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

QHY600M Photographic version, owners opinions?

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 gregbradley

gregbradley

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2008

Posted 24 October 2020 - 12:53 AM

I am finally looking at getting a full frame CMOS sensor. I started out with an ASI183mm Pro and its a good performing camera although the small pixels really require good seeing. I also have ordered a QHY294M for galaxy imaging and it seems to be a nicely designed and flexible camera on paper.

 

I have been following threads about the ASI6200M and the qhY600M Photographic version and there seems to be a lot more posts about the ASI.

 

The QHY version though seems to me to have a few advantages. It costs a bit more but its the industry grade sensor versus the consumer grade. I take that to mean the Industry grade is considered to have lesser defects and thus more reliable and durable much like CCDs had engineering grade, class 2 and class 1 sensors. I know it costs more but its worth it for me as I plan to use it for a long time and I want long term performance (CCDs degrade slowly over time and I assume CMOS do as well otherwise mirrorless cameras would not update their bad pixel maps every month like they do in Sony's).

 

QHY also has the various readout modes which may be useful (perhaps not so much).

 

The ASI6200M has recently had a thread about microlens reflections in some images. Not good. It may be a narrowband filter issue or a weak antireflection coating but whatever its not a good thing. I haven't heard of this being an issue on QHY600M cameras.

 

Per QHY owners driver software issues seem to be a thing of the past and the main objection to QHY.

 

QHY have a firmware fix to reduce the background random horizontal pattern noise this sensor can generate. ASI does not.

 

Apart from that I am not aware of any real differences. Perhaps one has slightly better cooling than the other, the ASI has a built in hub (usually a very good thing as you always have a guide camera cable and a filter wheel cable).

 

Any advice from owners of either brand?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Greg.


Edited by gregbradley, 24 October 2020 - 12:54 AM.


#2 ArkabPriorSol

ArkabPriorSol

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 210
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 24 October 2020 - 12:43 PM

Get the QHY, read this: https://www.baader-p...-manufacturers/

Also QHY has amazing support, and they have a service center in United States so you don't have to ship to China for servicing needs.

Edited by ArkabPriorSol, 24 October 2020 - 12:44 PM.

  • Kevin_A likes this

#3 rgsalinger

rgsalinger

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 7,363
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Carlsbad Ca

Posted 24 October 2020 - 01:16 PM

Now that the prices are the same, I'd say that the QHY has the advantage. The ZWO uses less current and has two USB ports. These are both nice features. The QHY, when paired with a QHY filter wheel, uses just one USB port for the camera and the wheel and powers the wheel from the camera. That obviates to a great degree the advantages of less current and more ports. 

 

I'm not a buyer of QHY's local repair just yet. When I sent my old QHY16200A camera to Santa Barbara, they were unable to check it out and replace the fan. It ended up in Hong Kong and it was quite an adventure getting it back. That was just 1 year ago but maybe things are better now. 

 

Rgrds-Ross



#4 gregbradley

gregbradley

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2008

Posted 24 October 2020 - 04:50 PM

Thanks for the advice. I was looking at the Photographic version which is more expensive than the ZWO by about US$650. But the higher grade sensor is worth that to me. The extra readout modes may be useful as well but not a huge draw.

 

Greg.


  • ArkabPriorSol likes this

#5 rgsalinger

rgsalinger

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 7,363
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Carlsbad Ca

Posted 24 October 2020 - 09:17 PM

https://optcorp.com/...ome-cmos-camera would be the one I would look at. Not sure, though, just what the differences are between this one and the more expensive one.

 

Rgrds-Ross



#6 gregbradley

gregbradley

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2008

Posted 25 October 2020 - 01:01 AM

The Lite version uses the consumer grade sensor. The differences between the consumer grade and the industry grade sensor are detailed in the link a few posts up. There are considerable differences and to me well worth the extra cost.

 

Greg.



#7 johnpane

johnpane

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 180
  • Joined: 13 Dec 2014
  • Loc: Wexford, PA, USA

Posted 25 October 2020 - 08:12 AM

I'm calling b.s. on some of the stuff in that link in post 2. For example, "if you need it to last for several years versus just one year you will want to consider an industry sensor instead."



#8 ArkabPriorSol

ArkabPriorSol

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 210
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 25 October 2020 - 09:28 AM

The Lite version isn't tried and true yet. Also since it has the consumer version of the sensor it will likely depreciate it's value quicker than the photographic version. You'll be able to recoup more of your initial investment whenever you resell it.

#9 rgsalinger

rgsalinger

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 7,363
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Carlsbad Ca

Posted 25 October 2020 - 09:52 AM

How did you guys figure out that it was using the "consumer" sensor? I looked and looked and could not see that. 



#10 leviathan

leviathan

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 833
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2011
  • Loc: Azerbaijan

Posted 25 October 2020 - 12:05 PM

Here

Attached Thumbnails

  • Таблица.jpg



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