Hey Steve
Haven't found any issues with amp glow on the 294MM, calibrates out easily. I have seen the reports of a pattern problem on the OSC versions but never seen it on my mono.
But as I said, I was quite happily going to purchase an OSC 533 before the 294MM came my way - and that was just before the mono 533 was released. I'm happy with the 294MM, but it is likely I would have gone with the 533MM if it had been out at the time, something about that camera just caught me.
While the 183 & 1600 have been great cameras, and a still good performers for those with a more restrictive budget, I think they are now falling behind the similar sized sensors in the newer 533/294 cameras and I was willing to pay that little extra.
Whichever way you do go, I don't think you will be disappointed with the results, even if, based on the numbers, the resolution of the 533 isn't a perfect match for the 72ED with the reducer.
Cheers,
Mark
Quote:
Originally Posted by AstroViking
Hi Mark,
Ah yes. I forgot about the flattener/reducer. I do have one, and have used it quite a bit. Lately I've been going for smaller targets and decided I needed the extra focal length. (And you should see how stretched the stars are in the corners of the non-flattened images!)
I've been using the astrophotography tools CCD selector to try and narrow down which camera works best with my scope - both with and without the reducer.
Whilst the 183 and 294 fit more into the "green" region of the selector than the 533, I have heard a lot about their amp-glow and being a bit difficult to work with - hence my leaning towards the 553.
I can't see myself getting a bigger scope for quite a while (and the HEQ5 limits me to smaller OTAs anyway) so a reduced "future-proofing" is acceptable.
Cheers,
Steve
|