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

ASI New Camera -- 294 Pro ! - beta testing

  • Please log in to reply
592 replies to this topic

#326 Robert York

Robert York

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 462
  • Joined: 05 May 2013
  • Loc: Near Dallas, TX

Posted 21 October 2017 - 04:05 PM

So how's this camera stacking up vs the ASI071MC Cool?


Edited by Robert York, 21 October 2017 - 04:05 PM.


#327 Astrojedi

Astrojedi

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Joined: 27 May 2015
  • Loc: SoCal

Posted 21 October 2017 - 06:48 PM

 

Jeff,

If you have never done imaging before then there will be a learning curve but don't hesitate to ask for help here.

Thank you! I've dabbled in AP but lately just used an Infinity so this is going to be a lot of work for me.

 

I have used the Infinity as well. Not that much more work. In fact the 294 has lower tracking, alignment and mount requirements as you can pretty much stick with 30s subs which even on an AVX does not require guiding. I think it really depends on how you define more or less work.


Edited by Astrojedi, 21 October 2017 - 06:49 PM.

  • Jeff Smith likes this

#328 OleCuss

OleCuss

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1856
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2010

Posted 21 October 2017 - 09:06 PM

So how's this camera stacking up vs the ASI071MC Cool?

I don't think anyone can do a direct comparison.  I think, however, that I'd get the ASI294 over the ASI071 unless for some reason I wanted/needed the bigger ASI071 sensor.

 

So yeah, I'd still rather use the ASI071 if I'm using something like the NP101is with the reducer because I like the wide FOV and I'll put up with more stacking to get there.

 

But if I weren't wanting that wide an FOV (and had the image circle for the bigger sensor) then that ASI294/IMX294 is pretty unbeatable right now (and maybe for a long time to come).  That very good QE with great SNR has just got to be a joy for NRTV.

 

Seriously, I'm blown away by what some of the beta-testers have been doing with that ASI294 camera.  A rather generous size so you can get a good FOV and it is getting a lot of data/detail in a very short period of time.



#329 akulapanam

akulapanam

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2337
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012

Posted 21 October 2017 - 11:24 PM

 

So how's this camera stacking up vs the ASI071MC Cool?

I don't think anyone can do a direct comparison.  I think, however, that I'd get the ASI294 over the ASI071 unless for some reason I wanted/needed the bigger ASI071 sensor.

 

So yeah, I'd still rather use the ASI071 if I'm using something like the NP101is with the reducer because I like the wide FOV and I'll put up with more stacking to get there.

 

But if I weren't wanting that wide an FOV (and had the image circle for the bigger sensor) then that ASI294/IMX294 is pretty unbeatable right now (and maybe for a long time to come).  That very good QE with great SNR has just got to be a joy for NRTV.

 

Seriously, I'm blown away by what some of the beta-testers have been doing with that ASI294 camera.  A rather generous size so you can get a good FOV and it is getting a lot of data/detail in a very short period of time.

 

There is a huge difference in effective resolution.  For EAA 294 for normal imaging 071.



#330 OleCuss

OleCuss

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1856
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2010

Posted 22 October 2017 - 12:21 AM

 

There is a huge difference in effective resolution.  For EAA 294 for normal imaging 071.

 

 

I'm not really sure what you mean by that.

 

I think the pixels on the ASI071 are 4.78 microns?  I think the pixels on the ASI294 are 4.63 microns?  That means that the potential resolution of the ASI294 is actually better?

 

The ASI071 has more pixels but if your image circle is only big enough to nicely illuminate the IMX294 sensor those extra pixels are actually worse than a waste because you are just going to have to crop them.

 

Seriously, as best I can tell, if I don't need/want the bigger sensor the ASI071 is a far inferior choice for NRTV (or most other purposes).  As it turns out I have multiple scopes which can nicely illuminate an APS-C sensor or even a full-frame sensor so I still want the ASI071.  But I'm wanting the ASI071 for the increased FOV not because it gives me better resolution (because it won't).

 

Another point if I may?  I actually do have a computer with a 4K screen and that means that I can sort of make good use of most of the pixels put out by the ASI071 - but certainly not all of them.  Throw up a GUI on the screen and there is simply no chance that I can do good NRTV with the ASI071 whilst fully displaying all the pixels.

 

Now you can do hardware binning of the ASI071 at 3x3 or you can use software binning and that means that you can, indeed, utilize the ASI071 for great wide FOV viewing but you are going to have to do it with what just might be worse resolution than you could get if you had a sensor which was matching the target, the image circle, and the screen resolution I'm using for NRTV.

 

So far as my interests are concerned the only reason to have/use the ASI071 over the ASI294 is for the FOV with several of my scopes.  Otherwise I consider the ASI294 to be superior in pretty much all regards.

 

Well, that's just how I see it - and in part I think I'm agreeing with you.  I could be wrong?


Edited by OleCuss, 22 October 2017 - 12:23 AM.

  • neaptide likes this

#331 hbrunet181

hbrunet181

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 173
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2016
  • Loc: Saint-Jean sur le Richelieu Canada

Posted 22 October 2017 - 12:21 AM

 

Hi guys,

 

I got exited and ordered an Un-Cooled version of the ASI 294 Camera since I only intend to do EAA.

 

Can't wait to receive it. I loved my ASI224 and it has been my first jump in EAA, seeing all the super exitement everyone has for the 294 I Couldn't resist.

 

I'm planning on using it with my LX200 10 inch on Alt-Az only with a 0.5 Anteres 2 inch reducer. This will let me frame most of the bigger DSO's easily ( I think)

 

I will put my ASI224MC on the Stacked Orion ST-80 with Antares 0.5 1.25 reducer over it to get wider vistas.

 

So far would you say that the ASI294 is more sensitive when binned?

 

It looks like it.

 

Also anyone of you tried the new Astrolive program instead of Sharpcap? Thought and coments? it is free with ZWO cameras!

Yes, it is more "sensitive" when binned as are all cameras. You will enjoy it. I have not tried the uncooled version but maybe that is a good point. I will try to test this camera with the cooling off to see how the performance is.

 

Astrolive is actually dead. The author stopped working on it as he could not make enough income to support his efforts. You should try SharpCap.

 

Hi Astro Jedi,

 

Been following your stuff for a while now, I feel you on the resist to change part of CMOS vs CCD, my work is in R&D and its hard to implement new stuff in the tech world. Especially in an aging population and the ''its not broken so why change it'' mentality.

 

As for my last post,

 

I meant more sensitive in practice than the ASI224MC

 

Also, I allready use Shaprcap, it's awesome. I was just wondering about astrolive due to the fact it resolves plate and can reposition (apparently) goto's. Are the sharpcap developers working on using the ASI294 HDR ?



#332 Astrojedi

Astrojedi

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Joined: 27 May 2015
  • Loc: SoCal

Posted 22 October 2017 - 01:06 AM

 

 

So how's this camera stacking up vs the ASI071MC Cool?

I don't think anyone can do a direct comparison.  I think, however, that I'd get the ASI294 over the ASI071 unless for some reason I wanted/needed the bigger ASI071 sensor.

 

So yeah, I'd still rather use the ASI071 if I'm using something like the NP101is with the reducer because I like the wide FOV and I'll put up with more stacking to get there.

 

But if I weren't wanting that wide an FOV (and had the image circle for the bigger sensor) then that ASI294/IMX294 is pretty unbeatable right now (and maybe for a long time to come).  That very good QE with great SNR has just got to be a joy for NRTV.

 

Seriously, I'm blown away by what some of the beta-testers have been doing with that ASI294 camera.  A rather generous size so you can get a good FOV and it is getting a lot of data/detail in a very short period of time.

 

There is a huge difference in effective resolution.  For EAA 294 for normal imaging 071.

 

The 294 is a 4/3 sensor which is not that much smaller than a APS-C sensor. The pixel size is pretty similar. Not sure I understand the comment on a "huge" difference. Did you mean something else?

 

Also the 294 kicks a** for long exposure imaging with 13 stops of dynamic range at an incredibly low 1.5e of read noise and a higher QE than the 071. I would think this would make it a much superior sensor for imaging if you want to use a color sensor. The 071 will just not be able to keep up in terms of SNR.



#333 Robert York

Robert York

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 462
  • Joined: 05 May 2013
  • Loc: Near Dallas, TX

Posted 22 October 2017 - 01:11 AM

Personally, looking at the FoV, I don't see a terribly big difference, and all my scopes can handle the APS-C size fairly well (though maybe not perfectly).

 

And honestly, looking at this mostly for imaging, rather than live view.



#334 akulapanam

akulapanam

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2337
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012

Posted 22 October 2017 - 01:21 AM




So how's this camera stacking up vs the ASI071MC Cool?

I don't think anyone can do a direct comparison. I think, however, that I'd get the ASI294 over the ASI071 unless for some reason I wanted/needed the bigger ASI071 sensor.

So yeah, I'd still rather use the ASI071 if I'm using something like the NP101is with the reducer because I like the wide FOV and I'll put up with more stacking to get there.

But if I weren't wanting that wide an FOV (and had the image circle for the bigger sensor) then that ASI294/IMX294 is pretty unbeatable right now (and maybe for a long time to come). That very good QE with great SNR has just got to be a joy for NRTV.

Seriously, I'm blown away by what some of the beta-testers have been doing with that ASI294 camera. A rather generous size so you can get a good FOV and it is getting a lot of data/detail in a very short period of time.
There is a huge difference in effective resolution. For EAA 294 for normal imaging 071.
The 294 is a 4/3 sensor which is not that much smaller than a APS-C sensor. The pixel size is pretty similar. Not sure I understand the comment on a "huge" difference. Did you mean something else?

Also the 294 kicks a** for long exposure imaging with 13 stops of dynamic range at an incredibly low 1.5e of read noise and a higher QE than the 071. I would think this would make it a much superior sensor for imaging if you want to use a color sensor. The 071 will just not be able to keep up in terms of SNR.
The effective pixels are 9.3um because of the quad Bauer matrix and with debaying you are really talking about an 18.6um pixel. If you want to shoot in the 1"-2" range then you are going to need a long focal length scope.

Edited by akulapanam, 22 October 2017 - 01:22 AM.


#335 Astrojedi

Astrojedi

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Joined: 27 May 2015
  • Loc: SoCal

Posted 22 October 2017 - 03:01 AM

 

 

 

 

So how's this camera stacking up vs the ASI071MC Cool?

I don't think anyone can do a direct comparison. I think, however, that I'd get the ASI294 over the ASI071 unless for some reason I wanted/needed the bigger ASI071 sensor.

So yeah, I'd still rather use the ASI071 if I'm using something like the NP101is with the reducer because I like the wide FOV and I'll put up with more stacking to get there.

But if I weren't wanting that wide an FOV (and had the image circle for the bigger sensor) then that ASI294/IMX294 is pretty unbeatable right now (and maybe for a long time to come). That very good QE with great SNR has just got to be a joy for NRTV.

Seriously, I'm blown away by what some of the beta-testers have been doing with that ASI294 camera. A rather generous size so you can get a good FOV and it is getting a lot of data/detail in a very short period of time.
There is a huge difference in effective resolution. For EAA 294 for normal imaging 071.
The 294 is a 4/3 sensor which is not that much smaller than a APS-C sensor. The pixel size is pretty similar. Not sure I understand the comment on a "huge" difference. Did you mean something else?

Also the 294 kicks a** for long exposure imaging with 13 stops of dynamic range at an incredibly low 1.5e of read noise and a higher QE than the 071. I would think this would make it a much superior sensor for imaging if you want to use a color sensor. The 071 will just not be able to keep up in terms of SNR.
The effective pixels are 9.3um because of the quad Bauer matrix and with debaying you are really talking about an 18.6um pixel. If you want to shoot in the 1"-2" range then you are going to need a long focal length scope.

 

That is incorrect. I don't think you understand how the quad Bayer matrix works. It depends on how you combine the pixels during debayering. Also even if adjacent pixels are the same color they are not capturing the same information. They are still distinct pixels.

 

These are both x1 bin images using a C8 Hyperstar. 

 

https://www.cloudyni...11#entry8166865

https://www.cloudyni...11#entry8166870

 

None of captures on this thread by me or anyone else indicate any loss of resolution at x1 bin.

 

I do notice the sampling get poorer when I select x2 bin (as expected) but at x1 bin the detail is pretty similar to my 224 and 1600


Edited by Astrojedi, 22 October 2017 - 03:14 AM.

  • DSO_Viewer likes this

#336 Jacques Croiziers

Jacques Croiziers

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2017

Posted 22 October 2017 - 01:22 PM

 

 

 

 

 

So how's this camera stacking up vs the ASI071MC Cool?

I don't think anyone can do a direct comparison. I think, however, that I'd get the ASI294 over the ASI071 unless for some reason I wanted/needed the bigger ASI071 sensor.

So yeah, I'd still rather use the ASI071 if I'm using something like the NP101is with the reducer because I like the wide FOV and I'll put up with more stacking to get there.

But if I weren't wanting that wide an FOV (and had the image circle for the bigger sensor) then that ASI294/IMX294 is pretty unbeatable right now (and maybe for a long time to come). That very good QE with great SNR has just got to be a joy for NRTV.

Seriously, I'm blown away by what some of the beta-testers have been doing with that ASI294 camera. A rather generous size so you can get a good FOV and it is getting a lot of data/detail in a very short period of time.
There is a huge difference in effective resolution. For EAA 294 for normal imaging 071.
The 294 is a 4/3 sensor which is not that much smaller than a APS-C sensor. The pixel size is pretty similar. Not sure I understand the comment on a "huge" difference. Did you mean something else?

Also the 294 kicks a** for long exposure imaging with 13 stops of dynamic range at an incredibly low 1.5e of read noise and a higher QE than the 071. I would think this would make it a much superior sensor for imaging if you want to use a color sensor. The 071 will just not be able to keep up in terms of SNR.
The effective pixels are 9.3um because of the quad Bauer matrix and with debaying you are really talking about an 18.6um pixel. If you want to shoot in the 1"-2" range then you are going to need a long focal length scope.

 

That is incorrect. I don't think you understand how the quad Bayer matrix works. It depends on how you combine the pixels during debayering. Also even if adjacent pixels are the same color they are not capturing the same information. They are still distinct pixels.

 

These are both x1 bin images using a C8 Hyperstar. 

 

https://www.cloudyni...11#entry8166865

https://www.cloudyni...11#entry8166870

 

None of captures on this thread by me or anyone else indicate any loss of resolution at x1 bin.

 

I do notice the sampling get poorer when I select x2 bin (as expected) but at x1 bin the detail is pretty similar to my 224 and 1600

 

Hello,

I do not understand the peculiarity of this matrix debayer
Can you explain to me and how to treat the images ???

 

@Jacq



#337 Robert York

Robert York

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 462
  • Joined: 05 May 2013
  • Loc: Near Dallas, TX

Posted 22 October 2017 - 03:15 PM

Well, I fell victim to my fond memories of good OSC. Just ordered my ASI294. Now I have two good cameras on the way. There are no limits to what I can do! lol.gif



#338 A. Viegas

A. Viegas

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2947
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2012
  • Loc: New York City/ CT

Posted 22 October 2017 - 03:29 PM

Congrats Robert!   and welcome to the dark side of EAA and new camera addiction! Jedi.gif



#339 Astrojedi

Astrojedi

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Joined: 27 May 2015
  • Loc: SoCal

Posted 22 October 2017 - 03:37 PM

Well, I fell victim to my fond memories of good OSC. Just ordered my ASI294. Now I have two good cameras on the way. There are no limits to what I can do! lol.gif

 

Congrats! As Al appropriately put it... welcome to the dark side. : )



#340 Robert York

Robert York

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 462
  • Joined: 05 May 2013
  • Loc: Near Dallas, TX

Posted 22 October 2017 - 03:56 PM

Congrats Robert!   and welcome to the dark side of EAA and new camera addiction! Jedi.gif

Oh, I'm beyond a camera addict. Not counting ones built into phones and computers, I have 3 in the house, and 3 in the mail. :p

 

To be honest EAA isn't something I've seriously considered yet. I like pretty pictures too much. Hours of integration. But something like this camera and a Hyperstar could make that a lot closer to real time. The biggest drawback is the low spatial resolution. Looks like 2.25" per pixel with the Hyperstar.

 

Might be a new thing to play with.



#341 Robert York

Robert York

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 462
  • Joined: 05 May 2013
  • Loc: Near Dallas, TX

Posted 22 October 2017 - 03:58 PM

Sure... Here is how the 294 works in (1) Quad Bayer hardware x2 bin mode (2) x1 bin mode and (3) in x2 software bin mode

 

Note that this is my view of how these different structures work based on my experience in the field. It is possible ZWO may have implemented this slightly differently but it will be a variation of the forced debayer hence conceptually this will be accurate.

 

As should be clear from below, there is no loss of resolution due to the Quad Bayer matrix. Next time anyone says that to you (Robert) point them to this post.

 

attachicon.gifSlide0.JPG

 

attachicon.gifSlide1.JPG

 

attachicon.gifSlide2.JPG

Is there a way to toggle between these binning modes?



#342 Astrojedi

Astrojedi

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Joined: 27 May 2015
  • Loc: SoCal

Posted 22 October 2017 - 04:10 PM

Yes, you can choose the setting in SharpCap. My captures in this thread are at x1 bin and x2 software bin i.e. (2) and (3) above. I have not yet tired the x2 bin HW quad Bayer setting.



#343 Robert York

Robert York

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 462
  • Joined: 05 May 2013
  • Loc: Near Dallas, TX

Posted 22 October 2017 - 05:48 PM

Okay, now for the real question:

 

How long has it taken people to get their ASI294? I bought it right from ZWO, and they were in stock. I've heard of like, 2nd day shipping from China and craziness.


Edited by Robert York, 22 October 2017 - 05:48 PM.


#344 mclewis1

mclewis1

    Thread Killer

  • *****
  • Posts: 17613
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2006
  • Loc: New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 22 October 2017 - 06:05 PM

There are no limits to what I can do! lol.gif

I prefer to think that with real budgetary limits that there are no limits to what I can't do.  grin.gif


  • roelb likes this

#345 Ain Soph Aur

Ain Soph Aur

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1271
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2011
  • Loc: West Tennessee

Posted 22 October 2017 - 07:02 PM

Ordered: Oct 17 2:09 PM

Shipped: Oct 18 8:16 PM

Delivered: Oct 20 10:37 AM

 

Forecast: 4 evenings of clear skies starting tomorrow 


Edited by Ain Soph Aur, 22 October 2017 - 07:05 PM.

  • FrankG and Astrojedi like this

#346 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8150
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003
  • Loc: OC, CA, USA

Posted 22 October 2017 - 08:25 PM

Personally, looking at the FoV, I don't see a terribly big difference, and all my scopes can handle the APS-C size fairly well (though maybe not perfectly).

And honestly, looking at this mostly for imaging, rather than live view.


That's great you have some EAA interest. I'd suggest you check the Astrophotography forums for a 294 thread for feedback on AP use. That said it'd be great if you "saw the light and did more EAA observing.

#347 Astrojedi

Astrojedi

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Joined: 27 May 2015
  • Loc: SoCal

Posted 22 October 2017 - 08:54 PM

Reposting...

 

Here is how the 294 works in (1) Quad Bayer hardware x2 bin mode (2) x1 bin mode and (3) in x2 software bin mode

 

Note that this is my view of how these different structures work based on my experience in the field. It is possible ZWO may have implemented this slightly differently but it will be a variation of the forced debayer hence conceptually this will be accurate.

 

As should be clear from below, there is no loss of resolution due to the Quad Bayer matrix.

 

Slide0.JPG

 

Slide1.JPG

 

Slide2.JPG

 


  • Robert York likes this

#348 Robert York

Robert York

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 462
  • Joined: 05 May 2013
  • Loc: Near Dallas, TX

Posted 22 October 2017 - 10:11 PM

 

Personally, looking at the FoV, I don't see a terribly big difference, and all my scopes can handle the APS-C size fairly well (though maybe not perfectly).

And honestly, looking at this mostly for imaging, rather than live view.


That's great you have some EAA interest. I'd suggest you check the Astrophotography forums for a 294 thread for feedback on AP use. That said it'd be great if you "saw the light and did more EAA observing.

 

I'm very fascinated by EAA. I've always wanted to do it, I just thought it was technologically not there yet. But from what I've seen with some videos on youtube with cameras like this, we are there. I'm very eager to get this camera and give EAA a try.

 

I just haven't ever thought about it until the past few days. Didn't think you could get images that were very interesting. Always seemed like it was out of reach like Star Trek, or just grainy, barely visible images. But I've seen very good things in the last week. Star Trek is almost here. :)



#349 Robert York

Robert York

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 462
  • Joined: 05 May 2013
  • Loc: Near Dallas, TX

Posted 22 October 2017 - 10:28 PM

Reposting...

 

Here is how the 294 works in (1) Quad Bayer hardware x2 bin mode (2) x1 bin mode and (3) in x2 software bin mode

 

Note that this is my view of how these different structures work based on my experience in the field. It is possible ZWO may have implemented this slightly differently but it will be a variation of the forced debayer hence conceptually this will be accurate.

 

As should be clear from below, there is no loss of resolution due to the Quad Bayer matrix.

 

attachicon.gifSlide0.JPG

 

attachicon.gifSlide1.JPG

 

attachicon.gifSlide2.JPG

Also, I was thinking about this, and this arrangement actually should give better results with dithering or EAA applications, where the target is moving a little bit. Since the bayer pattern really is a 4x4 pattern, and offset like shown, that means that your pixel alignment is just a tad more spread out, meaning integration would shift which pattern orientation was over a star on a given frame.

 

In my head at least, it seems like it might be helpful. Maybe I'm just tired.

 

Edit: I've actually been already testing some psuedo EAA sort of work. I'm trying to do normal imaging, but with frames only a few seconds long, so I don't have to actually guide. It's an experiment. Getting live integration with Sharpcap is my next goal.


Edited by Robert York, 22 October 2017 - 10:47 PM.


#350 akulapanam

akulapanam

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2337
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012

Posted 22 October 2017 - 11:18 PM

Reposting...

 

Here is how the 294 works in (1) Quad Bayer hardware x2 bin mode (2) x1 bin mode and (3) in x2 software bin mode

 

Note that this is my view of how these different structures work based on my experience in the field. It is possible ZWO may have implemented this slightly differently but it will be a variation of the forced debayer hence conceptually this will be accurate.

 

As should be clear from below, there is no loss of resolution due to the Quad Bayer matrix.

 

attachicon.gifSlide0.JPG

 

attachicon.gifSlide1.JPG

 

attachicon.gifSlide2.JPG

I don't know the Sony sensor sheet doesn't indicate a drive mode for your example above. Edit actually one mode looks like a possibility.

 

http://www.sony-semi...94CJK_Flyer.pdf


Edited by akulapanam, 22 October 2017 - 11:21 PM.



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