Colour or Mono?

[Mike21]

Dear All,

I am on the verge of making the jump from DSLR to CCD. I have some editing skills with Photoshop from copying Jerry Lodriguss' methods and I plan on using a Williams' 110X655, Apo, Doublet. It's not truely apo, but it's still my fave.

How much more "when are you going to spend some time with me?" am I going to hear if I go with mono CCD as opposed to colour CCD? Is the extra effort more likely to make her a much prettier piccie and therefore more likely to sooth her nerves?f

Ta, Michael.

[Alchemy]

always a difficult choice, usually $ will decide for you,

Color- good if you have limited time, set and forget, easier to process, 6mp qhy8 (which i have) gives nice smooth image

Mono- dearer, but will provide more detail ( bayer array etc) more fiddling with filters -add a few 100$ for good 2 inch ones, filter wheel, plus the extra processing. worth it if you have the skills.

if you feel you have mastered color one shot , by all means go mono. i personally am happy with OSC .

give us a thumbnail or two of your best images.

bit like swimming, if youre a good swimmer get out in the surf and have fun, if youre not quite so good, you get pounded and its no fun.

[Terry B]

Another point is do you want to do any science as well or just take pretty pics?
The mono is vastly superior for science images.

[Mike21]

Wow! That was quick, thanks!

OK, what's OSC? How do I get a thumbnail to you? I am very limited in my mount capacities too. I've only an EQ5 with clockdrives and the RA is too slow for anything longer than 30sec. I am willing to upgrade there too. I have learnt how to Photoshop layer; limited success. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to be collaberating with any scientific astronomers, I just want pretty pics. Or are there advantages to being astronomically acurate that I have not considered yet?

Michael.

[PCH]

OSC = One Shot Colour The colour camera thats been spoken of versus the mono option which means you have to take the colours through filtered shots individually.

[Terry B]

You can sometimes do both science and pretty pics. The science that is done regularly by amateurs includes supernova searches, comet discovery and measurement, variable star monitoring (photometry), astronomy (measuring position) of minor planets etc.

[Mike21]

Here are my two best to date.

M.

[Hagar]

Hi Michael, I can speak a little from both sides of this argument. It all boils down to three things.
1. Time constraints: The OSC gives good results quite quickly you can easily produce a nice pretty pix as you put it in a couple of hours imaging. The mono with filters will add almost double this time taking into account things like capturing each colour separately, stacking and processing but generally speaking the result will be a little better.
2. Budget: A reasonable one shot colour camera can be bought for a couple of thousand dollars, a similar mono will cost at least $1000 dearer then around the $500 -$1500 for a set of filters plus $750 for a filterwheel to match the filters.
3. Processing/ computer skills: The amount of extra computer work to put together a multi colour filtered image is quite a bit. Software gets much more critical and less automated requiring more time, effort and skills.

I have had both and ended up selling my mono camera, filter wheel and filters for many of the above reasons but by far the most critical to me was the time constraints. To achieve what I considered a reasonable image with the Mono camera took me at least a full night or two split nights at a minimum. The OSC produced a reasonable image in half to one full night and in my opinion the results were very much the same in the end.

Dietmar wrote an interesting comparison between similar OSC and mono cameras HERE (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=22377) which may be of interest.

I hope this helps.

[Bassnut]

Well, Ive been head banging a DSLR for a while, while my mono CCD is away for repair, and the experience was interesting. I found for a given final image quality, the DSLR required a lot more exposure time and fiddling in PS.

I was supprised at the image quality the DSLR rendered in the end, but it was a struggle, for HaRGB at least.

A cooled Astro oneshot cam would be better than a DSLR, both in noise and QE (Qe wise, I think, might be wrong there), but imaging the same object with a CCD and oneshot, I found, in the end, I spent more time overall with exposure time and time in PS with the DSLR than I did with the CCD, and still didnt quite reach the same result.

It is often quoted that a one shot takes less time for exposures than changing filters in a mono CCD, but the longer exposure times required to match image quality of a CCD make the diff mute IMO.

In the end, if your serious, a Mono CCD is a given for many reasons, despite the cost. Oneshots can be an expensive temporary transition.

[Alchemy]

the extra information gives me the way i would go

go out and buy a bigger and more capable mount, ie eq6 pro, extend your sub times to 6-8 minutes, your current camera will have far more capabilities if you can do that. i think mono is still a little way off for you, keep in mind Fred (bassnut ) has been doing it for a long time owns a buch of scopes (including GRAS) and has honed his skills .

have a look through the forums and see who uses what and just what they are capable of equipment wise.

buying a mono camera at the moment would be like putting a big block v8 into a model T ford.... update the chassis(mount) first.

the mantra in imaging is MOUNT MOUNT MOUNT, then scope and camera

hope this helps:)

clive

[Bassnut]

Just noticed you can only take 30sec exposures. eeek, Clive is dead right, spend your money on a better mount, the CCD cam comes later.

[Mike21]

Dear All Again,

It's nice to know someone is out there ready to advise.

Yes 30 sec is woeful. But it is not only the EQ5 that is the problem, my Nikon D80 has a very messy long exposure signature. More than 45-ish seconds and its all over. Tracking HAS to be dealt with but so does my imaging equipment. I foolishly went for the D80 because it was being superceded by the D90 and was therefore cheaper. False econonmising! The D80 is useless (according to me and reviewers) and the D90 is a winner (according to the Sky at Night), better than the Canon EOS 1000D. Hindsight is 20/20, however, the camera was bought for reasons other than astrophotography and it performs well in sunlight.

I am ready to get a CCD. Andrew are now stocking Atiks. The bottom end Atik is the same price whether going for colour or mono. Unless someone yells "STOP YOU FOOL!", I am going to give the colour Atik a go for $1K and get another mount, at least an HEQ5Pro or better.

I repeat the invitation for someone to stop me!

Thanks so far, Mike

[Tandum]

If you mean the Atik 16ic then it has a pretty small sensor at 659x494 pixels. That's under halve a megapixel. Your field of view will be pretty small. You might want to plug the numbers into TheSky or something and compare the FOV with what you have now. It does have a guide port on it so you can always use it as a guide camera when you replace it.

[ian fry]

Hi mike
yeh go for the atik colour have a look at iankingimaging.com site he has soom good deals going i get stuff from him. Also waiting for a price on the skywatcher 190 mak-newt from ian.

[AlexN]

I would follow what others have said... Mount mount mount.. I'd be upgrading your mount to something capable of giving you 5~10 minute exposures... Your Nikon D80 might have high noise, but thats why we take dark frames... Some CCD cameras dont require dark frames, however the firm majority still do... and taking short exposures with a CCD is still going to result in noisy images, as your signal to noise ratio increases with exposure time..

Your best bet is to start taking longer exposures with a better mount and your current DSLR/scope.. and in conjunction with the longer exposures, start calibrating your images with dark frames, flat frames and bias frames. This will result in your images having stronger signal, more data (brighter, more detail), less noise and, with the extra information provided by longer exposures, you'll find the the images are easier to process as well...

Alex

[Alchemy]

you are recieving the advice you required, its up to you what you do with it, i do not know if you have used a full calibration for your images. (darks flats etc)

i would NOT go under 4 megapixels, some of the old SBIG cameras still used are so, but in this day and age megapixels are the way to go.

as for 1 shot cameras heres a couple taken with an qhy8 one shot color CCD. they can give a reasonable image, i would oneday like a mono, but not yet there is still plenty more i can achieve with this camera yet.

Mount First !!!!!!!

[Mike21]

The overwhelming message is mount, mount, mount. The lesser message is to approach low resolution OSC cameras with hessitation. I cannot see my playmoney covering both problems quickly.

Therefore I am (as advised) going to squeeze the D80 harder and get a mount first. I have done some dark field calibration, but probably need to do more. I predict that I am still going to have difficulty creating anything very impressive because at high ISO setting the D80 burns out the top corners of the FOV to white in 45sec flat.

To step this thread sideways; what if I reigned in the deep space imaging (which seems to be associated with deep pocket emptying) and explored planetary imaging. I have a Mak180 and therefore would only need a ToUCam plus accessories, adaptors and alike. From my limited understanding, I would also be able to image planets on my EQ5.

Would this course of action allow me to enjoy imaging and processing and allow me a more relaxed attitude to obtaining a mount and CCD? Advice on obtaining ToUCam plus stuff gratefully accepted.

Thanks and regards to all, Michael.

[Matty P]

Hi Mike,

There has been a heap of great info already however I think it would be best if you decide where your main interests are first, whether it be deep sky imaging or planetary.

Maybe it would be a good idea for you with your current setup to have a go at Planetary imaging. Your EQ5 should be able to handle it well as tracking accuracy is not overly important and processing planetary images will give you the skills to later confidently persue deep sky imaging. A Toucam will give you good results but I remember them being quite hard to find at a local dealer.

I think you will find planetary imaging a little less challenging than deep sky work with your current setup but by no means am I saying that it will be easy. Your enjoyment for both deep sky imaging and planetary work really depends on your image capture skills, your processing skills, your enjoyment for it and ability to ask questions.

You are on your way now... ;)


:thumbsup:

[Mike21]

My interest lies in fiddling. I have two other fiddling hobbies, motorcycles and building big model aircraft. Lenses, mirrors, mounts etc all appeal to my desire to sit and fiddle. Planets and DS are both interesting. You've confirmed that planetary imaging might be a well chosen stepping stone.

Thanks for your opinion.

[AlexN]

Planetary imaging is a great place to start, as it takes a lot less precision to get a good image... Obviously to get images as seen by Bird, Iceman and the like it takes a lot more hard work and dedication, however to get yourself some very nice images, its less strain on you and your gear than deep sky imaging... Usually a lot less frustration and hair pulling too!

[Matty P]

Here is a great article on Planetary imaging. Lots of great info.

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/63-306-0-0-1-0.html

:thumbsup: