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

Show us your Asi2600/Qhy268c images

  • Please log in to reply
160 replies to this topic

#101 calypsob

calypsob

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,955
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Virginia

Posted 18 August 2020 - 03:59 PM

Read the link I posted above. Apparently they do have plans now.

Hmm I guess Ill believe it when I see it. It would be an amazing camera. Maybe Sony offers these if you order in some kind of minlot.


  • rockstarbill likes this

#102 Dean J.

Dean J.

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2011
  • Loc: Vista, CA

Posted 18 August 2020 - 04:09 PM

It won't change my mind yet, which is that Sony don't have an IMX571 Mono Sensor.

 

ZWO have no plans for an IMX571 Mono (because Sony are not making a Mono Sensor, or it would be on their Roadmap and it isn't), so for QHY to get a Mono version they are either modifying the IMX571 Sensor, or paying Sony to do it for them, or paying Sony to make a run of Mono Sensors specifically for them under contract.

... or QHY is bringing out their new mono QHY268M as stated in the video later this year.  If ZWO falls behind on this one and isn’t doing the same then I will be buying my first QHY camera.



#103 Freakshow

Freakshow

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 142
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2013

Posted 18 August 2020 - 04:47 PM

ZWO "has the plan"  

 

In this link... https://stargazerslo...the-way/page/2/



#104 Freakshow

Freakshow

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 142
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2013

Posted 18 August 2020 - 05:07 PM

Sorry for derailing this thread.  Let's get back to the intent--beautiful OSC pictures!  



#105 Freakshow

Freakshow

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 142
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2013

Posted 18 August 2020 - 05:18 PM

A question to QHY owners.  What is the real horizontal and vertical pixel resolution when you omit the Optic Black and Overscan areas?  

 

QHY. 6280 x 4210 which includes optic black and overscan 

 

ASI 2600  6248 x 4176 (all used???)


Edited by Freakshow, 18 August 2020 - 05:20 PM.


#106 sn2006gy

sn2006gy

    Apollo

  • ****-
  • Posts: 1,088
  • Joined: 04 May 2020
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 18 August 2020 - 10:35 PM

Wouldn't 36mm filters be sufficient?  Significantly cheaper than 2".  Less weight.  Smaller filter wheel?  And you could pair it with a IMX462, or IMX174 guide/planetary camera and have all the bases covered.

Since this discussion is for the 2600mc, i already invested in 2" filters. The filters go in front of my field flattener when on my apo and they go in a 2" filter wheel when on my other scope.

 

Also, since i know APS-C is just another stepping stone i'd not want to waste my time or money going 36mm unmounted when I know I'd probably jump on a full frame camera in the future. 2" would work, i guess 50mm would be preferred but oh well. Have to stop somewhere...

 

I've got 30+ years of imaging ahead me.. I'm not betting on stuff that worked the last 30 years smile.gif

 

I found the 2600 to be the perfect spot to learn some of the difficulties of a larger format... when it comes to glass i'll buy once cry once. That's all. I am having fun watching people work out much larger kinks on 6200 but i'll slowly work my way there.


Edited by sn2006gy, 18 August 2020 - 10:39 PM.

  • JerseyBoy likes this

#107 Freakshow

Freakshow

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 142
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2013

Posted 18 August 2020 - 11:01 PM

I thought about a 6200 but economies of scale were off.  Essentially a Nikon D850 and D500 will give you the exact same hi-res pics but one has a larger area to crop from.  The only reason I could imagine going from an APS-C to FF is...none if you are willing to mosaic.  APS-C is lighter, cheaper, smaller files, faster processing, virtually no vignetting 40mm+ image circles, images better because it hits the sweet spot of the optics....What am I missing?


  • JerseyBoy likes this

#108 sn2006gy

sn2006gy

    Apollo

  • ****-
  • Posts: 1,088
  • Joined: 04 May 2020
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 18 August 2020 - 11:23 PM

I thought about a 6200 but economies of scale were off.  Essentially a Nikon D850 and D500 will give you the exact same hi-res pics but one has a larger area to crop from.  The only reason I could imagine going from an APS-C to FF is...none if you are willing to mosaic.  APS-C is lighter, cheaper, smaller files, faster processing, virtually no vignetting 40mm+ image circles, images better because it hits the sweet spot of the optics....What am I missing?

Not missing anything! These are amazing cameras.

 

My enthusiasm for these 533/2600 has no bounds. I'm getting amazing images off these sensors and i'm nowhere near hitting any limits with these OSC or the Triad Ultras filter combination... Heck, i think we're just scratching the surface of what these modern OSC's can do.  Which is why i got mildly annoyed at the comment saying Mono is always superior in a thread about this particular camera... no need for that nonsense here. Let us enjoy what we have and relish in modern sensors and modern processing.

 

So yeah, I'm not missing anything smile.gif which goes back to me saying 'no need for mono, gimme dark skies'  

 

My next scope is an epsilon so i would do larger filters because i have the capability for FF image circle and again, buy once cry once.  I've had enough vignetting i'm not short changing myself on these larger sensors.

 

Unfortunately UPS lost my scope so we'll see what happens


Edited by sn2006gy, 18 August 2020 - 11:26 PM.

  • JerseyBoy likes this

#109 rockstarbill

rockstarbill

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,610
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 18 August 2020 - 11:39 PM

Not missing anything! These are amazing cameras.

 

My enthusiasm for these 533/2600 has no bounds. I'm getting amazing images off these sensors and i'm nowhere near hitting any limits with these OSC or the Triad Ultras filter combination... Heck, i think we're just scratching the surface of what these modern OSC's can do.  Which is why i got mildly annoyed at the comment saying Mono is always superior in a thread about this particular camera... no need for that nonsense here. Let us enjoy what we have and relish in modern sensors and modern processing.

 

So yeah, I'm not missing anything smile.gif which goes back to me saying 'no need for mono, gimme dark skies'  

 

My next scope is an epsilon so i would do larger filters because i have the capability for FF image circle and again, buy once cry once.  I've had enough vignetting i'm not short changing myself on these larger sensors.

 

Unfortunately UPS lost my scope so we'll see what happens

Mono is superior. There is no denying that if the decision is based on science. 

 

That is the bottom line. wink.gif

 

With that said - OSC cameras can produce great data. :p


Edited by rockstarbill, 18 August 2020 - 11:45 PM.


#110 sn2006gy

sn2006gy

    Apollo

  • ****-
  • Posts: 1,088
  • Joined: 04 May 2020
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 19 August 2020 - 12:13 AM

Mono is superior. There is no denying that if the decision is based on science. 

 

That is the bottom line. wink.gif

 

With that said - OSC cameras can produce great data. tongue2.gif

Lol...

 

Show me an APS-C mono that is superior to the 2600 then.  You seem to want to fight this out, so lets do it smile.gif  I have no idea or reason why you feel its so important to repeat this time after time, so lets see. Open up a new thread and lets do a comparison. For science.


Edited by sn2006gy, 19 August 2020 - 12:15 AM.


#111 rockstarbill

rockstarbill

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,610
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 19 August 2020 - 01:28 AM

Lol...

Show me an APS-C mono that is superior to the 2600 then. You seem to want to fight this out, so lets do it smile.gif I have no idea or reason why you feel its so important to repeat this time after time, so lets see. Open up a new thread and lets do a comparison. For science.


I have no idea why the size of the sensor is relevant in your mind. 6200 mono vs 2600 APSC, crop the 6200 down if you feel better (it doesn't matter).

6200 wins handily. Again the size of the sensor isn't the point. The KAF16200 FLI camera would win vs the 2600 OSC.

I don't think you should speak authoritatively about matters. Might wanna read up on some good books on the subject. I've seen quite a few posts where you've misled others with your perspectives and it's not helpful.

#112 R Botero

R Botero

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,815
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2009
  • Loc: Kent, England

Posted 19 August 2020 - 02:21 AM

Maybe it’s cloudy where you guys are (as it is here right now) but get back to posting images please! :wink:
  • bugbit likes this

#113 RichieS

RichieS

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017

Posted 19 August 2020 - 06:07 AM

Back to images then.
Ldn673. Very poor conditions

get.jpg?insecure
  • R Botero, calypsob and JerseyBoy like this

#114 sn2006gy

sn2006gy

    Apollo

  • ****-
  • Posts: 1,088
  • Joined: 04 May 2020
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 19 August 2020 - 08:08 AM

I have no idea why the size of the sensor is relevant in your mind. 6200 mono vs 2600 APSC, crop the 6200 down if you feel better (it doesn't matter).

6200 wins handily. Again the size of the sensor isn't the point. The KAF16200 FLI camera would win vs the 2600 OSC.

I don't think you should speak authoritatively about matters. Might wanna read up on some good books on the subject. I've seen quite a few posts where you've misled others with your perspectives and it's not helpful.

First, I never speak for anyone but my self. So quite the accusations there buddy. You seem to have a problem, not me. I have a 2600mc, i'm only speaking from experience. Not some desire for authority.

 

To answer your claims though:

 

Kaf:

 

9e readout noise

40k well

USB 2.0

6um pixels...

> 0.25 e dark current at 0

 

ahh, it doesn't compare...

 

For the 2600 OSC, i'm going to take shorter subs. I'm going to dither. I'm going to bayer drizzle in processing.  I'd be way under sampled on the KAF so i wouldn't buy it to begin with.  

 

I don't need to bring up the 6200 because i wouldn't spend 4k to crop it to APS-C and even if I did, it still doesn't support your claim that going mono on a 6200 is far superior to 2600 Color when I said I would be better off going to darker skies.

 

Truth is, I would be better off going to darker skies before i saw any difference - visually discernable or scientifically based. That's based on my scopes, seeing, skies and experience in actually using the 2600 and knowing people who are in similar skies using mono and mono+6200 even.

 

Yes, lets get back to posting 2600mc images



#115 FredOS

FredOS

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 268
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2017

Posted 19 August 2020 - 08:27 AM

I think you need to check your data. FLI 16200 is 6e readout noise which for 6micron pixels is in fact very impressive. Dark Noise is 0.015 at -25C. The camera can easily go to -35C.

I have both the ASI6200 and FLI16200 and continue to view the FLI as quite impressive when I compare the outcome on same targets. And larger pixels are not a negative, in particular for larger scopes. On OSC vs mono, I haven't tried OSC considering mono is better for narrowband.


Edited by FredOS, 19 August 2020 - 08:32 AM.

  • rockstarbill likes this

#116 sn2006gy

sn2006gy

    Apollo

  • ****-
  • Posts: 1,088
  • Joined: 04 May 2020
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 19 August 2020 - 08:44 AM

I think you need to check your data. FLI 16200 is 6e readout noise which for 6micron pixels is in fact very impressive. Dark Noise is 0.015 at -25C. The camera can easily go to -35C.

I have both the ASI6200 and FLI16200 and continue to view the FLI as quite impressive when I compare the outcome on same targets. And larger pixels are not a negative, in particular for larger scopes. On OSC vs mono, I haven't tried OSC considering mono is better for narrowband.

 

The kaf is a great camera. 

 

The numbers on the spec sheet clearly are based on 0C - yes, you can get cooler.  It says dark current > 0.25 electrons/second at 0c, it says 9e electronic read noise, it says "~40k" well depth. I'm reading the product spec sheet for the atik-16200.

 

The 6200 and the 16200 are amazing. let me clear that out of the way for those who think i have some ulterior motive. I'm only answering these questions in respect to comparing these to the 2600 - I never once initiated this comparison, i was just told by someone here that they're "Scientifically better"

 

The 2600mc is amazing too.

 

We on the same page?

 

I'm only praising the 2600mc (and the 533mc) in comparison to the wild claims others are making and i can't for the life of me figure out why those claims have to even be stated when they're not true in the absolute terms. Way too many variables and we're not talking about the differences in processing & acquisition that make either more competitive with each other or surface advantages that help people - especially when paired with specific scopes.


Edited by sn2006gy, 19 August 2020 - 08:48 AM.


#117 smr

smr

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 78
  • Joined: 22 Aug 2018

Posted 19 August 2020 - 08:46 AM

Guys, this is a thread for images and discussion about the 2600MC Pro and QHY268C.... there are tonnes of other threads for mono discussions.


  • calypsob and sn2006gy like this

#118 LPA

LPA

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 152
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Dallas, TX

Posted 19 August 2020 - 08:57 AM

Back to images: M33 taken with AT130EDT + Riccardi FF/FR + ASI2600MC, CEM60, 68x120 sec., cropped to 4000x4000, downsized for CN:

 

M33_HTcsmall.jpg

 

Larry


  • R Botero, Ken Sturrock, calypsob and 4 others like this

#119 smr

smr

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 78
  • Joined: 22 Aug 2018

Posted 19 August 2020 - 09:03 AM

Nice M33 ^ 

 

One great thing about having a 24-30mp sensor is that ability to crop in heavily without losing IQ.



#120 TimN

TimN

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 3,415
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2008
  • Loc: Ontario, Canada

Posted 20 August 2020 - 08:36 AM

A few of the recent posts have veered off topic into comparing cameras and OSC's vs Mono.  This thread is for showing Asi2600/Qhy268c images. Posts deemed to be off topic will be removed.



#121 R Botero

R Botero

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,815
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2009
  • Loc: Kent, England

Posted 21 August 2020 - 12:16 PM

Sh2-140, vdB 153 and LDN 1204 in Cepheus.  9.75hrs using an AP Stowaway.  See link for LRGB version with L from a 6" AP refractor mounted in tandem with the smaller scope and full resolution pictures:

 

https://www.astrobin.com/770tyy/D/

 

Roberto

 

kEWFiJ-tEgAj_1824x0_i7HNvtwD.jpg


  • AstroGabe, OrionSword, LPA and 8 others like this

#122 skyman1975

skyman1975

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2011

Posted 21 August 2020 - 01:07 PM

Hello.

 

My name Is Raúl. I'm Spanish.

 

I am impressed with the camera ASI2600MC.

 

Only One shot M8.

Takahashi Tsa 102 reducer F6. Filter Idas NGS1

1x500s, no flats, no bias, no darks.

Simple processed with Pixinsight 1.8

 

get.jpg?insecure


  • R Botero, OrionSword, JerseyBoy and 5 others like this

#123 Umasscrew39

Umasscrew39

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 1,265
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2016
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 21 August 2020 - 01:35 PM

Welcome to Cloudy Nights, Raul.  Excellent image!!  

 

Bruce



#124 R Botero

R Botero

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,815
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2009
  • Loc: Kent, England

Posted 21 August 2020 - 01:55 PM

Hello.

 

My name Is Raúl. I'm Spanish.

 

I am impressed with the camera ASI2600MC.

 

Only One shot M8.

Takahashi Tsa 102 reducer F6. Filter Idas NGS1

1x500s, no flats, no bias, no darks.

Simple processed with Pixinsight 1.8

 

get.jpg?insecure

Bienvenido Raul!  Una imagen fantastica!

Cheers

 

Roberto


  • skyman1975 likes this

#125 Dean J.

Dean J.

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2011
  • Loc: Vista, CA

Posted 25 August 2020 - 07:36 PM

After looking at the images on this thread I decided to take the plunge with an ASI2600.  This is the first color camera that I have tried.
 
Here is the "first light" with a Takahashi FSQ-106 at f/3.6 with the 645 reducer:

get.jpg?insecure

95 x 180s exposures. I think that I will try 240s exposures the next time out.

As Rick said at the end of Casablanca - I think that this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

I am looking forward to the release of the eventual mono version of this camera but in the mean time I can occupy myself with the color version. ;-)
  • gatsbyiv, JerseyBoy and bugbit like this


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