Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

ST-8300M vs. ST-10XE for DSO Imaging on C11

astrophotography
This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
7 replies to this topic

#1 collaredkeeper

collaredkeeper

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 184
  • Joined: 25 Oct 2012

Posted 22 October 2014 - 01:31 PM

Hello everyone,

 

I have been upgrading and purchasing equipment for about a year now with hopes of one day using it all. I have a pretty much complete setup now, but must admit, I have yet to really use any of it due to time constraints and work schedules. I do plan on setting everything up perhaps in an observatory or similar once things settle down, but really looking for more experienced advice regarding ccd cameras. 

 

What I wanted to ask was in regards to ccd cameras and equipment. I currently own a SBIG ST-10XE (click for specs from SBIG) along with the filter wheel, filters, Pyxis rotator, OAG, ST-i, etc. I purchased this because it was a mono camera with high sensitivity (NABG), but I have yet to really understand why it was a good or best choice for my C11 at f6.3/f10. I now have the opportunity to trade my camera for a SBIG ST-8300M, which has a larger sensor size, more pixels, and suprising and similarly good QE but is ABG. I think I asked this awhile ago, but now can't seem to find the thread and the answer to which camera would be the best choice for my C11. 

 

Which camera do you feel is best?

 

Again here's the spec pages

ST-10XE: Spec Page

ST-8300M: Spec Page

 

I understand the physical differences between the cameras like internal guiding, pixel size, filter size, "blooms", but just have always figured the ST-8300M was the premier camera. Is the ST-8300M primarily a refractor or short focal length ccd? 

 

Looking at the prices they went for originally (see here), the ST-10XE was priced at $5,795-$5,995, which was about three times the amount that the ST-8300M sold for at $1,995. To me, prices often reflect quality, so just not sure if I am missing something here regarding the two cameras.

 

Thanks for all the help!

Tony


Edited by collaredkeeper, 22 October 2014 - 01:33 PM.


#2 jrcrilly

jrcrilly

    Refractor wienie no more

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 35,589
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2003

Posted 22 October 2014 - 02:26 PM

The price difference reflects both the more complex camera of the original ST series and the much higher price of the 3200 chip. Traditionally, full frame chips like the 3200 were much more expensive than the interline series chips. The 8300 broke that pattern, which is one reason for its popularity. You get full frame tech for an interline price.

 

The 8300 operates with less undersampling at shorter focal lengths and can be binned to 2MB for longer lengths so it is very versatile. The 3200 has mid-size pixels but not enough to bin and still retain decent pixel count. With a C11 it's just right at 3MB while an 8300 would usually be binned at that focal length for 2MB. If you have both short and long imaging telescopes, as many do, the 8300 has an edge (which is one reason I switched from an ST-10 to the QSI583). I lost a lot of narrowband performance, though.



#3 collaredkeeper

collaredkeeper

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 184
  • Joined: 25 Oct 2012

Posted 22 October 2014 - 04:09 PM

The price difference reflects....can be binned to 2MB for longer lengths so it is very versatile. The 3200 has mid-size pixels but not enough to bin and still retain decent pixel count. With a C11 it's just right at 3MB while an 8300 would usually be binned at that focal length for 2MB. If you have both short and long imaging telescopes, as many do, the 8300 has an edge (which is one reason I switched from an ST-10 to the QSI583). I lost a lot of narrowband performance, though.

 

 

Hey Jrcrilly,

 

Thanks for that info, You're awesome! I think you answered a few of my earlier questions too awhile back, thanks for helping explain everything, it is very much appreciated. I could have sworn I knew what I was doing when I bought the ST-10XE, thankfully I did. I don't do much for widefield imaging, at least not in any of my plans, so I think I'll stick to the ST-10.

 

Have a good one,

Tony


Edited by collaredkeeper, 22 October 2014 - 07:31 PM.


#4 andysea

andysea

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,664
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2010

Posted 23 October 2014 - 08:05 PM

I went exactly the opposite way! I had the QSI583 first  and then got the 532 to shoot at longer focal length. I kept the 8300 tho for the exact same reason as John's: smaller pixels for wide field and no blooms



#5 collaredkeeper

collaredkeeper

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 184
  • Joined: 25 Oct 2012

Posted 23 October 2014 - 11:21 PM

I went exactly the opposite way! I had the QSI583 first  and then got the 532 to shoot at longer focal length. I kept the 8300 tho for the exact same reason as John's: smaller pixels for wide field and no blooms

 

How are you finding the QSI532 now that you've used it? 


Edited by collaredkeeper, 23 October 2014 - 11:27 PM.


#6 andysea

andysea

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,664
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2010

Posted 24 October 2014 - 03:44 PM

I actually haven't used it yet. I just bought a used one. All we did so far is measure the read noise and analyze the bias and I am very impressed. It is lower read noise than the 583. The FFT also looks great. 

I will update once we analyze the photon transfer curve and the dark frame curve. So far is looks a lot better than my 583 and my friend's 683.

I suspect that the 532 is more linear than the 583/683.


Edited by andysea, 24 October 2014 - 03:44 PM.


#7 Konihlav

Konihlav

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,731
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2009

Posted 25 October 2014 - 05:35 AM

andysea: and what was the result? what did you measure?



#8 andysea

andysea

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,664
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2010

Posted 25 October 2014 - 07:09 AM

Konilhav, 

Std variation of bias frame-master bias appears to be ~8 adu or ~6.7e-

You can use these bias frames + master bias to add to your collection

https://www.dropbox....2 bias.zip?dl=0


Edited by andysea, 25 October 2014 - 10:16 AM.



CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics