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

#26 Astrojedi

Astrojedi

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3970
  • Joined: 27 May 2015
  • Loc: SoCal

Posted 13 September 2017 - 09:43 PM

Ok. Great look forward to your results.



#27 Alien Observatory

Alien Observatory

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 852
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2015

Posted 13 September 2017 - 10:47 PM

Hi Hiten

I have used my C11 with celestron 0.63x reducer and the ASI1600 with very little vignetting. Also for this Saturday if I get clear skies my goal is really first to try and assess the sensitivity vs the 1600 as a primary goal. In future testing I will try it more as an Astrophotography camera but that is for the following week.

Al

Al how is the weather forecast looking for Saturday PM ?  Pat Utah



#28 Ptarmigan

Ptarmigan

    Lagopus lagopus

  • *****
  • Posts: 4626
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Arctic

Posted 13 September 2017 - 11:21 PM

Looks cool. I like to see the results.

 

When is it coming out and price?



#29 Dragon Man

Dragon Man

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3381
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Snake Valley, Australia

Posted 14 September 2017 - 12:09 AM

Al, I would prefer to see your results without flats. Not all of us use flats.

I would like to see what the 'Camera' is capable of, not what 'SharpCap' is capable of,

and not all of us use SharpCap.

This is a Camera test, not a software test wink.gif

 

As for targets, make sure you get some really faint targets like Galaxy Clusters and tiny Planetary Nebulae. Too many people test cameras on easy bright objects. waytogo.gif


  • Ptarmigan, will w, Censustaker and 1 other like this

#30 Astrojedi

Astrojedi

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3970
  • Joined: 27 May 2015
  • Loc: SoCal

Posted 14 September 2017 - 12:26 AM

Ken,

Just FYI... Flats correct non uniformities in the optical system not the sensor. In fact to fully understand the capabilities of the camera you have to minimize optical system issues. The reason I suggested flats is that on my SCT I get quite strong vignetting with a 4/3 sensor due to the SCT optical design. 

 

Hiten


  • Relativist, kingjamez, alphatripleplus and 1 other like this

#31 Dragon Man

Dragon Man

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3381
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Snake Valley, Australia

Posted 14 September 2017 - 06:16 AM

Ken,

Just FYI... Flats correct non uniformities in the optical system not the sensor. In fact to fully understand the capabilities of the camera you have to minimize optical system issues. The reason I suggested flats is that on my SCT I get quite strong vignetting with a 4/3 sensor due to the SCT optical design. 

 

Hiten

Hiten, I am aware of what Flats do. I did Astrophotography for quite a few years before I switched to Video.

But a test should be warts and all.

By using flats to create a better result, people will expect the same results from their own gear, giving a false impression, especially for those people who don't use flats.

 

And I didn't ask Al 'not' to do flats! If you read my post again I said: "I would prefer" and "I would like".

 

Sheesh, a person has to be really careful what they say in here  bangbang.gif

The simple answer is show results 'with' and 'without' flats.

 

As far as quality of results, are we looking for results of Observing or Imaging?

. . . and don't say both. This is an Observing Forum.


  • mclewis1 and will w like this

#32 OleCuss

OleCuss

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2010

Posted 14 September 2017 - 08:43 AM

It is interesting to get the different perspectives.

 

Personally, I want to see the best that camera can do.  For me that means I want to see what it can do under the best possible conditions and optimal calibration.  I can do the sub-optimal stuff myself!

 

So I'd personally prefer to see optimized/calibrated single frames at a variety of levels of gain and duration on a fairly broad selection of targets.

 

I'd also be happy with some stacked stuff, but the single-frame lights are what I most desire to see

 

Anyway, that's just me, and Al can do whatever he wishes, when he wishes, and how he wishes.


  • ito304 likes this

#33 Astrojedi

Astrojedi

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3970
  • Joined: 27 May 2015
  • Loc: SoCal

Posted 14 September 2017 - 08:44 AM

Ken,

 

"Sheesh, a person has to be really careful what they say in here"  - well I could say that as well. Subsequent posts make me feel that asking for flats was a mistake on my part.

 

"warts and all" - I don't want the warts of the optical system complicating the evaluation. I never use calibration unlike many of our counterparts here but SCTs are really not well suited for larger sensors. The optical system issues make it hard to properly evaluate the sensor.

 

There is nothing wrong with flats if they can be applied in real time. A lot of folks here seem to be obsessed with the 'purity' of EAA like not stacking or not using flats or darks. I find this really strange and very backward looking. As long as you can apply something in real time it should not be an issue. When new tools become available to us we should use them and not fight technological progress.

 

Note that anyone using this camera can apply flats in real time if using SharpCap Pro or Astrotoaster.

 

Hiten


  • mikefulb, elwaine, barbarosa and 2 others like this

#34 Stargazer3236

Stargazer3236

    Soyuz

  • ***--
  • Posts: 3733
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Waltham, MA

Posted 14 September 2017 - 08:48 AM

Are they offering the new 294 with both cooled and un-cooled options?

 

An uncooled 1600MC is $700, perhaps a bit less with other retailers. Will the 294 be the  same price uncooled?

 

I am more interested in the uncooled 1600 at the moment, but would be interested in the uncooled 294, if the price is right!



#35 Stargazer3236

Stargazer3236

    Soyuz

  • ***--
  • Posts: 3733
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Waltham, MA

Posted 14 September 2017 - 08:52 AM

When is the "projected date" of selling this camera to customers?

 

I am eager to get a 4:3 camera to do some EAA.



#36 Astrojedi

Astrojedi

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3970
  • Joined: 27 May 2015
  • Loc: SoCal

Posted 14 September 2017 - 09:04 AM

Are they offering the new 294 with both cooled and un-cooled options?

 

An uncooled 1600MC is $700, perhaps a bit less with other retailers. Will the 294 be the  same price uncooled?

 

I am more interested in the uncooled 1600 at the moment, but would be interested in the uncooled 294, if the price is right!

I highly doubt the 294 will be the same price as 1600MC. It is a much more advanced sensor. But first let's see how it performs. And then if the price is not too high I think it could be an excellent camera.



#37 iam1ru12

iam1ru12

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 453
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Raleigh/Durham, NC

Posted 14 September 2017 - 09:34 AM

Back to your question about targets, my I suggest the following:

 

  • M51 - one of my favorites and there's lots of detail that can be revealed, also there are nice faint galaxies that may show up in your FOV
  • M16 - another one of my favorites so it nice to compare your shots with some of mine
  • NGC 7293 (the Helix Nebula) - this is a rather low surface brightness & I've found this object a challenge 
  • NGC 253 (Sculptor Galaxy) - should fit nicely in your FOV, has a nice bright center and whispy arms - should be a nice test of the dynamic range of the camera 

-Mike


  • OleCuss likes this

#38 A. Viegas

A. Viegas

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2993
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2012
  • Loc: New York City/ CT

Posted 14 September 2017 - 10:49 AM

I am crossing my fingers for this Saturday...    this public school observatory is close to my observing location: http://www.cleardark...hnMcrthkey.html

 

Its looking like 20%-30% clouds for Saturday night.   That should not be too bad.
 

----------

 

Are they offering the new 294 with both cooled and un-cooled options?

- Not sure, but given ZWO's current mix of offerings it is likely but I do not know for sure.   Like all OSC cameras you are going to get hotpixels especially if you are in a hot area...   the cooled camera is I believe worth the extra cost especially if you plan to do DSO imaging.

 

----------

 

Price ?

No idea yet

 

----------

 

Flats vs. EAA purity...

 

-  My goal this Saturday is to be as simple as possible.  This will be my first time using this camera so I am just going to focus on SharpCap and live viewing.   I hope to get on www.nightskiesnetwork.com and broadcast, warts and all.   Hopefully, if we get a good and engaged group of people we can try other stuff, other scopes and other imaging ideas over the course of the evening.

 

-----------

 

List of additional targets: 

 

From my C11's observing site I cannot go much more than 5 degrees below the ecliptic.  So low stuff like M16/Helix/Sculptor not going to work that well - M51 maybe, depending on some trees.  

 

----------

 

 

Al


  • Dragon Man, OleCuss and ito304 like this

#39 jimthompson

jimthompson

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1102
  • Joined: 06 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Ottawa, Canada

Posted 14 September 2017 - 01:07 PM

Hi Al,

 

I hope you have clear skies this weekend.  I am also curious to see how this new camera performs.  I have found that picking targets close to the zenith work well for testing as those objects remain visible for a long time.  Thus anything around Cygnus would be a good choice for testing, like ngc6888 Crescent Nebula for example which is a moderately challenging target (not too bright, not too dim).  You can also use M27 since it has a wide dynamic range (when you include the ends of the "football" shape) and a good range of colours.  East or West Veil nebula would also be a good target for moderate difficulty and good range of colours, however due to their angular size you probably won't fit them entirely in one field of view through a C11.

 

Best Regards,

 

Jim T.



#40 MartinMeredith

MartinMeredith

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 671
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2015

Posted 14 September 2017 - 01:49 PM

Al, I wonder if you could fit in an open cluster, particularly one with some colour contrasts e.g. NGC 7419 in Cepheus (has some exceedingly red members) or M11; or the globular that is almost an open cluster, M71 in Sagitta. And if you fancy something challenging, Abell 39 in Hercules is a faint but reasonably large PN that should test the sensitivity.

 

best of luck

 

Martin


  • Dragon Man likes this

#41 A. Viegas

A. Viegas

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2993
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2012
  • Loc: New York City/ CT

Posted 14 September 2017 - 02:06 PM

Al, I wonder if you could fit in an open cluster, particularly one with some colour contrasts e.g. NGC 7419 in Cepheus (has some exceedingly red members) or M11; or the globular that is almost an open cluster, M71 in Sagitta. And if you fancy something challenging, Abell 39 in Hercules is a faint but reasonably large PN that should test the sensitivity.

 

best of luck

 

Martin

Thanks Martin

 

good ideas!



#42 Stargazer3236

Stargazer3236

    Soyuz

  • ***--
  • Posts: 3733
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Waltham, MA

Posted 14 September 2017 - 02:12 PM

I am curious, A. Viegas, How did they pick you to do the consumer testing?



#43 charotarguy

charotarguy

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1258
  • Joined: 10 Sep 2014

Posted 14 September 2017 - 02:38 PM

Will you be testing in NYC?



#44 A. Viegas

A. Viegas

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2993
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2012
  • Loc: New York City/ CT

Posted 14 September 2017 - 02:54 PM

Will you be testing in NYC?

I am testing about 70 miles North of Manhattan near the NY/CT border.   It is an "orange" zone.


  • charotarguy likes this

#45 ChrisFC

ChrisFC

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 372
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2015
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 14 September 2017 - 07:33 PM

That's a big well size. Much more than the 071! Look forward to the results

#46 XS_Man

XS_Man

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 179
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2016
  • Loc: FRANCE

Posted 16 September 2017 - 05:51 AM

Many many thanks Al for this great new ! smile.gif

 

After the non-official announcement of ASI 385, now this ASI 294. Great job ZWO !

 

No informations on ZWO forum, Sam forget to speak about about this new gem ! grin.gif

I add a post hoping that Sam will give us more informations :

https://zwoug.org/vi...hp?f=21&t=7406 

 

As Astrojedi, I have great expectations for short exposures use. wink.gif
Until now I use a QHY5III 178 C to obtain a color layer to mix with a monochrome
layer from a monochrome camera. But I hate these boring little 2.4 micron
pixels of IMX 178 ! So I hope that this new sensor could replace it in effective way.

 

And 1.5 e- readout noise at high gain, sounds great with 4.6 micron pixel. Same
readout noise as IMX 178. So used at same F/D IMX 294 will be greatly better for sure !

 

I guess the price will not be low, but without cooling it will cost less.
My main questions will be about 2 important points :

 

- "Amp glow" : is it as low as for IMX178/IMX294 or does an anti-amp glow circuit
  will be necessary for short exposures at high gain ?

 

- Dark noise without cooling ? Is it as important as for IMX174 (I hope no) ?


Al, do you think you could post some darks at high gain ?
For example 1 second, 5 seconds, and 10 seconds with gain = 350 to 400.

Hope you will have great pictures with it !

 

I am curious, A. Viegas, How did they pick you to do the consumer testing?

 

 

Same question for me ? grin.gif

 

Albéric


Edited by XS_Man, 16 September 2017 - 05:57 AM.


#47 A. Viegas

A. Viegas

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2993
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2012
  • Loc: New York City/ CT

Posted 16 September 2017 - 07:56 AM

If you look back on this Forum and the basic and intermediate imaging forum I was the first beta tester of the ASI174 mono and the first beta tester of the ASI1600 mono. I also helped out Sam and his team at their first NEAF attendance. Lastly I think I was helpful in convincing Sam to move beyond planetary and guiding cameras and to try and develop products for the EAA market.

I hope that answers any questions. Obviously it helps to be a customer too. I have purchased 4 ZWO cameras to date

Al

I will post some darks today
  • ccs_hello, Dragon Man and roelb like this

#48 A. Viegas

A. Viegas

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2993
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2012
  • Loc: New York City/ CT

Posted 16 September 2017 - 10:50 AM

OK.

I have produced a series of DARKS using Sharpcap.   Interestingly enough Sharpcap has a gain range of  0 to 570   vs the 0-400 in Sam's graphs of the sensor's response.

Anyhow these are all RAW16   4144x2822   1x1 Bin   .FITS     I did not change "Brightness" which in Sharpcap is the setting usually used by Offset.  That I will play around with when I get some clear skies.   All other settings in sharpcap were left the same.  I set the temp to -25  but the camera only got to -15 range  (this was indoors)   For Unity I set Sharpcap at 170  which is 30% of max gain (570) vs. the unity setting of 120 out of 400 in the response graphs in the prior post.   Download size are 22MB each.   Shareable GOOGLE link is here:  https://drive.google...M010c2lxTXlNQ0E

 

enjoy ! grin.gif

 

Al

 

ASI294 sharpcap settings
 
Max Gain   10s
ASI 294 maxgain T 15 10s 0001
 
Half Gain  600s
ASI294 halfgain T 15 600s 0001

 

 
Unity Gain 600s
ASI294 unitygain T 15 600s 0001

 

 


  • OleCuss and Alien Observatory like this

#49 Alien Observatory

Alien Observatory

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 852
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2015

Posted 16 September 2017 - 11:05 AM

Al, Thanks for the darks, good stuff !!   Looks like a very small amount of Amp Glow at 600 secs and half gain, no Amp Glow at 600 secs and Unity gain.  

 

Looks like to me ZWO did a very good job on this new camera / sensor.   Pat Utah  smile.gif



#50 XS_Man

XS_Man

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 179
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2016
  • Loc: FRANCE

Posted 16 September 2017 - 11:51 AM

Thanks Al,

 

The dark at 10 sec and max gain is really impressive ! shocked.gif

Are you sure it's at max gain, it seems so clean ?

Even at 30sec and max gain, amp glow is low.

 

Very promissing for sure !

 

 

Interestingly enough Sharpcap has a gain range of  0 to 570

 

So it means, I guess, that max. gain of sensor is 57 dB ?

Nearly same scale as for IMX 290 / IMX 224.

 

Albéric


Edited by XS_Man, 16 September 2017 - 12:06 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