Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Astrophotography and Imaging Equipment and Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #21  
Old 14-02-2020, 05:37 AM
The_bluester's Avatar
The_bluester (Paul)
Registered User

The_bluester is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Kilmore, Australia
Posts: 3,342
If you mean the 2600, images are just starting to turn up on astrobin. Like this one taken with an SCT and Hyperstar.

https://www.astrobin.com/full/qoy3js/0/
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 14-02-2020, 01:19 PM
Startrek (Martin)
Registered User

Startrek is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Sydney and South Coast NSW
Posts: 5,990
Paul
Thanks for checking, nice image but looks a little bit blown out or overstretched
I’ll look forward to seeing some images using a 6” or 8” newt
Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 14-02-2020, 01:37 PM
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 probably not stretch or saturate it so hard either, but as a first image from one of those cams it looks fairly promising.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-04-2020, 06:37 PM
Startrek (Martin)
Registered User

Startrek is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Sydney and South Coast NSW
Posts: 5,990
Just found a really good detailed review of the new ZWOASI2600MC camera on AstroNorth.com ( Tim Connolly )
Plenty of detailed hands on descriptions and images to review
Camera is looking really promising ( excluding the price tag $4K )
Probably the biggest learning curve jumping up from a humble DSLR is being able to “tame the beast”
Just enquiring whether any members in Australia have one of these cameras in their arsenal
Thanks in advance
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-04-2020, 10:53 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
This may be an excellent camera. File sizes won't be so huge as the 6300 and vignetting would be less of a problem. Less expensive and filters wouldn't have to be as large.

Full frame though gets a wider field of view which always looks better in 90% of images.

80% QE, 16bit and high dynamic range. Tempting.

This must be the same APSc sensor used in the Fuji XT3 and 4.

Just looked around a bit more and there isn't a mono version. I wonder if they plan to release one later.
One shot colour may be convenient but I would rather do filtered imaging.

Greg.

Last edited by gregbradley; 03-04-2020 at 11:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-04-2020, 07:24 PM
Startrek (Martin)
Registered User

Startrek is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Sydney and South Coast NSW
Posts: 5,990
Greg
The sensor on the ZWOASI2600MC is a back illuminated Sony IMX571 APS-C , don’t know whether it’s similar to the Fuji
I’m considering buying one over the next few months but supply is difficult at present due to Corona and I’m happy to wait for some more reviews
I will be using it under Bortle 3 skies south coast NSW and in Sydney under Bortle 8 ( thinking about a OSC narrowband filter , duo band , tri band or quad band )
Camera has incredible specs but reviews are just as important too
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-04-2020, 08:28 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
26mp BSI Sony sensor is almost certainly the same as the Fuji 26mp Sony BSI sensor.

But of course the Fuji has its own proprietary colour matrix (not Bayer its a 6 x 6 grid with more emphasis on the green). Plus there are threads now showing Fuji like Sony engage in filtering their RAW data resulting in some green faint stars.

Also not 16 bit (14bit) and not cooled.

Same with a Sony A7riv its the same BSI full frame 61mp sensor but of course with a Bayer colour matrix and not cooled plus some RAW filtering.

These ASI and QHY cameras are getting results way past what you could get with the mirrorless cameras using the same sensor.

ASI2600MC sounds great but I would've personally wanted the mono. Also I find the specs listed by ZWO misleading. Saying 84% QE for the ASI2600MC is a lie as that would be the QE for the mono version not the colour. Probably more like 60% or so (QE's for popular cameras are listed somewhere - it may be Christian Buil's site, 65% is about as high as they go) much like CCDs except mono CCDs utilise every pixel and are best for narrowband. One shot colour is fun but its way slower and dim areas suffer noise plus weaker at narrowband which is where these cameras excel.

Not trying to be a downer but its better to go into it with eyes wide open.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-04-2020, 10:29 AM
Camelopardalis's Avatar
Camelopardalis (Dunk)
Drifting from the pole

Camelopardalis is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley View Post
Also I find the specs listed by ZWO misleading. Saying 84% QE for the ASI2600MC is a lie as that would be the QE for the mono version not the colour. Probably more like 60% or so (QE's for popular cameras are listed somewhere - it may be Christian Buil's site, 65% is about as high as they go) much like CCDs except mono CCDs utilise every pixel and are best for narrowband. One shot colour is fun but its way slower and dim areas suffer noise plus weaker at narrowband which is where these cameras excel.
Just curious, but why would the QE be lower for OSC than mono? Obviously the Bayer array is doing the colour filtering, but if a red photon hits the red photosite, then it's not otherwise impeded? Likewise for the other two channels of course.

The 183 is listed as 83-84% QE also, doesn't seem unreasonable for back-illuminated sensors.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-04-2020, 02:36 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/50d/test.htm

Scroll down a bit and you can see the QE for some older Canon cameras. Pretty low compared to CCD or modern Sony or Panasonic CMOS.

Bayer Matrix means less light hitting the sensor. Also that 4 pixels are used to make 1 colour pixel. Mono uses all pixels and nothing is inhibiting light from hitting the sensor.

I did see a long list of modern cameras and their QE. As I recall the highest were the latest Sony's like the A7riii and A7riv. QE is up around 65%.

So marketing claims of 84% for a one shot colour is misleading as that is the QE for a mono chip not a one shot colour which are always considerably less.

I agree 84% for a mono BSI sensor is realisitic. Its not for a one shot colour sensor.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-04-2020, 04:28 PM
Camelopardalis's Avatar
Camelopardalis (Dunk)
Drifting from the pole

Camelopardalis is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 5,425
QE is measured at a spread of wavelengths, hence the plots. Peak QE will be quoted at the wavelength where this is highest. For Sony sensors to demonstrate QE in the 80s % isn't unreasonable given advances in sensor tech in the last 10 years. I'm not defending ZWO's data one way or another.

This (reputable?) doc makes for an interesting sensor QE comparison: https://www.flir.com/globalassets/ii...sor-Review.pdf (note: they specify 530nm)

QE is a measurement of the output of electrons from photon strikes...mono or OSC makes no difference. The pixel in a mono sensor can't tell the difference between a colour filter in a wheel and a colour (Bayer) filter printed on. If a given filter is less efficient than another, that's a disadvantage for sure. Given the competitive market of the sensor business, it wouldn't make any sense for Sony to scrimp on the quality of the Bayer filter.

Of course, the mono is more versatile...and we can get "full" resolution for a given colour filter rather than the reduced colour resolution of OSC, which I think is what you're getting at?

These sensors have made me consider going back to OSC, the 2600 sure does look good on paper.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 11-04-2020, 07:00 PM
Startrek (Martin)
Registered User

Startrek is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Sydney and South Coast NSW
Posts: 5,990
Yes specs look impressive
I guess there would be a huge backlog or orders from around the globe for this camera due to our current situation
I’m happy to wait a while and look at some more reviews but will probably bite the bullet towards the end of winter and order one
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 12-04-2020, 08:38 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camelopardalis View Post
QE is measured at a spread of wavelengths, hence the plots. Peak QE will be quoted at the wavelength where this is highest. For Sony sensors to demonstrate QE in the 80s % isn't unreasonable given advances in sensor tech in the last 10 years. I'm not defending ZWO's data one way or another.

This (reputable?) doc makes for an interesting sensor QE comparison: https://www.flir.com/globalassets/ii...sor-Review.pdf (note: they specify 530nm)

QE is a measurement of the output of electrons from photon strikes...mono or OSC makes no difference. The pixel in a mono sensor can't tell the difference between a colour filter in a wheel and a colour (Bayer) filter printed on. If a given filter is less efficient than another, that's a disadvantage for sure. Given the competitive market of the sensor business, it wouldn't make any sense for Sony to scrimp on the quality of the Bayer filter.

Of course, the mono is more versatile...and we can get "full" resolution for a given colour filter rather than the reduced colour resolution of OSC, which I think is what you're getting at?

These sensors have made me consider going back to OSC, the 2600 sure does look good on paper.
I notice on ZWO's website for the colour version of their chips in a comparison table they list these 80% QEs for the mono and for the colour they show TBD (to be determined). They do state the high 80 and 84% QE on some individual colour camera specs. Maybe its right. I don't think so as these are the same full frame sensors used in the Sony A7riv and they are more like 65% QE.

Regardless of the actual QE for the colour sensor it does look like a big step forward for these CMOS cameras.

From my recent study into them it seems the 2 main issues with CMOS has been amp glow and uneven dark noise that does not calibrate out.

Whether you can get around that with careful calibration (my setups already require careful calibration anyway) is another story but its good to know the actual pros and cons of the gear away from the marketing materials which have every scope as a fluorite triplet and the best camera ever.

What I would want to see is that this 2600 gives decent colour.

Greg

Last edited by gregbradley; 12-04-2020 at 11:16 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 30-04-2020, 05:33 PM
SuperG
Registered User

SuperG is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Sydney, NSW
Posts: 120
If you're looking to jump mi-year then place your order now. Orders are taking a couple to a few months to be fulfilled.
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 05:29 AM.

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