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

Which Camera?

  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Rockinrod

Rockinrod

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2019

Posted 22 May 2019 - 07:26 AM

You can play with this tool - change equipment to your taste (camera icon):
http://www.blackwate...maging-toolbox/

 

At least you need a focal reducer to even get to 0.66"/pixel (tried with 0.68x reducer - and asi294).

And what is your budget ?

 


Good Morning,

 

I'm starting out in astrophotography, I have used a Skyris 132C with SharpCap, and will be using my Nikon D700 with Backyard Nikon as well. I would like to advance into a CMOS color/cooled camera, but there are so many out there the decision is tough. I like ZWO brands, maybe a QHY not sure...

 

I've used the formula 206 x Pixel size divided by FL and coming up with a 0.63-.75 arc-sec per pixel. Not sure if that will work for me here in Florida with these not so clear skies. I was told by a sales rep at OPT that I need to be within a 1.0-2.0 per arc-sec, or i would have bloated stars. I definitely do not want this in my photos.

 

I have a CELESTRON 9.25 CGE XLT OTA, and would like to pair this scope with a good all round camera for both DSO, and Planetary. Could use some suggestions from you guys who are more experienced that I. This was my first ever photo using a Skyris 132C

 

Thank you,

 

Rodney

Attached Files


Edited by Rockinrod, 22 May 2019 - 08:36 AM.


#2 happylimpet

happylimpet

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3995
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2013
  • Loc: Southampton, UK

Posted 22 May 2019 - 07:28 AM

If you focus carefully then 0.63-0.75"/pix is a good scale, and very amenable to further sharpening. However its maybe a tall order when starting out.

 

I have 0.69"/pix and i think its perfect, especially when i get good seeing.  Florida is famous for its good seeing so I'd be tmepted to go with it and make it your goal to be good enough to exploit it! You can always bin the results anyway if theyre a bit bloaty.



#3 Tapio

Tapio

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2135
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2006
  • Loc: Tampere, Finland

Posted 22 May 2019 - 07:38 AM

You can play with this tool - change equipment to your taste (camera icon):
http://www.blackwate...maging-toolbox/

 

At least you need a focal reducer to even get to 0.66"/pixel (tried with 0.68x reducer - and asi294).

And what is your budget ?



#4 Rockinrod

Rockinrod

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2019

Posted 22 May 2019 - 07:47 AM

I'm 1/2 mile from Big Lagoon State park in Perdido, so I can go get a pretty dark sky there, That would help. My backyard has a few neighbors lights. I'll have to read up on this binning to see what this does. I'm usually at 1...

 

I just ordered one of those Bahtinov Mask for my focus. that should help...

 

If you focus carefully then 0.63-0.75"/pix is a good scale, and very amenable to further sharpening. However its maybe a tall order when starting out.

 

I have 0.69"/pix and i think its perfect, especially when i get good seeing.  Florida is famous for its good seeing so I'd be tmepted to go with it and make it your goal to be good enough to exploit it! You can always bin the results anyway if theyre a bit bloaty.



#5 Rockinrod

Rockinrod

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2019

Posted 22 May 2019 - 07:52 AM

You can play with this tool - change equipment to your taste (camera icon):
http://www.blackwate...maging-toolbox/

 

At least you need a focal reducer to even get to 0.66"/pixel (tried with 0.68x reducer - and asi294).

And what is your budget ?

I have a Celestron f/6.3 I keep on there bringing that 2350mm down to a 1480mm FL, using my full frame Nikon, the diagonal measurement on that D700 is 43.21mm, it's also rigged for full spectrum. I haven't tried using the Nikon yet. It comes back from LifePixel today after the mod.

 

Rodney


Edited by Rockinrod, 22 May 2019 - 07:52 AM.


#6 sg6

sg6

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5920
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2010
  • Loc: Norfolk, UK.

Posted 22 May 2019 - 07:53 AM

1 arc sec per pixel is a good idea, also easy to remember. Usually I have heard 1 to 2 arc sec per pixel, so 1 makes it.

 

Now I have read of less as in 0.7-0.5 and that was in relation to planetary imaging - your scope should be good for planets. Equally planetary images I have seen with a 9.25 also used a TV powermate, think 2.5x powermate.

 

Presently play with the Nikon see how it all goes and decide later on a dedicated camera. Mainly as the 9.25 is not the best for DSO's even with a reducer you are likely up at 1500mm focal length and that is long. Just thinking you may decide that you have to use a different scope for the DSO aspect.



#7 Rockinrod

Rockinrod

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2019

Posted 22 May 2019 - 08:04 AM

I'm looking at the ZWO ASI294MC. That camera on my set up will give me a .50 arc-sec per pixel range. I was hoping to get that number a bit higher, but I can only bring this Cassegrain's FL down to f/6.3 max. I don't think there are any other focal reducers out there which will bring it down in the f/4-5 range

 

There are a few other's I'm looking at as well in that category.

 

Rodney

 

I have a Celestron f/6.3 I keep on there bringing that 2350mm down to a 1480mm FL, using my full frame Nikon, the diagonal measurement on that D700 is 43.21mm, it's also rigged for full spectrum. I haven't tried using the Nikon yet. It comes back from LifePixel today after the mod.

 

Rodney



#8 Rockinrod

Rockinrod

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2019

Posted 22 May 2019 - 08:30 AM

I use this one as well.

 

Tool

 

I have a Celestron f/6.3 I keep on there bringing that 2350mm down to a 1480mm FL, using my full frame Nikon, the diagonal measurement on that D700 is 43.21mm, it's also rigged for full spectrum. I haven't tried using the Nikon yet. It comes back from LifePixel today after the mod.

 

Rodney



#9 Rockinrod

Rockinrod

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2019

Posted 22 May 2019 - 08:34 AM

Yep, the more i learn about the numbers game and these formulas, the more I agree...! my OPT guy recommended a few cameras for my application. I'll go back and see what he said. But yes, for now I'll use the Nikon...

 

I'm even considering selling this scope for a 120mm refractor...Not now though until I can see what I can do with the set-up I have.

 

Thanks!

 

Rodney

 

1 arc sec per pixel is a good idea, also easy to remember. Usually I have heard 1 to 2 arc sec per pixel, so 1 makes it.

 

Now I have read of less as in 0.7-0.5 and that was in relation to planetary imaging - your scope should be good for planets. Equally planetary images I have seen with a 9.25 also used a TV powermate, think 2.5x powermate.

 

Presently play with the Nikon see how it all goes and decide later on a dedicated camera. Mainly as the 9.25 is not the best for DSO's even with a reducer you are likely up at 1500mm focal length and that is long. Just thinking you may decide that you have to use a different scope for the DSO aspect.



#10 Rockinrod

Rockinrod

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2019

Posted 22 May 2019 - 08:43 AM

If you focus carefully then 0.63-0.75"/pix is a good scale, and very amenable to further sharpening. However its maybe a tall order when starting out.

 

I have 0.69"/pix and i think its perfect, especially when i get good seeing.  Florida is famous for its good seeing so I'd be tmepted to go with it and make it your goal to be good enough to exploit it! You can always bin the results anyway if theyre a bit bloaty.

What scope are you using with it, if I may ask?

 

Rodney



#11 happylimpet

happylimpet

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3995
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2013
  • Loc: Southampton, UK

Posted 22 May 2019 - 09:43 AM

What scope are you using with it, if I may ask?

 

Rodney

Mine's a 12" f5 Newtonian with a 0.73x coma corrector/reducer. I use short subs (10secs usually) which also helps with getting sharp images.

 

 

Now I have read of less as in 0.7-0.5 and that was in relation to planetary imaging - your scope should be good for planets. Equally planetary images I have seen with a 9.25 also used a TV powermate, think 2.5x powermate.

 

Presently play with the Nikon see how it all goes and decide later on a dedicated camera. Mainly as the 9.25 is not the best for DSO's even with a reducer you are likely up at 1500mm focal length and that is long. Just thinking you may decide that you have to use a different scope for the DSO aspect.

Planetary imaging is usually done at 0.1-0.2"/pix.



#12 Rockinrod

Rockinrod

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2019

Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:04 AM

Mine's a 12" f5 Newtonian with a 0.73x coma corrector/reducer. I use short subs (10secs usually) which also helps with getting sharp images.

 

 

Planetary imaging is usually done at 0.1-0.2"/pix.

That's with a clear clean sky though correct? What about with some light pollution and haze? Would a 0.50-60 work, for DSO?



#13 rgsalinger

rgsalinger

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 5115
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Carlsbad Ca

Posted 22 May 2019 - 01:13 PM

First of all, what mount do you plan to use? I ask because that is the most important thing in successful deep sky imaging. I routinely put a 900 dollar telescope on an 10000 dollar mount. Second of all, with an SCT of that length, not only do you need a really good mount, but you also need to consider that an off axis guider is a requirement as well. Do some research and fit one to your system along with an appropriate guide camera.

 

Use your existing equipment with the OAG and test the guiding accuracy. Don't worry about the camera until you are confident that you can get guiding well under 1 arc second RMS. Buy a copy of the Deep Sky Imaging Primer to learn more about this. Buying a camera and trying to image deep sky objects at .5 or .6 arc seconds of image scale is tough to do even with a good mount. 

 

Rgrds-Ross



#14 happylimpet

happylimpet

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3995
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2013
  • Loc: Southampton, UK

Posted 22 May 2019 - 02:15 PM

I agree with the above - I have a £250 scope on a £2500 mount! But with low read noise cameras you can use short subs (like 10 secs) at little cost to the image noise, and be much less sensitive to guiding errors.

 

And regarding LP and haze, I have lots of LP - makes no difference, just longer exposures. Resolution is unaffected.



#15 Rockinrod

Rockinrod

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2019

Posted 22 May 2019 - 03:23 PM

First of all, what mount do you plan to use? I ask because that is the most important thing in successful deep sky imaging. I routinely put a 900 dollar telescope on an 10000 dollar mount. Second of all, with an SCT of that length, not only do you need a really good mount, but you also need to consider that an off axis guider is a requirement as well. Do some research and fit one to your system along with an appropriate guide camera.

 

Use your existing equipment with the OAG and test the guiding accuracy. Don't worry about the camera until you are confident that you can get guiding well under 1 arc second RMS. Buy a copy of the Deep Sky Imaging Primer to learn more about this. Buying a camera and trying to image deep sky objects at .5 or .6 arc seconds of image scale is tough to do even with a good mount. 

 

Rgrds-Ross

One of the best in astronomy a Losmandy G11 with the Gemini2 system, a Sky Watcher 50ED guide scope with Lodestar Xpress X2 guide camera. Then my Nikon Full frame, full spectrum D700 camera for the imaging. I think I can learn with this, then later go to another camera and or scope...Keeping the mount of course

 

Rodney


Edited by Rockinrod, 22 May 2019 - 03:24 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