Jump to content

Canada's top-tier Telescopes & Accessories
Be as specific as possible when reporting issues and *ALWAYS* include the full version number of the application you are using and your exact *CAMERA MODEL*
NEVER POST YOUR KEY IN ANY PUBLIC FORUM, INCLUDING THE O'TELESCOPE SUPPORT FORUM ::: IF YOU DO YOUR KEY WILL BE DEACTIVATED WITHOUT NOTICE!
  • 0

What is a well supported camera for a starter AP kit?


thewallabie

Question

Hi,

i am currently testing BY EOS with a borrowed EOS 7D Mark II. While the 7D has all the functions that one wants and very good noise characteristics it is not in my price range.

So i have a few questions:

1. Is there any future plans for Sony or Pentax version of the BY programs?

2. If i buy BYEos and want to run later with Nikon camera do i need to buy also BYNikon?

3. What is your recommendation for beginners to mid-range cameras? I had a few educated comments that the Nikon D5300 is quite good on the noise but is it trully 100% implemented in the BY program like most EOS cameras are?

4. Between the 650D,700D and D5300 which one would you suggest the best for starting up with AP?

 

Thanks for the answers in advance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 11
  • Created
  • Last Reply

11 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

You did not say what kind of astrophotography you are interested in.

 

I am a Canon (T5i) owner so my only knowledge of the Nikon models comes from helping people on these forums.

 

I use use cooled CCD cameras for most of my imaging. I do use my T5i for lunar and planetary work.

 

The Nikon SDK seems less mature and more finicky than Canon's...more beginners with Nikon cameras seem to struggle with getting the camera connected. Earlier this year Nikon came out with a firmware upgrade that broke 3rd party apps like BYN until Nikon could release a new version of their SDK to support the new firmware. The Nikon cameras tout lower noise, but it seems that they do that by doing more in-camera processing to filter out the noise, not because their sensors inherently have less noise for a given temperature.

 

If you are interested in planetary imaging then I would definitely suggest Canon over Nikon. Canon's 5X zoom feature for LiveView displays the central ~20% of the sensor at full resolution. This gives the best possible image. Nikon's LiveView zoom does not work this way, apparently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the answers Guylain and Rick,

 

I am actually following up a comment from Guylain on his presentation video of the BYE where right before the end of the presentation he said that the Nikon 5300 or 5500 with the Sony sensors are very good cameras with low noise characteristics.

I also talked with some people over at Cloudy Nights and they told me that a Nikon after the 5300 would be the better product.

 

Rick what camera are you using then for planetary?

I mostly want to do DSO (galaxies/nebulas) but you will probably point me to a mono CCD with filter wheel but thats just way over my budget.

I am currently using a Pentax K-30 but the tethering is aweful while BYE offers exactly what i want for remote controling a session. So i am thinking to get something between a 650/700 and a 5300/5500 but i have exactly the same thoughts you do from what i read on forums. Canons are fully compatible while Nikons are still struggling in some areas and/or connectivity.

 

Thanks again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not do a lot of planetary, mostly DSO's. I love galaxies. I use my T5i for lunar/planetary, but I have a cooled ZWO ASI174MM that I want to try when Jupiter gets higher. I hope that the 174, with it's small pixels, will show a lot of planetary detail. To date, all that I have used it for is the moon. It did well. Here is a link to the photo.

 

Here are some links:

 

Lunar with T5i

Jupiter with T5i

Lunar single shot with ASI174

 

My telescope has too short a focal length to do Jupiter justice, but I love the wider field for galaxy clusters and nebulae.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a saying that if all you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail.

 

What I mean by that is that every piece of equipment that you buy is a tradeoff.

 

Here are some examples:

 

My refractor with its 1.5 degree field of view is great for large DSOs, but not good for planetary nebulae and lone, distant galaxies. For those objects you need more focal length. You only need look at my images of the Coma Cluster, one taken with my 5" refractor and the other taken with a 0.8 meter RC, to see the difference. I am OK with the "limitations" of my refractor.

 

The ZWO ASI178 is a very versatile and sensitive camera and only costs about $1000 with manual filter wheel and filters, but it has a small chip. If your imaging setup includes an 14" SCT with HyperStar then you are in a different arena from my 5" refractor. I have a friend who loves this camera because with a suitable (fast with USB 3.0) laptop he operates it in video mode on a 14" SCT with HyperStar. He can see live video frames with enough sensitivity to see small galaxies. He then switches to imaging mode to take deeper pictures of the same field.

 

The DSLR is familiar for a beginner and so is very popular and gives great encouragement in this hobby, but one-shot color images shot with a DSLR, any DSLR, typically do not have the resolution, the low thermal noise or the low pattern noise of a cooled monochrome CCD camera. In my experience, the more you pay the better the hardware and the easier it will be to get a satisfactory result.

 

That said, it does not mean that the DSLR is a bad way to start imaging. Based on my experience, though, it may not be where you end up. I have been a dedicated supporter of BYE for over 5 years, and expect to continue to be. i believe that BYE is a great tool for the beginning DSR imager. It gives you easy-to-use tools to help you get good data from the start, and the combo of a DSLR and BYE, especially if you already have the DSLR, are a very attractive price point!

 

Good Luck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From your list I would recommend NOT buying the 650D if you intend to do any planetary imaging. This camera has some internal limitation that restricts the fps rate to 10 or less, in all other respects its fine, the 600D and 700D I believe don't have this issue. 

 

If you are interested there are a number of threads on this issue regarding the 650D.

 

I have used the 1100D, 650D and 7D mkii. All worked fine for DSO and the 1100D and 7D mkii work fine for planetary. Obviously the noise levels reflect the price of the camera, however with a good set of darks, flats, etc. coupled with good post processing software good (pleasing) results can be obtained at all budget levels. I use PixInsight but others use many other equivalents or combinations and get great reaults. 

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From your list I would recommend NOT buying the 650D if you intend to do any planetary imaging. This camera has some internal limitation that restricts the fps rate to 10 or less, in all other respects its fine, the 600D and 700D I believe don't have this issue. 

 

If you are interested there are a number of threads on this issue regarding the 650D.

 

I have used the 1100D, 650D and 7D mkii. All worked fine for DSO and the 1100D and 7D mkii work fine for planetary. Obviously the noise levels reflect the price of the camera, however with a good set of darks, flats, etc. coupled with good post processing software good (pleasing) results can be obtained at all budget levels. I use PixInsight but others use many other equivalents or combinations and get great reaults. 

 

Jim

 

There is a saying that if all you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail.

 

What I mean by that is that every piece of equipment that you buy is a tradeoff.

 

Here are some examples:

 

My refractor with its 1.5 degree field of view is great for large DSOs, but not good for planetary nebulae and lone, distant galaxies. For those objects you need more focal length. You only need look at my images of the Coma Cluster, one taken with my 5" refractor and the other taken with a 0.8 meter RC, to see the difference. I am OK with the "limitations" of my refractor.

 

The ZWO ASI178 is a very versatile and sensitive camera and only costs about $1000 with manual filter wheel and filters, but it has a small chip. If your imaging setup includes an 14" SCT with HyperStar then you are in a different arena from my 5" refractor. I have a friend who loves this camera because with a suitable (fast with USB 3.0) laptop he operates it in video mode on a 14" SCT with HyperStar. He can see live video frames with enough sensitivity to see small galaxies. He then switches to imaging mode to take deeper pictures of the same field.

 

The DSLR is familiar for a beginner and so is very popular and gives great encouragement in this hobby, but one-shot color images shot with a DSLR, any DSLR, typically do not have the resolution, the low thermal noise or the low pattern noise of a cooled monochrome CCD camera. In my experience, the more you pay the better the hardware and the easier it will be to get a satisfactory result.

 

That said, it does not mean that the DSLR is a bad way to start imaging. Based on my experience, though, it may not be where you end up. I have been a dedicated supporter of BYE for over 5 years, and expect to continue to be. i believe that BYE is a great tool for the beginning DSR imager. It gives you easy-to-use tools to help you get good data from the start, and the combo of a DSLR and BYE, especially if you already have the DSLR, are a very attractive price point!

 

Good Luck

Thanks for the responses today.

 

My setup is as follows :

Skywatcher Evostar ED80 Pro

Corrector /Flattener 0,8x

AVX Celestron mount

QHY5 Autoguider

Polarmaster

 

I currently have a Pentax K-30 but i want to use EOS so i can do some of the work remotely.

I am 90% interested in DSO AP. The planetary i can do it with my QHY...

A ccd would give me that remote possibility. I dont really care about a second DSLR. The only big plus i see with a Canon/Nikon is the cheap chip size. But then it need to be modified for the IR filter so the price will be that of the 178MM....

I was also looking at the 178MM. Would that be a good option for startup?

Also, i know that everyone swears by the mono cameras with filter wheels but why not a color camera? After all a DSLR is only a color camera and at least 50% of the people are using a DSLR...

What is the true practical advantages of a mono camera with a filter wheels vs a color camera or a DSLR?

 

Thanks again for any responses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my mind there are several disadvantages of the DSLR.

 

But first, I will say again that starting your astrophotography with a DSLR is not a bad way to begin. The DSLR is is familiar. Both Nikon and Canon models support full control from a remote computer, and once you get used to focusing with LiveView, it is relatively painless to quickly nail critical focus. This is critical to getting good data.

 

Now for some of the drawbacks to the DSLR:

 

First is that it is not typically cooled. Using an uncooled camera means that there will be more noise in your images. Most of that noise can be removed through processing, but it makes image processing more complicated and involved. I have heard it said that for every 7 degrees Celsius temperature drop the amount of thermal noise in an image is reduced by 50%. If this holds true it means that by shooting at -10C rather than 32C you have reduced the thermal noise by 98.5%. Not having a cooled camera also makes shooting calibration frames more difficult, since dark frames need to be shot at the same temperature as the lights. This makes it more difficult (not impossible, but more difficult) to build up a library of dark frames that you can use over a period of months. My normal imaging temperature for my cooled CCD cameras (QSI583, QHY10, ASI178) is -10C. I can achieve that cooled temperature when the ambient temperature is 20C. This means that I can shoot/update dark frames in a darkened room, during the day. This makes my nighttime imaging more productive since I don't have to spend part of the night shooting darks.

 

One-shot color cameras (CCD cameras as well as DSLR cameras) use a Bayer array. This means that each pixel has either a red, green, or blue filter over it. 50% of the pixels have a green filter with 25% red and 25% blue. If you look at a mono image shot with a green filter, there is almost nothing in the image but stars. There is not a lot of green light that is scattered or emitted by DSOs, but wait...half the pixels in a one-shot color camera only record green light. Since each pixel in the RAW image only records one color, the other two colors are assigned during the raw conversion (de-bayering) process. What this means is that each red pixel is assigned a green and a blue value from the values of the surrounding green and blue pixels. This lowers the accuracy of the colors in the image compared to a monochrome camera.

 

Most DSLR cameras use 14-bit analog to digital conversions while most dedicated mono CCD cameras for astronomical use use 16-bit A-to-D conversions. This also gives more accurate data.

 

Unmodified DSLR cameras (the Canon 60Da and the Nikon D810a are exceptions) have low response in much of the red part of the spectrum. This is by design and makes it easier to achieve a natural color balance for terrestrial photography. The camera sensor is sensitive to near infrared and ultraviolet wavelengths. This means that it will record light that your eye cannot see. The stock solution is to put a blocking filter in front of the sensor. This blocking filter typically blocks "invisible" light and some of the visible red light. This includes the hydrogen alpha emission line. This reduced sensitivity to Ha light is not particularly desirable for astrophotography.

 

There are solutions to some of the above-mentioned drawbacks. There are add-on or add-in coolers that are available. The camera can also be modified to replace the blocking filter with either unfiltered glass or at least a filter that blocks less Ha light. While these solutions are effective they also raise the cost to the point that the CCD camera becomes more competively priced.

 

I hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my mind there are several disadvantages of the DSLR.

 

But first, I will say again that starting your astrophotography with a DSLR is not a bad way to begin. The DSLR is is familiar. Both Nikon and Canon models support full control from a remote computer, and once you get used to focusing with LiveView, it is relatively painless to quickly nail critical focus. This is critical to getting good data.

 

Now for some of the drawbacks to the DSLR:

 

First is that it is not typically cooled. Using an uncooled camera means that there will be more noise in your images. Most of that noise can be removed through processing, but it makes image processing more complicated and involved. I have heard it said that for every 7 degrees Celsius temperature drop the amount of thermal noise in an image is reduced by 50%. If this holds true it means that by shooting at -10C rather than 32C you have reduced the thermal noise by 98.5%. Not having a cooled camera also makes shooting calibration frames more difficult, since dark frames need to be shot at the same temperature as the lights. This makes it more difficult (not impossible, but more difficult) to build up a library of dark frames that you can use over a period of months. My normal imaging temperature for my cooled CCD cameras (QSI583, QHY10, ASI178) is -10C. I can achieve that cooled temperature when the ambient temperature is 20C. This means that I can shoot/update dark frames in a darkened room, during the day. This makes my nighttime imaging more productive since I don't have to spend part of the night shooting darks.

 

One-shot color cameras (CCD cameras as well as DSLR cameras) use a Bayer array. This means that each pixel has either a red, green, or blue filter over it. 50% of the pixels have a green filter with 25% red and 25% blue. If you look at a mono image shot with a green filter, there is almost nothing in the image but stars. There is not a lot of green light that is scattered or emitted by DSOs, but wait...half the pixels in a one-shot color camera only record green light. Since each pixel in the RAW image only records one color, the other two colors are assigned during the raw conversion (de-bayering) process. What this means is that each red pixel is assigned a green and a blue value from the values of the surrounding green and blue pixels. This lowers the accuracy of the colors in the image compared to a monochrome camera.

 

Most DSLR cameras use 14-bit analog to digital conversions while most dedicated mono CCD cameras for astronomical use use 16-bit A-to-D conversions. This also gives more accurate data.

 

Unmodified DSLR cameras (the Canon 60Da and the Nikon D810a are exceptions) have low response in much of the red part of the spectrum. This is by design and makes it easier to achieve a natural color balance for terrestrial photography. The camera sensor is sensitive to near infrared and ultraviolet wavelengths. This means that it will record light that your eye cannot see. The stock solution is to put a blocking filter in front of the sensor. This blocking filter typically blocks "invisible" light and some of the visible red light. This includes the hydrogen alpha emission line. This reduced sensitivity to Ha light is not particularly desirable for astrophotography.

 

There are solutions to some of the above-mentioned drawbacks. There are add-on or add-in coolers that are available. The camera can also be modified to replace the blocking filter with either unfiltered glass or at least a filter that blocks less Ha light. While these solutions are effective they also raise the cost to the point that the CCD camera becomes more competively priced.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Well That was as detailed as possible i guess!

 

I guess my problem now is that my scope with the reducer and a 178 for example would have a fov enough to capture like 70% of the M31....

So unless i do mosaic (which is really tedious work) the only option looks like a DSLR..... or a much more expensive CCD....

Why dont they make Cmos sensors for AP? Mass production and good enough sensitivity for beginners.... as i see it the market is either , take a 1000USD brand new Canon and take it apart and render it useless for normal use or spend 2000USD for a large CCD.... am i seeing it wrong or are there other alternatives i dont see?

At the same time the way you explained the filtering it doesnt seem a way out of it. What i mean sooner or later in search of picture quality one must use a filter wheel....

 

Thanks again Rick , your answer explained a lot of things and made my search for the right equipment a little more difficult :) , but at least i am in the right direction now :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said in my earlier thread, your choice of hardware is always a compromise. If you need to shoot a mosaic of large objects like M31 or the Rosette Nebula, then don't shoot those targets until you have more experience and the mosaic does not seem so daunting. The 178's sensor is smaller than a DSLR sensor, even an APS-C sized sensor, but the pixels are a quarter the size. This means that what you do capture in that smaller FOV should have good detail.

 

There are lots of posts on other forums asking about why CMOS is not popular for AP. You can read those discussions.

 

The Canon T5i (body onlyl) is about $550.

 

When I bought my QSI583wsg I spent as much for 7 filters as I did for the camera.

 

Replacing the blocking filter of a DSLR does not render it useless for terrestrial photography. How to use it as a normal camera depends on your choice of filter. You should read the info on the sites that do modifications for more details about the replacement filter options depending on your type of scope.

 

The reasons that I do not have a modded DSLR is 1) it voids the camera's warranty and 2) it is more of an issue to get service on it. An aquaintance snagged the cable on his modified Canon DSLR and broke the USB jack. He took it to a local camera shop. He gave them explicit instruction not to touch the sensor since the camera had been modified. The local camera shop sent the camera to Canon for repair and in addition Canon re-calibrated the sensor. Canon wanted several hundred dollars to fix it and he was unwilling to pay it. As a result the camera was basically useless for AP. He has not bought another DSLR for astrophotography.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies to offer your a better browsing experience. You can adjust your cookie settings. By closing this banner, scrolling this page, clicking a link or continuing to browse otherwise, you agree to the use of cookies, our Privacy Policy, and our Terms of Use