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

Help me select a good matching camera for my Edge 1100 (for deep sky astrophotography)

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 SimonIRE

SimonIRE

    Apollo

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,291
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2018
  • Loc: South East England

Posted 15 May 2021 - 07:40 AM

[For deep sky astrophotography - not planetary] 

 

I've decided to be more patient and try to get good images out of my Edge 1100. I am very much a refractor lover but I am keen to try to make this scope work...to some degree. 

 

I fully get that imaging with an Edge1100 is not for the faint hearted regardless of the quality of your equipment but I would like to line things up in my favour as best I can. I have purchased the Optec Fast focus system (I got a good deal on a used unit) and I have the x 0.7 reducer.

 

The only camera I have that is not currently in use is an ASI1600MM with filters. This is possibly not the ideal camera (0.4"/pixel) but I have a superb mount and a Celestron OAG and 174mm mini guide camera so these things will help offset this challenging image scale. 

 

I am interested to know 2 things:

 

1. What in your opinion is the ideal camera for this set up. I have a QSI 683 which would be good - but alas, its at a remote observatory. 

 

2. I have a growing interest in OSC cameras - keep in mind my skies are OK (Bortle 5). The ASI 2600 caught my eye but of course, the image scale is not ideal. 

 

I have some experience with refractors but I am a SCT newbie. I tried this last summer but gave up pretty quickly - I really didn't give it a fair go. 

 

Opinions appreciated. 

 

Best, 

Simon


Edited by SimonIRE, 15 May 2021 - 08:03 AM.


#2 RogeZ

RogeZ

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,774
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2004
  • Loc: Palm Beach Gardens, FL

Posted 15 May 2021 - 08:32 AM

Simon I use a 6200MM and I love it. A 6200MC would be great with the scope, a 2600MC would be great as well.
  • SimonIRE likes this

#3 SimonIRE

SimonIRE

    Apollo

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,291
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2018
  • Loc: South East England

Posted 15 May 2021 - 08:35 AM

Simon I use a 6200MM and I love it. A 6200MC would be great with the scope, a 2600MC would be great as well.

 

Very tempted by the 2600MC. Does anyone think those 3.74 micron pixels would be a source of frustration?



#4 RogeZ

RogeZ

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,774
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2004
  • Loc: Palm Beach Gardens, FL

Posted 15 May 2021 - 09:02 AM

I dont bin or reduce the scope yet, but if anything bin 2x2.

#5 aaube

aaube

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 384
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2011
  • Loc: Pointe du Lac, Canada

Posted 15 May 2021 - 09:23 AM

Hi Simon,

I'm imaging with an Edge11 at F10.  With an ASI294MM at Bin2, it gives me a sampling of 0.35''/pixel.

Good seeing around here is in the area of 1.5 to 2'' so you'd think the above combo would be a pain but

it's not that bad.

 

I use Voyager and the autofocus works really well.  In my case, the only limiting factor is plate solving.

It can be difficult to use if conditions are not great.

 

With that being said, i would think the 2600 could do it, in good conditions. Imho, a 6200 at bin2 would be best.

 

Alain



#6 WadeH237

WadeH237

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,184
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Ellensburg, WA

Posted 15 May 2021 - 09:33 AM

Very tempted by the 2600MC. Does anyone think those 3.74 micron pixels would be a source of frustration?

I think that you'll be fine.  Being over sampled is not the end of the world.  Besides, with a one-shot-color camera and 3.74 micron pixels, you can debayer using the "super pixel" method and effectively have 7 micron pixels.  I purchased an ASI2600MC Pro to use with my EdgeHD 8 at F/10 for this very purpose (but haven't had a chance to try it yet, since I'm working on some other stuff with my QSI690).

 

If you are looking at a one-shot-color camera, the ASI2600MC would be on my short list, and so would its bigger brother, the ASI6200MC.  Naturally, either of these cameras would be fine as mono, too, but the filters would be very expensive, since you need large ones to cover them.

 

Your mounts will carry this setup and hardly even know it's there, but you will need to use your OAG, since the mirror on the EdgeHD scopes can move - even when "locked".


  • jdupton likes this

#7 SimonIRE

SimonIRE

    Apollo

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,291
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2018
  • Loc: South East England

Posted 15 May 2021 - 10:11 AM

Do you think the Edge 1100 reduced to F7 would handle the full frame sensor of the ASI6200MC?

 

I have a QHY600 mono and the only thing that can cover it 100% in my arsenal is my TOA130 with the super flattener. My FSQ106 doesn't do it. I would be surprised if a mass produced SCT could. Am I wrong?



#8 SimonIRE

SimonIRE

    Apollo

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,291
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2018
  • Loc: South East England

Posted 15 May 2021 - 10:14 AM

What about the ZWO ASI 2400MC-PRO? 

 

Full frame sensor - bigger pixels (5.4 microns). 14 rather than 16-bit but perhaps a better match for the Edge?



#9 WadeH237

WadeH237

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,184
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Ellensburg, WA

Posted 15 May 2021 - 11:44 AM

Do you think the Edge 1100 reduced to F7 would handle the full frame sensor of the ASI6200MC?

 

I have a QHY600 mono and the only thing that can cover it 100% in my arsenal is my TOA130 with the super flattener. My FSQ106 doesn't do it. I would be surprised if a mass produced SCT could. Am I wrong?

I've not used an 11" EdgeHD, but I used an 8" EdgeHD with the F/7 reducer for several years.  Even covering a much smaller sensor, I was never happy with the stars in the corners, plus there is some significant chromatic aberration with the reducer, especially in the blue channel.  The quality of the field is much better at the native focal length.

 

Since you already have the QHY600 and the EdgeHD 11, you have nothing to lose by giving it a try.  If I remember right, the EdgeHD 11 is supposed to cover a full frame sensor at F/10.  Also, if I remember right, the QHY600 can bin 2x2 without compromise (some CMOS sensors reduce the ADC bit depth when binning, but I don't think that one does).

 

You might already have everything that you need.  And if it were me, I would probably pass on the reducer.



#10 SimonIRE

SimonIRE

    Apollo

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,291
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2018
  • Loc: South East England

Posted 15 May 2021 - 11:58 AM

I've not used an 11" EdgeHD, but I used an 8" EdgeHD with the F/7 reducer for several years. Even covering a much smaller sensor, I was never happy with the stars in the corners, plus there is some significant chromatic aberration with the reducer, especially in the blue channel. The quality of the field is much better at the native focal length.

Since you already have the QHY600 and the EdgeHD 11, you have nothing to lose by giving it a try. If I remember right, the EdgeHD 11 is supposed to cover a full frame sensor at F/10. Also, if I remember right, the QHY600 can bin 2x2 without compromise (some CMOS sensors reduce the ADC bit depth when binning, but I don't think that one does).

You might already have everything that you need. And if it were me, I would probably pass on the reducer.


Interesting. I thought it would be a slightly easier animal to tame at F7.

#11 WadeH237

WadeH237

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,184
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Ellensburg, WA

Posted 15 May 2021 - 12:19 PM

Interesting. I thought it would be a slightly easier animal to tame at F7.

It will reduce the demands on the mount, but it will also push the optics more.

 

Since you have the mount covered - and then some - I would just run it at F/10 if it were me.



#12 audioengr

audioengr

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2020

Posted 15 May 2021 - 12:41 PM

From my 8" EdgeHD OTA, I can do 2.5X Barlow with my ASI294MC-Pro camera without oversampling for a few small objects.  I use the Baader VIP and an extender to get 2.5X.  The full-well is excellent on the ASI294MC-Pro.  Better not to use the Barlow however unless you have to.

 

With 11", you already have a lot of magnification, so you may not need a Barlow for most small objects.

 

I would highly recommend the Hyperstar for your OTA for most nebula.  This is F1.9, which makes captures very short and improves S/N ratio significantly.  I think the 8" with Hyperstar is optimal for 90% of nebula as far as FOV.  Check out the FOV with Hyperstar and your scope on some objects with Telescopius.  Objects will be larger than with the 8", but still excellent.  I am able to blow-up my photos to at least 20"X30" without getting grainy.   Ideally, I think you should be looking at a camera with 4-5 um square pixels and 20Mpixels density.  I would look at the Starizona site at their Hyperstar for your OTA and see what cameras they support.  Get the one with the largest pixels and largest array that still fits in the FOV.  The aperture of the Hyperstar lenses will limit this I think.  There will be some vignetting, but the flats take care of this.

 

Here is what some DSO's look like with the 8" using ASI294MC-Pro with Hyperstar and Baader UV/IR cut filter:

 

M31 Andromeda framed2 RGB session 1 Lpc Cbg Csc St starnet32 PS
 
 
IC1396 Elephant Trunk Low StoN RGB session 1 Lpc Cbg csc2 St starnet32 PIstretch PS
 
 
M42 Auto RGB session 1 Cbg St PCCal PS

Edited by audioengr, 15 May 2021 - 04:39 PM.


#13 RogeZ

RogeZ

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,774
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2004
  • Loc: Palm Beach Gardens, FL

Posted 15 May 2021 - 12:52 PM

Next week I will be getting my hands on a reducer, finally connect my Esatto and test the system at f/7.

There are experienced folks here that I respect that seemed to struggle with the reducer, while the reducer claims it improves star shape. There are reports of CA as well. I need to test this myself; many variables here.

#14 SimonIRE

SimonIRE

    Apollo

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,291
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2018
  • Loc: South East England

Posted 17 May 2021 - 11:58 AM

Incidentally, what about the ASI 2400 MC pro? Large pixels in a full frame format. Its 14 bit rather than 16 bit but I doubt this is going make any visible difference. What do you guys think?




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