current front runners are CMOS, not CCD and they are not in that price band (~$300). try the ASI120 or QHY5 L2. these require optics at about f19. Both have extremely high QE and can run at high framerates.
The ASI has a growing user base and has produced some remarkable images - the QHY uses the same chip and has built in autoguide port.
BTW, Neil, there is a Point Grey camera on IceTrade here from Poita going for $750 which is about 70% off the new price, mono, but give that some consideration too.
BTW, Neil, there is a Point Grey camera on IceTrade here from Poita going for $750 which is about 70% off the new price, mono, but give that some consideration too.
Cheers
Chris
Hi Chris. The TIS618 cameras are certainly very capable, but the new CMOS cameras have higher QE, smaller pixels and lots of them. they also run at high framerates and seem to have low noise. http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthrea...l/fpart/1/vc/1
I also use a 618 camera, but it looks to me like the CMOS cams are currently leading the pack by a small margin - I might get one. Regards ray
Don't forget that the DB of the cameras such as the flea3 are much higher than the ASI. The electronics are better too. read noise is much lower. Bird has been testing one of these and we have talked about this. His opinion is that if you have a flea3 don't bother buying an ASI. However, the camera is worth getting if you are on a limited budget. It has good performance characteristics but is not better than the more expensive cameras. Nor is it on par. It is just behind. The only place it leads is on price. The production of good images is mostly as you know Ray dependant upon good seeing, good collimation and processing.
Yes I know of Darryl's images but if you look with a high res monitor you can see a lot of speckle despite him using 4000 frames per channel. That says a lot about noise characteristics.
You might also consider pixel size in the equation too Ray. The
sensor has smaller pixels. That will lead to not only a scale difference but also smaller well depth being a lot smaller.
You can run higher frame rates but only because the scale is so much smaller. The reported frame rates of 90 fps are really only based on the scale. If you look at Darryls images and commentary (as long winded as they are) you can glean that he is imaging at 6000mm with a C14 and then he resamples quite a lot. At that scale even a flea3 would run at 90 frames per second.
My recommendation of course is always based on budget. If Neil cannot afford a flea3 then by all means buy the ASI. The same for yourself Ray. If you can afford more buy the electronics.