#1  
Old 30-01-2021, 09:15 PM
Startrek (Martin)
Registered User

Startrek is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Sydney and South Coast NSW
Posts: 5,990
ZWOASI2600MC and ZWOASI2600MM

Just been reviewing the new 2600MM camera specs against my 2600MC and so far can’t see any major differences other than the absence of a Bayer matrix filter arrangement on the MM or maybe I’m missing something ??
Same physical size
Same connections
Same backlit sensor
Same cooler
Same performance specs according to the 4 graphs presented by ZWO
Same weight
Same, same, same
So my question is why is the MM $280 more expensive than the MC ( ZWO site ) Bintel don’t have the MM on their site as yet or at least it wasn’t there when I checked

I welcome comments from folk more familiar and experienced with cooled mono cameras than myself who’s only used cooled colour

Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 30-01-2021, 09:36 PM
jahnpahwa (JP)
Registered User

jahnpahwa is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Canberra, AUS
Posts: 593
I don't think there will be a manufacturing cost to justify it. Mono has a big flexibility advantage, and I reckon people are willing to pay for that, so of course that is what's charged.

I'd be interested to know if the bayered sensors cost them more as inputs to production.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 30-01-2021, 09:59 PM
billdan's Avatar
billdan (Bill)
Registered User

billdan is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Narangba, SE QLD
Posts: 1,551
Yes Mono camera's are more expensive than Colour. The sensor cost from Sony must be lot higher for Mono (less volume shipped out maybe).

I notice on the QHY site, the list price for the QHY294C is $999 and the QHY294M is $1299.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 31-01-2021, 07:23 AM
The_bluester's Avatar
The_bluester (Paul)
Registered User

The_bluester is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Kilmore, Australia
Posts: 3,342
I would imagine the mono sensor is a case of astro cam makers convincing Sony to make chips available without the bayer matrix. Low volume (Comparatively) special orders mean higher cost.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 31-01-2021, 09:46 AM
Camelopardalis's Avatar
Camelopardalis (Dunk)
Drifting from the pole

Camelopardalis is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 5,425
Yup, it’s the volume factor.

Sony will be pumping out conventional Bayer CFA and X-Trans (for Fujifilm) in relatively large quantities compared to those mono runs. I don’t have one yet, but we’re pretty lucky they got convinced to do a run without any CFA this time around, and you can bet they got convinced by $$$
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 31-01-2021, 10:08 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
I imagine that they have to remove the CFA but still put on the microlenses.
So that would be a mono version of the CFA as the microlenses are coloured with dye on the colour version.

Also I don't know how accurate this is but with the 294M its listed with a different sensor number by Sony. So perhaps they consider it a different sensor tweaked or not tweaked for mono. I presume the 2600 has the same sensor number?

We are lucky Sony is doing this so it must mean the astro business is large enough to warrant them doing a mono. This is the same sensor as used in the Fuji XT4.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 11:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement