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

Deciding on which colored astro camera to get

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 DropTekRoon

DropTekRoon

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 266
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2021

Posted 18 August 2022 - 05:09 PM

I have been using a modified DSLR for awhile on one of my setups now but I want to use a OSC dedicated astro camera for it now. It is an 80mm refractor with a FL of 600mm but I use a .85 reducer so it's at 510mm. I also use a GPCAM2 as a guide camera with that setup. I would like something fairly easy to setup and use

 

The ZWO 533 MC Pro gets a lot of praise on here. The square sensor doesn't bother me. It seems like a pretty good match with my scope

 

The QHY 183c also seems to be pretty decent as well. I have seen some people say that there's some AMP glow. Not sure how bad the glow is but dark frames should take care of that. Supposedly you don't have to deal with sensor tilt with sensors of 20 microns with the QHY cameras which would be nice if true

 

I also came across the Risingcam IMX571. It looks similar to the ZWO 2600 and despite being more expensive than the other two I mentioned above, it has a larger sensor and will be useable at longer focal lengths. Maybe it's overkill for this scope, but it would also be nice to have the large FOV and have the ability to crop down to the size of a ZWO 533 or QHY 183 FOV. However, the one thing that concerns me about the Risingcam would be the drivers and support. Has anyone experienced any problems with that or have you had no issues with it?


Edited by DropTekRoon, 18 August 2022 - 08:05 PM.

  • jasonjeremiah likes this

#2 EdDixon

EdDixon

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 374
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2019
  • Loc: Virginia

Posted 18 August 2022 - 05:40 PM

My ASI294MC Pro has worked well with my WO GT71.


  • DropTekRoon likes this

#3 jasonjeremiah

jasonjeremiah

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 637
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2009
  • Loc: Hanahan SC

Posted 18 August 2022 - 06:13 PM

I have been using a modified DSLR for awhile on one of my setups now but I want to use a OSC dedicated astro camera for it now. It is an 80mm refractor with a FL of 600mm but I use a .85 reducer so it's at 510mm. I also use a GPCAM2 as a guide camera with that setup. I would like something fairly easy to setup and use

 

The ZWO 533 MC Pro gets a lot of praise on here. The square sensor doesn't bother me. It seems like a pretty good match with my scope

 

The QHY 183c also seems to be pretty decent as well. I have seen some people say that there's some AMP glow. Not sure how bad the glow is but dark frames should take care of that. Supposedly you don't have to deal with sensor tilt with sensors of 20 microns with the QHY cameras which would be nice if true

 

I also came across the Risingcam IMX571. It looks similar to the ZWO 2600 and despite being more expensive than the other two I mentioned above, it has a larger sensor and will be useable at longer focal lengths. Maybe it's overkill for this scope, but it would also be nice to have the large FOV and have the ability to crop down to the size of a ZWO 533 or QHY 183 FOV. However, the one thing that concerns me about the Risingcam would be the drivers and support. Has anyone experienced any problems with that or have you had no issues with it?

I've experienced zero issues with either of my Risingcam IMX571 cameras.  That's right - I liked the first so much I bought another for my other mount.  It's a great camera which has little to no noise.  They are a joy to shoot with and don't break the bank.  I ordered mine from sellers who were selling for about $100 less than Risingcam, so two cost me about the price of one ASI2600MC.  

 

APT, SGP, and NINA all offer native support for the Risingcam IMX571 (which is technically the Touptek ATR3CMOS26000KPA) and work seamlessly with any of the three.  I did not order from Risingcam but have had questions about the camera and the seller I purchased from, as well as Risingcam, both responded to emails sent with questions about the camera within 24 hours.  Eddie from Risingcam responded within 2 hours.  You can't go wrong with that camera and if you pay the extra $100 to order from Risingcam, you'll be assured excellent customer service.  If you've read any of the long thread about the camera in the Experienced forum, you'll know there are many happy, satisfied users.  To me, the camera is a no brainer at that price.  It's a quality piece of equipment even if it doesn't say ZWO on the side.


  • DropTekRoon and Pantilas like this

#4 DropTekRoon

DropTekRoon

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 266
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2021

Posted 18 August 2022 - 08:17 PM

I've experienced zero issues with either of my Risingcam IMX571 cameras.  That's right - I liked the first so much I bought another for my other mount.  It's a great camera which has little to no noise.  They are a joy to shoot with and don't break the bank.  I ordered mine from sellers who were selling for about $100 less than Risingcam, so two cost me about the price of one ASI2600MC.  

 

APT, SGP, and NINA all offer native support for the Risingcam IMX571 (which is technically the Touptek ATR3CMOS26000KPA) and work seamlessly with any of the three.  I did not order from Risingcam but have had questions about the camera and the seller I purchased from, as well as Risingcam, both responded to emails sent with questions about the camera within 24 hours.  Eddie from Risingcam responded within 2 hours.  You can't go wrong with that camera and if you pay the extra $100 to order from Risingcam, you'll be assured excellent customer service.  If you've read any of the long thread about the camera in the Experienced forum, you'll know there are many happy, satisfied users.  To me, the camera is a no brainer at that price.  It's a quality piece of equipment even if it doesn't say ZWO on the side.

That's good to hear. I was surprised when I saw the price of the camera. It seems like a steal for the price. It has a large sensor and it's a lot cheaper than the ZWO 2600. I thought for sure that IMX571 would just be a bad quality off brand camera but apparently there are lots of people that are satisfied with it. Does it have a built in UV/IR filter or would I need to purchase one? 



#5 hmrphoto

hmrphoto

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Maryland, USA

Posted 18 August 2022 - 08:30 PM

When deciding on a camera, the ZWO ASI cameras live in the ZWO ASI world and play nicely with the ZWO ASIair. You may want to consider how you are going to focus, guide, aim the mount... IF a ZWO ASI air is in your future, you may not want to discount the ZWO so fast.



#6 dx_ron

dx_ron

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,473
  • Joined: 10 Sep 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 18 August 2022 - 08:31 PM

You can buy the color Risingcam either with a uv/ir-cut filter, or without "AR" (=anti-reflective) glass. Most people seem to choose the AR glass, I guess because we think someday we might try NIR imaging or something (I'm not laughing at people - in fact, that's what I did).

 

I use INDI and the driver works fine.

 

I started with a QHY183C, and quite enjoyed using it. Just make sure you have darks for exactly the right sensor temp and exposure length (which is best practice for any camera anyway). If you want to start small, watch the classifieds for a used one. (maybe pay special attention to the classifieds in a week or so...)


Edited by dx_ron, 18 August 2022 - 08:35 PM.

  • DropTekRoon likes this

#7 DropTekRoon

DropTekRoon

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 266
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2021

Posted 18 August 2022 - 09:37 PM

When deciding on a camera, the ZWO ASI cameras live in the ZWO ASI world and play nicely with the ZWO ASIair. You may want to consider how you are going to focus, guide, aim the mount... IF a ZWO ASI air is in your future, you may not want to discount the ZWO so fast.

I don't use an ASIAIR. I use a mini PC. I didn't want to be tied to only using ZWO products

 

You can buy the color Risingcam either with a uv/ir-cut filter, or without "AR" (=anti-reflective) glass. Most people seem to choose the AR glass, I guess because we think someday we might try NIR imaging or something (I'm not laughing at people - in fact, that's what I did).

 

I use INDI and the driver works fine.

 

I started with a QHY183C, and quite enjoyed using it. Just make sure you have darks for exactly the right sensor temp and exposure length (which is best practice for any camera anyway). If you want to start small, watch the classifieds for a used one. (maybe pay special attention to the classifieds in a week or so...)

Ok that makes sense. Thanks. Yeah, it was always a pain taking dark frames with a DSLR because of the time it took up and trying to match the temperatures up. The IMX571 looks very tempting. Do you think it's overkill to use for imaging around 500-600 FL? Or would you recommend getting the 183c for that? I do have a 2" duo filter that I was using with my DSLR. I would assume I would still use that with the IMX571? If I got the QHY183c, could I still use the 2" filter or would I be better off using a 1.25"?


Edited by DropTekRoon, 18 August 2022 - 09:43 PM.


#8 Phishin_phool

Phishin_phool

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 919
  • Joined: 31 May 2020
  • Loc: Ohio

Posted 18 August 2022 - 11:29 PM

I have  qhy183C AND qhy183M (there was a buy one get one 1/2 price sale a while back). There is ampglow , it calibrates out nicely when using darks / bias(darkflats)/ and flats. The full well capacity isn't high so I tend to use them with low gain to keep dynamic range as good as I can. It is a small chip so as your fl increases they become less able to capture some common targets (but give a 'close-up' on others. I enjoy them both and my best images have come from them but they don't handle all I want so I can a) do mosaics which I recently started after 2.5 years of imaging or b) add another camera to compliment which I also did 294mm pro.


  • DropTekRoon likes this

#9 jasonjeremiah

jasonjeremiah

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 637
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2009
  • Loc: Hanahan SC

Posted 18 August 2022 - 11:41 PM

The IMX571 would be perfect for 500-600mm focal length. Actually, you'd be much better sampled with the IMX571's 3.76 pixel size at that focal length. The IMX571 is a very versatile sensor. I've used it capture great images from an AT60ED, a focally reduced C8, and everything in between. I'd say it's the most popular CMOS chip for AP on the market, right now, and for good reason.
  • DropTekRoon likes this

#10 dx_ron

dx_ron

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,473
  • Joined: 10 Sep 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 19 August 2022 - 07:06 AM

 

 The IMX571 looks very tempting. Do you think it's overkill to use for imaging around 500-600 FL? Or would you recommend getting the 183c for that? I do have a 2" duo filter that I was using with my DSLR. I would assume I would still use that with the IMX571? If I got the QHY183c, could I still use the 2" filter or would I be better off using a 1.25"?

If you can afford a 571 camera, go for it. I enjoyed my 183 a lot, but I'm enjoying the much larger sensor of the 571. There are some issues with the Risingcam's internal heater not being up to the task on very humid nights. I added the $20 ZWO external dew heater to mine and it seems to help.

 

You can use 2" filters on any camera. You will need a way to mount them in the image train. Some reducers / flatteners have threads for 2" filters, or many people use a filter drawer.

 



#11 DropTekRoon

DropTekRoon

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 266
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2021

Posted 19 August 2022 - 08:33 AM

You can use 2" filters on any camera. You will need a way to mount them in the image train. Some reducers / flatteners have threads for 2" filters, or many people use a filter drawer.

I have the Evostar .85 reducer. It's kinda weird when it comes to that specific reducer as there are no threads no attatch the filter onto. I used a 2" nose piece adapter that threaded on top of the reducer and attached the filter on top of the nose piece adapter. Do you know how exactly the imaging train would like for the 571? Would I need to buy something like the Skywatcher camera rotator (it screws onto the OTA tube and accepts 2" filters) or how exactly would the assembly look?


Edited by DropTekRoon, 19 August 2022 - 08:58 AM.


#12 dx_ron

dx_ron

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,473
  • Joined: 10 Sep 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 19 August 2022 - 08:51 AM

You need to know the backfocus requirement for your reducer (commonly 55mm, but check). The camera only uses up 17.5mm, so you have more room to work with compared to a dslr.

So the minimum would be something like

Reducer -> spacer -> filter drawer -> camera

 

You might or might not need a 48mm to 42mm adapter in there somewhere, depending on the specific components.


  • DropTekRoon likes this

#13 DropTekRoon

DropTekRoon

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 266
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2021

Posted 19 August 2022 - 02:58 PM

So if I were to use a 2" adapter that is 37mm in backfocus and put it on the camera, it would have a total of 54.5mm. Does being .5mm off with backfocus matter at all? Or does it need to be exactly 55mm?



#14 jasonjeremiah

jasonjeremiah

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 637
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2009
  • Loc: Hanahan SC

Posted 19 August 2022 - 03:14 PM

So if I were to use a 2" adapter that is 37mm in backfocus and put it on the camera, it would have a total of 54.5mm. Does being .5mm off with backfocus matter at all? Or does it need to be exactly 55mm?

Yes, in my experience, a .5mm can make a difference.  I think, if anything, you'll still be inside of focus cone and more prone to elongated stars radially, especially with an APS-c sensor.  I've never used a reducer that took less than 55mm backfocus to correct properly, and most times it's a 1-2mm more than that.  Do yourself a favor and get a variable extender.  I ended up with a plethora of different spacers I kept misplacing and finally bought variable extenders that go from 24-39mm distance in both M42 and M48 sizes.  The only thing with the variable extenders is making sure you try and tighten with everything squared up as you can develop tilt at the nut of the extender.



#15 danny1976

danny1976

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 599
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2021
  • Loc: Belgium

Posted 19 August 2022 - 03:22 PM

I put my 2” filter in the Evostar 72ed rotator. In the field flattener is no space for a filter.



#16 DropTekRoon

DropTekRoon

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 266
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2021

Posted 19 August 2022 - 03:29 PM

I ended up with a plethora of different spacers I kept misplacing and finally bought variable extenders that go from 24-39mm distance in both M42 and M48 sizes.  The only thing with the variable extenders is making sure you try and tighten with everything squared up as you can develop tilt at the nut of the extender.

Is the 24-39mm what you use with your IMX571? The camera comes with a 2" adapter that's about 37mm in backfocus so if you were to use just that, it would be .5 off. Do you need a UV/IR filter to prevent star bloat for the IMX571 with the AR glass?


Edited by DropTekRoon, 19 August 2022 - 03:32 PM.


#17 jasonjeremiah

jasonjeremiah

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 637
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2009
  • Loc: Hanahan SC

Posted 19 August 2022 - 07:06 PM

Is the 24-39mm what you use with your IMX571? The camera comes with a 2" adapter that's about 37mm in backfocus so if you were to use just that, it would be .5 off. Do you need a UV/IR filter to prevent star bloat for the IMX571 with the AR glass?

I'm having a bit of a hard time picturing the situation with the reducer you're using.  I will assume you have the nosepiece attached to the front of the reducer (as pointing toward objective) and the reducer is then slid into the compression ring of your telescope. 

 

Assuming this is correct, this is how the IMX571 would attach.  You have a couple of options.  First, the adapter that comes with the camera is not 2" in length.  It's exactly 32.5mm in length.  Not sure why they chose to make it this length.  It would make more sense to have made it exactly 37.5, as then you'd have your standard 55mm backfocus when attached.  But they didn't.  Also, the adapter has M42 male threads on the camera side (as the camera has an M42 female thread nose) and M48 female threads on the side that attaches to your telescope or reducer.  So, you can either buy a 5mm M42 spacer to add on the camera end or a 5mm M48 spacer to add on the reducer end.  The problem with either of these solutions is you'll have a hard time unscrewing the 5mm spacer from either end once it's tightened down as 5mm is hard to grip with the fingertips unless you have very strong, elf like fingertips. 

 

The easiest and I would say, best solution is to purchase two items.  First, buy this M48 variable spacer.  Currently in stock and a decent price.   This will end up on the reducer side of things.  Then, buy this M42 to M48 adapter.  The body of this adapter is 7mm in length, if I remember correctly.  This will thread onto your camera.  You'll need to adjust your spacer to give you 30.5mm of space and you'll then have your 55mm of backfocus.  Take some images and look at the stars in the corners.  Adjust accordingly to the shape of the stars.  



#18 jasonjeremiah

jasonjeremiah

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 637
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2009
  • Loc: Hanahan SC

Posted 19 August 2022 - 07:23 PM

Is the 24-39mm what you use with your IMX571? The camera comes with a 2" adapter that's about 37mm in backfocus so if you were to use just that, it would be .5 off. Do you need a UV/IR filter to prevent star bloat for the IMX571 with the AR glass?

Also, as far as the IR cut version or the AR, I don't think it much matters.  If you ever intend to do any IR imaging, then obviously should get the AR.  I actually find having the built in IR cut to be more of a convenience in certain situations.  

 

First, when I image galaxies or want to get a short integration for RGB stars, I only use an IR cut filter.  With the one with the IR cut glass, I don't have to add anything.  With the AR glass one, I have to add a IR cut filter somewhere in the imaging train.  I have a Svbony IR cut filter and for some reason, I seem to get some magenta colored bloat when using this filter.  I don't feel like spending $100 on an additonal filter, so most of the time when I use the camera with the AR glass, I have another filter already blocking IR, whether it be an L-Enhance, which I use over 80% of the time or an Orion Skyglow filter for just mild LP.  

 

I also have an IDAS NB3 dual band filter, which allows me to capture SII and OIII, which I can then combine with L-Enhance data to do a true SHO.  The problem here is the NB3 does not block IR so it has to be used in conjunction with an IR filter.  If I stack an IR filter on top of the NB3, I get halos around some stars.  More than likely reflections are being bounced between the surfaces of the filters.  So, having the IR filter glass on one of the cameras allows me to image with only having to attach the NB3 on the end of my reducer and therefore, no halos.  So, for my purposes, the IR glass is more convenient.  I like limiting the amount of glass surfaces as much as possible.  


Edited by jasonjeremiah, 19 August 2022 - 07:24 PM.

  • DropTekRoon likes this

#19 DropTekRoon

DropTekRoon

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 266
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2021

Posted 19 August 2022 - 07:35 PM

Also, as far as the IR cut version or the AR, I don't think it much matters.  If you ever intend to do any IR imaging, then obviously should get the AR.  I actually find having the built in IR cut to be more of a convenience in certain situations.  

 

First, when I image galaxies or want to get a short integration for RGB stars, I only use an IR cut filter.  With the one with the IR cut glass, I don't have to add anything.  With the AR glass one, I have to add a IR cut filter somewhere in the imaging train.  I have a Svbony IR cut filter and for some reason, I seem to get some magenta colored bloat when using this filter.  I don't feel like spending $100 on an additonal filter, so most of the time when I use the camera with the AR glass, I have another filter already blocking IR, whether it be an L-Enhance, which I use over 80% of the time or an Orion Skyglow filter for just mild LP.  

 

I also have an IDAS NB3 dual band filter, which allows me to capture SII and OIII, which I can then combine with L-Enhance data to do a true SHO.  The problem here is the NB3 does not block IR so it has to be used in conjunction with an IR filter.  If I stack an IR filter on top of the NB3, I get halos around some stars.  More than likely reflections are being bounced between the surfaces of the filters.  So, having the IR filter glass on one of the cameras allows me to image with only having to attach the NB3 on the end of my reducer and therefore, no halos.  So, for my purposes, the IR glass is more convenient.  I like limiting the amount of glass surfaces as much as possible.  

 

Yeah I use my 2" L-eNhance filter quite a bit so maybe the AR glass would be the way to go. I never knew this filter prevented star bloat. So I guess I wouldn't need a UV/IR filter if I used the L-eNhance with the AR glass



#20 jasonjeremiah

jasonjeremiah

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 637
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2009
  • Loc: Hanahan SC

Posted 19 August 2022 - 07:37 PM

I just want to finish by saying, if you get the IMX571 you'll be very impressed.  My first dedicated astro camera was an Orion Starshoot G16, which was basically a clone of the ASI1600MC.  This camera took my imaging to a different level due to the ability to control the temperature of the sensor and thereby, thermal noise.  It also saves you the time of constantly shooting different sets of darks.  The only thing about this camera was it was not user friendly, especially for a beginner coming from a DSLR.  That sensor is finicky, regardless of the brand of camera.  There's a plethora of posts about calibration issues with the 1600 and it's brethren, whether it be due to amp glow or incorrectly acquired flats.  I had to shoot wall flats with this camera as no flat panel or artificial source of light would generate properly correcting flat, especially when I shot with a dual NB filter.

 

The Risingcam IMX571 and more specifically, the Sony IMX571 sensor, is the easiest sensor I've ever shot with.  I've gone back to being able to use a flat panel for my flats with no crazy over or under corrections.  It has ultra low noise.  I've literally taken some images, that after stacking, required little to no noise reduction.  You can shoot EVERYTHING set at HCG and 100 gain and it will come out great.  I've found no reason to shoot at LCG.  At HCG, you still have a full well at around 20,000 which is the max full well on the 1600 sensor at 0 gain.  It's a transition going from a DSLR to a dedicated astro camera that shoots only in FITS format, but the IMX571 makes that transition as smooth as possible.  


  • DropTekRoon likes this

#21 jasonjeremiah

jasonjeremiah

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 637
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2009
  • Loc: Hanahan SC

Posted 19 August 2022 - 07:39 PM

Yeah I use my 2" L-eNhance filter quite a bit so maybe the AR glass would be the way to go. I never knew this filter prevented star bloat. So I guess I wouldn't need a UV/IR filter if I used the L-eNhance with the AR glass

No, you wouldn't.  The L-enhance is blocking it already.  



#22 DropTekRoon

DropTekRoon

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 266
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2021

Posted 19 August 2022 - 07:43 PM

I just want to finish by saying, if you get the IMX571 you'll be very impressed.  My first dedicated astro camera was an Orion Starshoot G16, which was basically a clone of the ASI1600MC.  This camera took my imaging to a different level due to the ability to control the temperature of the sensor and thereby, thermal noise.  It also saves you the time of constantly shooting different sets of darks.  The only thing about this camera was it was not user friendly, especially for a beginner coming from a DSLR.  That sensor is finicky, regardless of the brand of camera.  There's a plethora of posts about calibration issues with the 1600 and it's brethren, whether it be due to amp glow or incorrectly acquired flats.  I had to shoot wall flats with this camera as no flat panel or artificial source of light would generate properly correcting flat, especially when I shot with a dual NB filter.

 

The Risingcam IMX571 and more specifically, the Sony IMX571 sensor, is the easiest sensor I've ever shot with.  I've gone back to being able to use a flat panel for my flats with no crazy over or under corrections.  It has ultra low noise.  I've literally taken some images, that after stacking, required little to no noise reduction.  You can shoot EVERYTHING set at HCG and 100 gain and it will come out great.  I've found no reason to shoot at LCG.  At HCG, you still have a full well at around 20,000 which is the max full well on the 1600 sensor at 0 gain.  It's a transition going from a DSLR to a dedicated astro camera that shoots only in FITS format, but the IMX571 makes that transition as smooth as possible.  

You may have sold me on the camera. Sounds like it's pretty legit and quite a few people seem to be really happy with it

 

No, you wouldn't.  The L-enhance is blocking it already.  

Makes sense. Thankyou for all the explanations for this camera



#23 tomfildan

tomfildan

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2022

Posted 31 August 2022 - 02:12 PM

Hi, 

 

Does anybody have an experience with QHY 183C? I can´t get any resut - no visibe nebulas, just Big Orion nebula, weak star clusters or just sky with less stars. I have 10´Newton 4,7 ratio speed telescope, but using 0,33 x reducer so ratio is pretty speed 1,6! Tested in SharpCap, without filters and with Neodynum and L-enhance filter without success or very weak resut. I have no proper polar alignment, exposition max only 15s for sharper image. Tested 30s, 60s, no result. I did set everything - gain, offset, colors, etc. I have cam Omegon 178C with same 2,4 um pixels and it can show all nebulas during several seconds with higher gain....so, where could be problem???Could be the camera bad?

 

Thanks for any advice!

 

Tom



#24 Phishin_phool

Phishin_phool

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 919
  • Joined: 31 May 2020
  • Loc: Ohio

Posted 04 September 2022 - 10:25 AM

Hi, 

 

Does anybody have an experience with QHY 183C? I can´t get any resut - no visibe nebulas, just Big Orion nebula, weak star clusters or just sky with less stars. I have 10´Newton 4,7 ratio speed telescope, but using 0,33 x reducer so ratio is pretty speed 1,6! Tested in SharpCap, without filters and with Neodynum and L-enhance filter without success or very weak resut. I have no proper polar alignment, exposition max only 15s for sharper image. Tested 30s, 60s, no result. I did set everything - gain, offset, colors, etc. I have cam Omegon 178C with same 2,4 um pixels and it can show all nebulas during several seconds with higher gain....so, where could be problem???Could be the camera bad?

 

Thanks for any advice!

 

Tom

Have you stretched the 183c after taking the images - 15sec images will tend to be very dark on their own. you will need to stack a bunch and then stretch them to really see your target, The following images was taken using the 183 c (but at f/2 and 60 sec subs - around 90 of them IIRC).

51242599516_e933cabffb_z.jpg


  • Sheridan likes 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