and you managed to suppress the usually overpowering light from R136. You can see where 60Mp comes in handy, too.

Lovely image. Thanks for sharing it.

Cheers,
Richard

[alpal]

Wow Peter,
that's impressive.
the FSQ-106 has handled the 36mm x 24mm frame easily
with no sign of aberrations in the corners.
It looks like the QHY 600 has worked well straight out of the box
with a QE above 80% for most of the light spectrum
and 75% at Ha wavelength of 656nm for your image.

My old QHY-9 is only giving 50% QE at 656nm for Ha.

Times have changed.
I look forward to some great colour images from you with this setup.
Are you going to try the QHY600 on the Alluna
or would it be oversampled with such small pixels?



cheers
Allan

[DavidTrap]

Looks very nice Peter.

I ordered my QHY600M before the lite was announced. Only difference I can really find between the two is that the lite uses the consumer grade chip (as does the ASI6200) and has a shorter housing length which may have an effect on cooling. With your more extensive knowledge and understanding of astronomy equipment from a dealer's perspective, was there a particular reason you chose the lite?

DT

[Peter Ward]

The main difference is a smaller case size, and 1G of buffer memory.

The buffer is important if you think you'll need high frame rates. Given my minimum exposures are measured in minutes, rather than frames per second, I do not see an issue here.

The case size is smaller, which makes it easier to mount IMHO, but, meh, a trivial difference at best.

Hope that helps :thumbsup:

P.S. Stating the obvious, the Photo-lite version is also less expensive.

[Placidus]

A lovely image.


A wonderful result for just one hour. I had to multiply 12 x 5 minutes several times before I convinced myself. The CMOS approach works so well on say the 100 brightest beasties.


The one place left for CCD's on great big scopes is the ridiculously faint.


Mike

[Andy01]

Impressive detail for the short integration! :thumbsup:
Framing is awkward though - those half cropped nebs on the top edge of the frame and RHS might be better left out altogether next time :D

[Peter Ward]

Ta M&T. This new CMOS kid on the block won't be replacing my STX16803 anytime soon. I re-shot the same field last night with the CCD and it wipes the (noise) floor with the CMOS. (I am putting together a small test report and will post a link soon). Sure the QHY has better resolution, but the bigger CCD pixels have recorded just a much, if not more, nebulosity with a buttery smooth background that makes the CMOS look like sand paper.

Weather permitting I will re-shoot the scene with the QHY, dithered & shorter exposures, but same total exposure time.

It expect the result will be interesting!

[Peter Ward]

Ta...but it was never intended to be a pretty picture. Simply a test/demonstration of the CMOS waters.

The pretty stuff will hopefully come next week when the Camera Tilt Adjuster arrives for use with the 645 reducer. The QHY shows even the slightest error at F3.8. ( tried it already) ..hence not much point in a re-shoot until the required bits arrive. :thumbsup:

[Peter Ward]

It's a bit of a struggle, but the PMEII I use manages to cope. :)