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- 294 VRs 1600 color cooled 5 min images

  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:43 PM

RESULTS of ASI 294-1600 shootout..I tried to keep data the same with 3 objects,It was tought to do!...But I will post my summary. This is a simple example and I have alot more data ..over 2 GB,but for now this is a simple result.. I used my ES127mm(fdc100) with reducer for F5.25,with about 5 min of data on each..at a gain of around 350 and 26 seconds stacked exposures.(about 5 min total)I used a STC multi filter,,,and tried to color balance...but someday will do the test with no filter..I did this from home N of Tampa on a very good night for me..lol...
I will let you be the judge......
but IMHO the 294 just makes smoother pics. BTW the first image was very different from each camera...the 294 being VERY soother and less noise.Both cameras are very good camers and can be used,,,,but the 294 collects more data in less time... For M27 I included a 8 min data of the 1600 to compare with 294(5min) and you can judge for yourself..The files are marked at the top or on the screen capture as to what they are... You might want to full screen them to get a better view..(download also for more info)...So this is my first pass at postting this data.I think the extra 2 bits and well depth in the 294 helps. To see more download and ZOOM and streatch to get a better view of backround noise.USE WIN10 PHOTOs to view this download(under options at beottom of photo.)
The bottom line is that they are both good cameras with the 294 being a little better for fast "live imaging"..The files were resized for under500 for this post... Better pics could be done by tweeking each for each camera...but I tried to keep it simple..
BTW I find that GAIN upper limits for me are : 294-450...1600-350 for fast imaging..*** These are both done at gain =350 ,bin 1 raw16

NO GUIDING,NO DARKS,NO LIGHTS...done all in sharpcap.**********and did a "Live broadcast on nightskiesnetwork.com that night.

Bob(mega)


********PLEASE CLICK on the PICS to make them bigger and read info*********

Edited by mega256, 16 May 2018 - 05:39 PM.

  • DonBoy, barbarosa, OleCuss and 6 others like this

#2 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:44 PM

M27 5 min compare

Attached Thumbnails

  • M27-5MIN COMPARE (Large).JPG

  • roelb, Robrj and bdyer22 like this

#3 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:46 PM

M27-294 5min

Attached Thumbnails

  • M27-294-5MIN.jpg

  • roelb, Robrj and bdyer22 like this

#4 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:47 PM

M27-1600 5 min

Attached Thumbnails

  • M27-1600-5MIN.jpg

  • roelb and Robrj like this

#5 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:48 PM

M27 CROP compare sorry about focus on this one..

Attached Thumbnails

  • M27-CROP COMPARE.JPG

Edited by mega256, 16 May 2018 - 05:10 PM.

  • gazerjim, roelb, Robrj and 1 other like this

#6 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:49 PM

M104 CROP compare

Attached Thumbnails

  • M104 CROP COMPARE.JPG

  • roelb, Robrj and bdyer22 like this

#7 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:50 PM

NGC5634-5 min compare

Attached Thumbnails

  • NGC5634-5MIN COMPARE (Large).JPG

  • Robrj likes this

#8 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:51 PM

NCG 5634 CROP compare

Attached Thumbnails

  • NGC5634-CROP CPMPARE.JPG

  • Robrj likes this

#9 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:53 PM

M104-compare5 min

Attached Thumbnails

  • M104-COMPARE 5MIN.JPG

  • Robrj and bdyer22 like this

#10 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:59 PM

M27 1600 8 MIN of DATA

****Compare this with the 5min of the 294 M27 data above*****

Attached Thumbnails

  • M27-1600-8MIN ZOOM.jpg

Edited by mega256, 16 May 2018 - 05:01 PM.

  • roelb, Robrj and bdyer22 like this

#11 roelb

roelb

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 830
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2013
  • Loc: Belgium, Antwerp

Posted 16 May 2018 - 05:24 PM

Nice comparison waytogo.gif



#12 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 05:32 PM

M16 ASI294 full frame 5 min data total...from that night downsized from 26MB to 430KB to show what can be done in a smaller file size. ***Please click on it***

Attached Thumbnails

  • M16-294-Stack_20frames_600s (Large).jpg

Edited by mega256, 16 May 2018 - 05:37 PM.

  • DonBoy, roelb, Robrj and 2 others like this

#13 OleCuss

OleCuss

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1548
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2010

Posted 16 May 2018 - 06:53 PM

I greatly appreciate your doing that comparison!  I think it was very nicely done.

 

I'm going to mostly agree that I'd prefer what the ASI294 is doing for NRTV rather than the ASI1600 but I could easily see where others might see things differently.

 

Particularly when the cropped views of M27 are compared I think the ASI1600 wins out on detail.  Depending on color preferences you could like the ASI1600 better but I lean toward the 294 on that.

 

But part of the it is the focal length at which you were operating.  With an effective focal length of something like 667mm you could be under-sampling a bit with the ASI294?  I haven't run the numbers but my gut tells me that it should not be under-sampled but that could be wrong.  If under-sampling actually is an issue with the ASI294 then that would explain why the smaller pixels of the ASI1600 would be winning out on detail?

 

Then again, I'm not always going to be doing NRTV with either the ASI1600 or the ASI294 at BINx1.  I'm often likely to be at something like 2x2 (I only have the ASI1600 so I can't say what I'd do with the ASI294) - and then the smaller pixels of the ASI1600 wouldn't be much help anyway.

 

At a longer focal length the ASI294 might look even better against the ASI1600?  So if I ever decide to plug the ASI1600 into my 12" Dob I could be be significantly less happy than I'd be with the ASI294.

 

Well, anyway, I'm not complaining about the ASI1600.  It's a good camera for NRTV although IMHO you have reinforced the idea that the ASI294 is generally better for NRTV.

 

Oh, and that M16 is beautiful by any standard.  Amazing that this kind of image can be obtained in an NRTV fashion!

 

The telescope is also clearly a good performer!


Edited by OleCuss, 16 May 2018 - 06:56 PM.


#14 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 07:16 PM

Thank you so much....
Yes I agree they are 2 different cameras....both good!...

At home North of Tampa I have a gulf sea fog most of the time...its kind of a sky glow...up to 40+deg most nights that the temps are not equal..
Gulf and 1 mile from Gulf...lol...And I take short fast exposures to get by with... I think the 294 is better at that..so in fewer frames I get a somewhat better image...BUT the 1600 is no slouch, and I think with longer exposures it might shine...The scope I use at home is the 127mm refractor,,,But in the field I like my AT10INTT at F4 at about 1100mm...both cameras work well with it.. I only have both cameras because I do a lot of field work(darker sites)..with different setups. Bottom line there are many very nice cameras to chose from now. It was fun to broadcast my test on the web live..


Bob
  • OleCuss likes this

#15 cbwerner

cbwerner

    Bicycle Repairman

  • -----
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 3328
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Maidens, VA

Posted 16 May 2018 - 07:45 PM

Great comparison Bob. Thanks for sharing!

 

To my eye the color response of the 294 seems more robust and natural, but both show themselves nicely. :waytogo:



#16 jgraham

jgraham

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18727
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Miami Valley Astronomical Society

Posted 16 May 2018 - 08:23 PM

Wow, very nice! I really appreciate seeing the screen grabs, they have given me some ideas to try my next time out.

 

Thanks!



#17 alphatripleplus

alphatripleplus

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 10501
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2012
  • Loc: New Jersey

Posted 16 May 2018 - 09:54 PM

Nice comparison, Bob. Did you try your Infinity on any of these targets? Would be interesting to see a three way comparison if you ever have the chance. (Maybe uncooled for all, if you don't have cooling on the Infinity).



#18 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 16 May 2018 - 11:19 PM

No not this time...But I have done many B4...when I go to dark sites...I run 2 setups...the infinity and the 1600/294 with 2 mounts...some day Ill post..But the infinity is less than 2 MP and these cameras at 12-16MP....but the infinity does a great job..


Bob
  • alphatripleplus likes this

#19 alphatripleplus

alphatripleplus

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 10501
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2012
  • Loc: New Jersey

Posted 17 May 2018 - 07:29 AM

Thanks, Bob. Looking forward to it when you have a chance.



#20 saguaro

saguaro

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 632
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2012
  • Loc: Southern Arizona

Posted 17 May 2018 - 10:41 AM

M27 CROP compare sorry about focus on this one..

Bob, thank you for doing the shootout!

 

I agree that the 294 is the better camera for EAA since it is more sensitive and seems to perform better at higher gains. However, since I own the 1600MC-C (2nd-generation), I wanted to share my M27 for comparison taken May 14 under Bortle 4 skies west of Tucson. I'm using an Edge14@F/7.7 (2741mm fl) and CCDT67 focal reducer. I used SharpCap live stacking, Gain 300 Brightness 50, Bin1, no filter, cooled to -10C, master dark and master flat applied during live-stacking. I did do a manual color balance for the White Balance R and B channels beforehand.

 

This is M27, 8x30sec (4 minutes), saved as viewed, only cropped, reduced in size, rotated to match your "M27 Crop" reference images and converted to jpg for posting.

 

M27-8x30sec 1600MC-C.jpg

 

I think doing the manual color balance, and using a master dark and master flat, while not necessary for EAA, really helps to equalize some of the differences between the two cameras. Perhaps also the larger aperture and darker skies (not sure what your Bortle is north of Tampa) may also help to equalize some of the differences between the two cameras.


Edited by saguaro, 17 May 2018 - 11:43 AM.

  • mega256, roelb and bdyer22 like this

#21 DSO_Viewer

DSO_Viewer

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 643
  • Joined: 03 Jan 2016

Posted 17 May 2018 - 11:38 AM

RESULTS of ASI 294-1600 shootout..I tried to keep data the same with 3 objects,It was tought to do!...But I will post my summary. This is a simple example and I have alot more data ..over 2 GB,but for now this is a simple result.. I used my ES127mm(fdc100) with reducer for F5.25,with about 5 min of data on each..at a gain of around 350 and 26 seconds stacked exposures.(about 5 min total)I used a STC multi filter,,,and tried to color balance...but someday will do the test with no filter..I did this from home N of Tampa on a very good night for me..lol...
I will let you be the judge......
but IMHO the 294 just makes smoother pics. BTW the first image was very different from each camera...the 294 being VERY soother and less noise.Both cameras are very good camers and can be used,,,,but the 294 collects more data in less time... For M27 I included a 8 min data of the 1600 to compare with 294(5min) and you can judge for yourself..The files are marked at the top or on the screen capture as to what they are... You might want to full screen them to get a better view..(download also for more info)...So this is my first pass at postting this data.I think the extra 2 bits and well depth in the 294 helps. To see more download and ZOOM and streatch to get a better view of backround noise.USE WIN10 PHOTOs to view this download(under options at beottom of photo.)
The bottom line is that they are both good cameras with the 294 being a little better for fast "live imaging"..The files were resized for under500 for this post... Better pics could be done by tweeking each for each camera...but I tried to keep it simple..
BTW I find that GAIN upper limits for me are : 294-450...1600-350 for fast imaging..*** These are both done at gain =350 ,bin 1 raw16

NO GUIDING,NO DARKS,NO LIGHTS...done all in sharpcap.**********and did a "Live broadcast on nightskiesnetwork.com that night.

Bob(mega)


********PLEASE CLICK on the PICS to make them bigger and read info*********

Thank you Bob for taking the time out to do this test. I would like to make a few comments/suggestions regarding this test.

 

1. I do like the color balance better with the 294 but since filters affect sensors differently perhaps due to the different Bayer Matrix 1600 is GRBG & 294 is RGGB. I would try the same test but use no filters on again M27.

 

2. The usable gain you mentioned with the 1600 is 350 & 294 is 450 which I agree. I know you were probably thinking that using the same gain for more of a fair test but I think using the max gain was a disadvantage for noise with the 1600 even though I do not see any increase in noise. I would try 1600 at gain 350 and 294 at 450 or better still using both at 250 range.

 

3. I personally think the images esp. the cropped M27 & NGC 5634 are much sharper, more detailed and less bloated stars using the 1600 even though you used the same scope and filter. 

 

Steve


Edited by DSO_Viewer, 17 May 2018 - 07:02 PM.


#22 jimthompson

jimthompson

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 953
  • Joined: 06 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Ottawa, Canada

Posted 17 May 2018 - 02:59 PM

Thanks for your effort Bob.  I am glad you are finding time and clear skies to play with these two cameras.  I am looking forward to a summertime with my ASI294!

 

Cheers,

 

Jim T.



#23 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 23 May 2018 - 06:27 AM

Oh one more M17..same night,same specs..with settings...294,no guiding,no darks,no lights,,resized to 190KB. EASY/PEAZY ...

Attached Thumbnails

  • M17-294-5MIN.jpg

Edited by mega256, 23 May 2018 - 06:34 AM.

  • Starman27, DonBoy, OleCuss and 3 others like this

#24 alphatripleplus

alphatripleplus

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 10501
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2012
  • Loc: New Jersey

Posted 23 May 2018 - 07:07 AM

Oh one more M17..same night,same specs..with settings...294,no guiding,no darks,no lights,,resized to 190KB. EASY/PEAZY ...

No lights??confused1.gif 

 

(maybe no light pollution lol.gif )



#25 mega256

mega256

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: N of Tampa

Posted 23 May 2018 - 08:10 AM

Done from Tampa on a good night But WITH FILTER!! STC multi spectra 2"..(3:30AM)

https://www.cyclopso...spectra-filter/

Filters are a must in my home skies..P2 also very good..

Good optics and flters=no flats,darks..and adjustments..lol

BTW you will need 2" filters for the 294...the 1600 can use 1.25"

Edited by mega256, 23 May 2018 - 11:16 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