How to Choose a Solar Camera
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 окт 2023
- This video describes how to determine the best type of solar camera for your specific solar telescope configuration. One size does not fit all here, and your aperture and focal length will have a big influence on what models to consider. I learned a lot researching this topic and this should really help you optimize your camera for your set up. I also do a deep dive into the theory and compare what theory predicts against actual real world solar images. Also included are tips and tricks to improve your solar imaging.
For more information on the Lunt 100MT, please use:
tidd.ly/3V5zPYC
This is an affiliate link, which means at no extra cost to you, I will make a small commission if you use this link and make a qualifying purchase.
If you are in the market for solar gear or any other astrophotography equipment, I encourage you to consider Agena Astro or High Point Scientific.
Both companies have a wide variety of telescopes, mounts and related gear in stock, and I have found they provide honest, expert advice. If you use this link to their websites:
Agena Astro: bit.ly/3qfWaZS
High Point Scientific: www.highpointscientific.com/?...
you will not pay anything extra and I'll earn a small commission. Thank you.
#solarimaging #sun #space 
Наука
I really appreciate your tutorial. Being very new to solar imaging, your explanation of the pros and cons of various camera/telescope setups is very helpful.
Excellent tutorial. I feel a lot better informed when choosing my next solar camera
Fantastic video! However, i did some research in connection with buying a camera for my Lunt 80, and i believe the well depth for the IMX290 is only 14.6 ke. This would suggest the 462 is a better choice.
Mark ... NASA should be very proud they named you a NASA Ambassador. You always seem to exceed expectations.
Thanks Richard!
An interesting video, thank you.
I have a Lunt 60 (pre MT) and also the ZWO 90mm and ZWO 1600mm pro. It seems both are reasonably well matched to my Lunt, with the 290 slightly better due to smaller pixels. However, the 290 is only ~2mp vs 16mp of the 1600, and the latter also allows for full solar disc imaging, whereas the 290 would require me to work with mosaics (a p.i.t.a imho). It seems that I would need another camera for closer detail of the Sun using a barlow.
Both of my cameras have low FPS, are rolling shutter, and have low full well capacity.
It would be nice to see a high mp solution, that can fit the entire solar disc in 1 go, global shutter and suitable pixel sizes, but it seems that camera innovation is well, bypassing my setup. A frustrating experience.
Very helpful analysis! Thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
Hi William, congrats on your new 152! That's a big boy. I use an ED 127mm x 952mm APO for my solar setup with a Quark Chromosphere eyepiece Filter. Then I put my ASI432MM on the back of it. I love Solar imaging.
Who is William and what 152?
Thank you! I find all your solar videos very helpful. There's a typo in this video at 12:30, IMX628 should be IMX678 (I think). Also I found the Pixinsight Solar Toolbox to be easy and convienient, eliminating the need for IMPPG and Affinity Photo.
I also was thinking of dragging my (as yet, unused) Lunt 1.25" herschel wedge out. I have a Baader solar continuum and UV/IR cut filter for it too (also both unused). The wedge and filters are in storage (my living circumstances are well, difficult so a lot of stuff is packed away and not easily accessible to me). Some have suggested using a ERF on the front of the scope in conjunction with the wedge. Is this correct?
note: I haven't used the wedge as the focuser on my equinox isn't working very well and I'm getting focuser movement with pretty much any weight, even an eyepiece, even when locking down. It really needs to go back to SkyWatcher for them to look at, but money has been really tight for me since 2016...
Great video! I do wonder if the 1.02 factor in the formula is correct - can you double check? Because I googled and found exact same formulae BUT this number was 1.22 instead of 1.02. I wonder which is correct 🤔
Good question. 1.22 is used when you assume the Rayleigh limit. 1.02 is used when you assume the Dawes limit. I used the Dawes limit formula because actual performance often exceeds the Rayleigh limit (actual performance is what is provided in the Dawes limit formula)
Aah, okay, thanks for explaining that! I just ordered a 1.6x barlow for my 478/81 refractor + quark + IMX432 which seems to going to be just perfect of a combination according to theory ☀️
I started out with a 462MC and it was horrible on the sun. I ran it in monochrome mode and it improved a lot. But once I got the 290mm the images were stunning.
I then purchased the 174mm for full disc imaging and although it's decent and certainly better than the 462mc, it can't match the 290mm.
Same thing with planets. Although the 462 is usable, much better than on the sun, it still doesn't hold a candle to the 290mm.
I just use my 462 for guiding now. It does a good job for that. Lol.
Great video, I have an Edge HD 9.25 and a .7x reducer to bring the scope to f7. I have both an ASI482MC and an ASI533MC Pro. I have a white light Baader film and contiuum filter. Between the two cameras, What is the best camera for this setup? Or the best camera in general?
Great work :) I have a question - what about CaK line with Herschel wedge? If you put it to Lunt instead of h-alpha wedge - it's still f7 scope? So best would be smaller pixel?
The equations are covered in the video. Wavelength has a small impact but overwhelmingly the most important criteria is pixel size match to F ratio.
Very comprehensive analysis, thank you! What if I use my Zwo290mc in mono mode, would it be similar to the290mm in solar imaging?
Will be better than using it in color but not quite as good as the dedicated mono version
Great video!!! Which camera would you recommend for a 60mm Coronado? I now use a 178MM guide camera that gives me a full disk but a really slow frame rate of 17fps.
If you have the F6.6 version they my recommendations for F7 scopes will be essentially the same. Basically you want to avoid large pixel cameras like the IMX174 UNLESS you are at focal ratio around F28. With 60mm aperture it would be tough to get a lot of light with a 4.5x barlow (needed to get to F28).
Thanks for the valuable tutorial. I have a question regarding the camera to match the following equipment. I have an Astrophysics 130 mm f 8.35 refractor, a 174 mm asi camera and h alpha Day Star Quantum SE filter and barlow powermate 4x and rejection filter. With this configuration I use the Asi 174 mm mono camera.
If I wanted to use the telescope at f 8.35 the recommended camera should be the Player One Mars II with IMX 462 sensor, while if I wanted to use the telescope with 5x barlow it should be the Player One M Max with IMX 432 sensor. Can you kindly confirm this??
I also have a quark filter for the chromosphere that I use with 2 80 mm f6 refractors and a 76 f 5.5 without a rejection filter. In this case can I use the Asi 174 camera or would it be better to use the Player One M-Mini??
Thank you so much for your valuable advice.
All daystar products have a built in 4.2x Barlow so a quark with an F8 refractor is actually at F33.6 so a larger pixel size is the best match (eg imx174)
Thank you for such an informative video Mark. I currently use the Mono IMX178 and find it pairs really well with my Lunt 50 which is also f7. I have heard stories of newton rings, but I've thankfully never had an issue with it. You've got me interested in trying a 290/462 to see if I can gain some detail. Is there a preffered choice between the 290 or 462? I will probably go for the Player One version. Thanks
The resolution and speed are the same. The 462 has lower noise but the 290 has significantly better full well capacity. I would need to do a back to back test to know for sure but would guess the 290 has the edge
This is awesome. Thanks for all the work you put into this.
Yikes I love your videos, got a solarmaxiii 90 on the way. Time to learn math I really want to image. Have all my barlows from night set up,
The first time I looked in a 90mm Solarmax I was really impressed. Hope your instrument gives you a lot of fun!
I will be watching
Thank you for making these interesting videos, always very well explained.
Question though, if you use a Quark and want to add an extra Powermate, than where do you put it ? Before or after the Quark, so at the telescope side or at the camera side ?
I would be cautious about adding a powermate. If your telescope is an F7, with the internal telecentric of the Quark of 4.2x you are already at F30. Adding a 2x powermate would put you at F60! You would need a lot of aperture and incredible seeing to use that effectively. But if you did, I would put it after the quark before the camera.
@@AZASTROGUY Thank you for the answer, for solar I use my Esprit80 with a Quark, this is an native f5 scope, so with the Quark I am at F21. Therefor my question. What would you do with my setup ? Would you add an 2x Powermate or is it not worth the cost ?
Thank you in advance !
@@siegfriednoet That context is helpful. You could consider a 2x powermate, but you might also consider a 1.5 or 1.75x from Sieber Optics. I have no affiliation with them but do own a 1.5x that I like. www.siebertoptics.com/SiebertOptics-barlows.html#Ad%201b0
Great video! I'm looking to get into Solar imaging. I've been doing DSO imaging for a few years now and I've dabbled in Planetary. I'm looking to start with the Lunt LS40THa, which is an f/10 native telescope. It seems there are slightly different versions of the critical sampling formula in use. I started out using one that multiplies 1.22 by wavelength, not 1.02. That resulted in slightly different optimal values. I guess the big question is, how close to ideal do you need to be for good results, is "ballpark" good enough?
Before watching your video I was convinced the Play One Apollo-M Mini (4.5um pixels) was my best choice, but now I'm thinking something like the ASI178MM with 2.4um pixels is probably a better choice if I stay at f/10.
You can get an idea of the impact of pixel matching with my example images
I joined the Bluewater Astronomical Society about a year ago. Just got into imaging and enjoying great results in my wide field setup. I purchased a Skywatcher SolarQuest mount and have borrowed a Lunt LS60T HA with B1200. I want to stay in the ZWO brand at this time and would be interested in best option for this setup.
A ZWO ASI178MM should give you (barely) a full solar disk with an excellent pixel match to the focal ratio
@@AZASTROGUY Thanks for the advice. I really enjoy your videos - very thorough. Some parts way over my head re. experience, however it is nice to see that you have thoroughly tested to help us at the start of our learning.
@@adamhofmann2769 Thanks!
Be careful. I had a 178mm and got banding in my pictures.
I also realize that with the Lunt B1200 option it doubles the size of the sun from 6mm to 12mm. So that might cause problems if I want a full image of the sun. I likely will need a reducer with what what ever camera I choose.