Thanks Astrojedi and Mert. I will check those forums out and do some searches.
Posted 28 August 2015 - 10:59 PM
My main interest with the ASI224MC is for planetary imaging AND DSO imaging, although my DSO targets will be brighter galaxies, brighter planetary nebula, brighter emission nebula and of course condensed globulars. I can't wait to start imaging Uranus and Neptune with my 10" as well as my 6" nexstar and 8" Nexstar. Looking forward to Jupiter and Mars opposition next year. I already have some nice daytime shots of crescent Venus and Mercury with my Neximage 5 webcam.
Edited by Stargazer3236, 28 August 2015 - 10:59 PM.
Posted 29 August 2015 - 10:25 PM
I'd like to point out that in Sony's spec sheet the IMX224 has 3.75um pixels and a sensitivity of 2350mV.
Where the IMX178 has smaller pixels at 2.4um and a much lower sensitivity of 425mV.
By these numbers the ASI178 doesn't appear to be well suited to DSO imaging. You may also want to take a look at the ASI174 with it's larger pixels (5.86um) and higher sensitivity (825mV) than the ASI178 if the ASI224 doesn't suit.
If the IMX178 had 3.75um pixels its sensitivity would be in the 625ish range so what really matters is point sensitivity and QE. In both those areas the IMX178 is inline with the current generation of ICX 694/814/834 CCD chips and far exceeds the OnSemi chip series. That said the application that excites me about the IMX178 is with hyperstar where the scopes resolution + small pixels would allow below 1" arc sec resolution images if supported by seeing and depending on the well depth of the chip.
Posted 30 August 2015 - 01:06 PM
So what ZWO ASI camera is the best for an OAG guider and planetary pictures, or is there another better option in the $300 price range?
Posted 03 September 2015 - 04:34 PM
I just purchased the ASI224 that has a low read noise of between .75 and 1.5, depending on the gain setting. It is also quite sensitive and has a full well of 9400. Although the ASI178 has a deeper well of around 14900 it's read noise is up at 2.2 plus it's about $240 more expensive.
Posted 03 September 2015 - 08:07 PM
I think that you are confusing 174 and 178 camera prices.
Posted 03 September 2015 - 08:24 PM
By these numbers the ASI178 doesn't appear to be well suited to DSO imaging.
On the other hand, the ASI178 is the only one of the bunch with a 14 bit ADC.
Posted 03 September 2015 - 08:35 PM
I just paid High Point Scientific $359 for the ASI224MC. Where did you get the $349 price?