Spot on summary of what I have also learned over 20 years. Perfect for anyone and a superior product summary chart! Tip: For those who are price/cost sensitive like me, excellent products identical to ZWO spec'd cams can be had for 30-40% less if one shops around. I know because I have and use them. Again, thanks for being a good teacher.
Once again, another great video Curtis. You've probably saved me money by ensuring that I don't over-spec the equipment I need for EAA (as against full blown astrophotography)!
Thank you very much! Your video series are very helpful. I got information overload from all the available products we have today. Your videos clearly explained what I would want for my kind of astronomy. Thanks again!
Really enlightening review of the CMOS cameras! Thank you! Ive just started EAA with the 224, but will strongly consider the 485 585 options with the larger sensor. I'm pretty good at getting very close polar alignments, so am not terribly intimidated by the small sensor size of the 224. Using a crosshair 12mm centers most small objects for me. Drop in the camera, and I'm having fun. But your overview and recommendations are very intriguing and very useful for anyone, including those who might want to move into astrophotography. Not me. But you've nailed it for all us amateurs. 😊
You are welcome. If you can, please don't forget to use my links for your astronomy purchases as a n easy way to support my channel and more videos like this one.
This is excellent presentation. Author is very knowledgeable. Minor things: Sorry, there is no IMX2600. In asi2600, imx571 sensor. One more thing, sensor quality is important, but electronics is important as well. Especially for amp glow and stability for sensor. For example, ASI294MM pro is unmitigated crap, QHY294M is not amp glow and stability-wise. This is a reason ASI294MM lights almost impossible to calibrate. Another example, Asi2600 is good, but not good enough as Moravian c3-26000
Exceptional content. You are my new goto creator for helpful information on starting in EAA and astro. Absolutely exceptional. I do have a few questions. First of all how can the formula include chip height or width when these can be nearly 50% different some times? To me, mathematically, that means the results of your formula could differ quite a bit chosing one or the other. And, the next thing is why have monochrome cameras? How do Astros take b/w data and make those hugely colorful pictures of neublae, etc./ Are monochrome cameras basically for astrophotography, or so I've heard, how do they do it? I never see fantastic monochrome pictures of nebulae and planets, etc. But, honestly, your content is so valuable to me.
Let me address the mono question first. Since monochrome cameras do not have a Bayer matrix they provide higher resolution and collect more light in a given time compared to color cameras. Most EAA is done with color but some folks also use mono because they like the higher resolution and faster light collection. Many Astro photographers use mono cameras along with a filter wheel and a series of filters (red, green, blue) to take advantage of the higher resolution but still get color. This takes more effort than a color camera to collect and process the data. Now your FOV question. Since some camera chips are rectangular the FOV will be different in in the two orthogonal directions. Obviously for a square chip the FOV is the same in either direction. With an eyepiece which has circular optics the FOV is the same in any direction. Hope this helps and don't forget to support my channel by using my links for your purchases when you can.
Regarding the FOV question per use in the arc seconds formula, would it be best with a rectangular chip to average the two different dimensions and plug that into the formula? Can you do a video on how to make color images using a filter wheel and a monochrome camera? That would be really helpful! Thanks for the great information, Curtis.
@@microreniassance2929 It is very useful to have the FOV in each of the two orthogonal dimensions of the chip. Deep sky objects come in all different shapes and sizes and they usually are not the same size in two orthogonal directions. Having the FOV along each axis allows you to decide how best to rotate the camera to fit the object in the picture. If you want a general number you can always calculate the FOV along the diagonal. Sorry, but I have no plans to make the video you are requesting. We don't need that for EAA and you can certainly do astrophotography with a color camera which is what I do. So much simpler. Especially for a beginner.
I really appreciate what you have done on this video to demystify the multiple choices out there for an EAA camera. I just completed a 12.5" F/4.8 Dobsonian (soon to be on an EQ Platform) and am curious what your thoughts may be on a compatible camera? The FL is 1524mm. I'll do the math based on your equations from the video, but does this scope yield itself to an available camera on your spreadsheet? I suspect a .5 focal reducer may be necessary to achieve desireable results. Thanks for any advice you can offer!
At f/4.8 an APS-C sized camera like the ASI2600 will only fit about 1/3 of the Andromeda galaxy into the field of view of 35 x 53 arc min. So you would have to go with a full frame camera for the large DSOs like the ASI2400. This will still not fully fit Andromeda but the FOV will increase to 54 x 81 arc min. Adding a 0.5 reducer will increase the FOVs each by a factor of 2. In that case the 2600 should be fairly good for the larger objects. You never can capture the entirety of some of these objects without using mosaics.
Great video once again Curtis! I have been waiting for part 2 and I can say it gives a great overview of all salient points to start on the right track. I got a bit confused at around 20 mins into the video where you mentioned image scale. My understanding is that the bigger the pixels the longer the focal length to use in order to maintain a good image scale. So when purchasing a camera shouldn't you select one for the shorter focal length so that in case you go for a telescope with a longer focal length you use binning in order to compensate with binned (hence bigger) pixels? I stand to be corrected but I think you said the opposite. Thanks again and keep up the good work.
Curtis, really enjoying your videos. I love visual astronomy but the cold night air is starting to bother my old bones 😊. So I am looking to get into EAA so I can be in a tent with my heater and see more details. I will be using my ES 127mm refractor that is f7.5 and a Fl of 952. Will the ASI533MC camera work ok with that scope? Do I need anything else in the optical train for that to work? I will purchase a new mount, possibly the SW EQ6 pro to carry it all. I have a new 100ah AGM battery to run it all. I want to use Sharp Cap to stack with on my 4 year old laptop and move the scope with my iPad. I would love to run it all from my iPad but don’t think I can do it with Sharp Cap. Thanks for all your instructional videos! Clear skies!
My son has the ES 127 and I have used if for EAA a couple of times. The ASI533MC should work fine with that scope. It will have an image scale of 0.8 arc-seconds per pixel which is fine for a seeing of 2 - 3 arc-seconds per pixel. It came with a couple of extension rings which you may need to help achieve but I don't remember the thread size. You may find that you need an M48 to M42 adapter to connect from the camera to the extension rings but I am not sure. Good luck! And if at all possible, don't forget to use my links to either High Point Scientific or Agena Astro below the video for your purchases as these help support my efforts to make more videos.
That is what I generally recommend. You can use dark frame subtraction on the fly in Sharpcap to clean things up. However, if you think you might get into astrophotography, spend the additional $200 on a cooled camera.
Thanks so much for the advice! Just a minor correction - the field of view equation doesn't seem right to me. Using the formula provided, a chip height of 13mm combined with a focal length of 2350mm gives me 3488*13/2350 = 19.3 arc-seconds, which is about half the angular diameter of Jupiter. Could you please clarify with the correct formula?
Yes, the equation should indicate that the resulting FOV is in arc-minutes, not arc-seconds. So your calculation is 19.3 arc-minutes. Thank you for pointing this out and sorry for the confusion.
This is an excellent video, Curtis! Thank you so much. Astronomy is something I've always wanted to get into. Which forum(s) would you recommend to join for someone like me? I'm located in Northern Nevada, if that makes any difference.
Thanks, Mike. You might try the Cloudy Nights forum as it seems to be the biggest with lots of individual categories or specialties. Good luck with your endeavor.
Hello Curtis! Excellent guide for EAA! I'm trying to choose a camera, but I'd like to do Planets AND also DSO with an intermediate camera - not the most basic, but not the cost and complexity of the cooled ones. One point is what you mentioned in the video, that non-cooled cameras are easier for beginners and to be used on most basic mounts (I have the Celestron NexStar 8SE with the standard AZ mount), and do not require extra power source. So I was looking to the ASI678MC or ASI585MC, that are lower noise non-cooled planetary cameras. I have no pretension to have a noise free image nor doing perfect astrophotograpy, just see and save some recordations (EAA). I have the 0.63 focal reducer for the C8 SCT. Will I be able to see "some" of the brightest nebulas and galaxies with these cameras?
You will absolutely be able to view lots of nebulas and galaxies with both of these cameras, not just the brightest ones. While ZWO classifies them as planetary cameras many people use these for DSOs as well. I have used the ASI224MC for DSOs and it is also listed as a planetary camera. Between the two, I would suggest the 585 as it has a much bigger sensor which will allow you to fit lots more objects in the FOV and will make it easier to find the objects to begin with. Both cameras you are looking at have Zero Amp Glo. Plus, use can use Dark Frame subtraction on the fly to reduce background noise so you can see more detail. If you can, please show your support for my channel by using one of my links to purchase your camera and accessories. If not, no worries. Good luck!
@@astronomytipsreviewswithcu740 Very encouraging! Thank you! I was reading the articles on your site regarding EAA - very good contents, it is a book, actually an EAA course! Congratulations! Although the 585MC can do the job, what about higher options of uncooled cameras, like the 533 and the 294, due the higher resolution and larger sensor and pixels - should they be considered? (to be used with a C8) And, although all the considerations about the size and complexity, investing on a cooled camera like the 533MCPro may worth LONG TERM for EAA? And what about auto-guiding - is it helpful for EAA? Regarding the links in your channel, just clicking on it and navigating between some products, will the website still identify that I came from your referrer?
@@marcelorsc If you can afford one of the more expensive cameras go for it as it will provide better results and give more options. The 294 has been a very popular camera for years, but the 533 is one of the newest models with zero amp glo. It has smaller pixels which will help for planetary. Both are good cameras. For me, I would go with the 533 and it is a bit cheaper. Auto guiding can be very helpful for long exposures which is common in astrophotography. But for EAA we take fairly short exposures (5 sec to 30sec) and stack them in real time so guiding is not as useful. You can guide, but it adds another layer of complexity. Guiding is certainly not needed for planetary work. Start without guiding and see how things work. You can always add it later. As for the why the referral works, once you connect to the vendor using one of my links below the video you can go anywhere in their web site and I will still get a small commission if you make a purchase. And it costs you nothing extra while helping me to do more videos like this. Thanks.
@@astronomytipsreviewswithcu740 Thank you again Curtis! I don’t want to overshoot with the camera if the remaining equipment is not proportional - makes no sense to spend more in the camera than in the whole telescope (same thought about eyepieces). But where I live this stuff is 3x more expensive, and as I’ll be in USA next month it will be an opportunity to buy a camera thinking for the future. Besides the suggestion for the 533MC (good for DSO, still good for planets), the decision question now is if cooled or not - not much because price ($600 to $800 for the 533), but due the other factors, like size, using it in the original 8SE AZ mount, extra power source… Would cooling it improve EAA enough to justify this option? I don’t see myself doing several hours of astrophotography to grab a single image, I think EAA will be the way, but as I can see it is a virus, it is a question of time for the EAA astronomers want to improve their pictures and equipment... 😀 PS: I’ve seen great images with the 533, but the square sensor is polemic - it gives the “sensation” of being smaller than wide sensors, what are your thoughts about it? (BTW, what models are the cameras in this video, besides the 224?)
@@marcelorsc As I say in the video, if you do not seeing yourself doing astrophotography you can save yourself the added cost of a cooled camera and just use dark frame subtraction during live stacking. The other cameras are the ASI1600MC, discontinued, and the ASI2600MC Pro. You have to decide for yourself whether your prefer a rectangular chip to the square chip. I don't personally see the problem.
what do you recommend for a c8 evolution alt az with a 6.3 focal reducer with minimum extras. like the idea of revolution imager because dont have to take all the extra gear low weight but as you said old tech shame they dont do a modern version just have a mini monitor couple of power banks compact and lightweight, instead with zwo need laptop power pack tons of wires or would you recommend a dslr if so which make model? thanks
With the Revolution Imager you won't have to use a computer but you will need something to view it on. A small LCD screen or your own TV at home if it has video inputs will work, plus power. This requires a separate power and video cable to the camera. The RI is not expensive but it is old technology with a very small sensor ~6mm diagonal which gives a very small field of view making it hard to locate DSOs. And you will have to make adjustments using the tiny buttons on the back of the camera in the dark. A CMOS camera like those from ZWO only requires a single USB cable but does require a computer which can be your viewing screen. You can use the free software from SharpCap to align images to get more detail. I recommend a CMOS camera. don't forget to use my links for your purchases if you can.
This is not a mistake. The Table is accurate. The ASI482 has 2.07 Mega Pixels. Both it and the ASI224 with 1.2Mega Pixels are the two cameras in the table with the least number of Pixels. The 482 has a much larger diagonal than the 224 due to a much larger pixel size and more of them.
@@astronomytipsreviewswithcu740 Yes, very expensive, but very attractive 😋. I looked who are users of this camera on AstroBin. Their scopes and mounts are also pricey. >50K for rig. No wonder that we are forcefully married to ZWO, etc.
![KAYTRANADA - Witchy (feat. Childish Gambino) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/jGK3YVmGZ3Y/mqdefault.jpg)
Spot on summary of what I have also learned over 20 years. Perfect for anyone and a superior product summary chart! Tip: For those who are price/cost sensitive like me, excellent products identical to ZWO spec'd cams can be had for 30-40% less if one shops around. I know because I have and use them. Again, thanks for being a good teacher.
I really appreciate the positive feedback. It encourages me to do more.
I've been using eyepieces as lens with a Celestron Digital Camera Adapter. Kind of old school, but it works really well.
Once again, another great video Curtis. You've probably saved me money by ensuring that I don't over-spec the equipment I need for EAA (as against full blown astrophotography)!
Glad I could help. Again, please consider using the links below my video to help support the channel so I can do more of these tutorials.
Thank you very much! Your video series are very helpful. I got information overload from all the available products we have today. Your videos clearly explained what I would want for my kind of astronomy. Thanks again!
This is a great summary. You really know your stuff. Thanks for taking the time to make this video.
Fascinating on the mono pixel sensing!
Danke für die gute Erklärung. Sehr sachlich und auch im Detail verständlich. 👌
Nicely done Curtis, very clearly explained and interesting. 👍 Cheers, Ken.
Ken, thanks.
Really enlightening review of the CMOS cameras! Thank you! Ive just started EAA with the 224, but will strongly consider the 485 585 options with the larger sensor. I'm pretty good at getting very close polar alignments, so am not terribly intimidated by the small sensor size of the 224. Using a crosshair 12mm centers most small objects for me. Drop in the camera, and I'm having fun.
But your overview and recommendations are very intriguing and very useful for anyone, including those who might want to move into astrophotography. Not me. But you've nailed it for all us amateurs. 😊
I really appreciate the feedback.
Thank you.
You are welcome. If you can, please don't forget to use my links for your astronomy purchases as a n easy way to support my channel and more videos like this one.
Thank you Sir, that’s really helpful information for someone just getting started.
You are welcome. Don't forget to subscribe for future videos and use my links for your purchases if you can.
just the info I was looking for, thanks for sharing
Brilliant video indeed with info that's well appreciated. Thank you.
Glad I found you, super info, clear skies
Great content sir! Very informative and helpful!
Thank you for the positive feedback. I am glad you found the video helpful.
I will use your links. Thanks!
Very clearly explained--and I really needed this info. Thanks, great video!
Thanks for the kind comments.
This is excellent presentation. Author is very knowledgeable.
Minor things: Sorry, there is no IMX2600. In asi2600, imx571 sensor.
One more thing, sensor quality is important, but electronics is important as well. Especially for amp glow and stability for sensor. For example, ASI294MM pro is unmitigated crap, QHY294M is not amp glow and stability-wise. This is a reason ASI294MM lights almost impossible to calibrate. Another example, Asi2600 is good, but not good enough as Moravian c3-26000
Exceptional content. You are my new goto creator for helpful information on starting in EAA and astro. Absolutely exceptional. I do have a few questions. First of all how can the formula include chip height or width when these can be nearly 50% different some times? To me, mathematically, that means the results of your formula could differ quite a bit chosing one or the other. And, the next thing is why have monochrome cameras? How do Astros take b/w data and make those hugely colorful pictures of neublae, etc./ Are monochrome cameras basically for astrophotography, or so I've heard, how do they do it? I never see fantastic monochrome pictures of nebulae and planets, etc. But, honestly, your content is so valuable to me.
Let me address the mono question first. Since monochrome cameras do not have a Bayer matrix they provide higher resolution and collect more light in a given time compared to color cameras. Most EAA is done with color but some folks also use mono because they like the higher resolution and faster light collection. Many Astro photographers use mono cameras along with a filter wheel and a series of filters (red, green, blue) to take advantage of the higher resolution but still get color. This takes more effort than a color camera to collect and process the data.
Now your FOV question. Since some camera chips are rectangular the FOV will be different in in the two orthogonal directions. Obviously for a square chip the FOV is the same in either direction. With an eyepiece which has circular optics the FOV is the same in any direction.
Hope this helps and don't forget to support my channel by using my links for your purchases when you can.
Regarding the FOV question per use in the arc seconds formula, would it be best with a rectangular chip to average the two different dimensions and plug that into the formula? Can you do a video on how to make color images using a filter wheel and a monochrome camera? That would be really helpful!
Thanks for the great information, Curtis.
@@microreniassance2929 It is very useful to have the FOV in each of the two orthogonal dimensions of the chip. Deep sky objects come in all different shapes and sizes and they usually are not the same size in two orthogonal directions. Having the FOV along each axis allows you to decide how best to rotate the camera to fit the object in the picture. If you want a general number you can always calculate the FOV along the diagonal.
Sorry, but I have no plans to make the video you are requesting. We don't need that for EAA and you can certainly do astrophotography with a color camera which is what I do. So much simpler. Especially for a beginner.
great video!
I really appreciate what you have done on this video to demystify the multiple choices out there for an EAA camera. I just completed a 12.5" F/4.8 Dobsonian (soon to be on an EQ Platform) and am curious what your thoughts may be on a compatible camera? The FL is 1524mm. I'll do the math based on your equations from the video, but does this scope yield itself to an available camera on your spreadsheet? I suspect a .5 focal reducer may be necessary to achieve desireable results. Thanks for any advice you can offer!
At f/4.8 an APS-C sized camera like the ASI2600 will only fit about 1/3 of the Andromeda galaxy into the field of view of 35 x 53 arc min. So you would have to go with a full frame camera for the large DSOs like the ASI2400. This will still not fully fit Andromeda but the FOV will increase to 54 x 81 arc min. Adding a 0.5 reducer will increase the FOVs each by a factor of 2. In that case the 2600 should be fairly good for the larger objects. You never can capture the entirety of some of these objects without using mosaics.
Great video once again Curtis! I have been waiting for part 2 and I can say it gives a great overview of all salient points to start on the right track. I got a bit confused at around 20 mins into the video where you mentioned image scale. My understanding is that the bigger the pixels the longer the focal length to use in order to maintain a good image scale. So when purchasing a camera shouldn't you select one for the shorter focal length so that in case you go for a telescope with a longer focal length you use binning in order to compensate with binned (hence bigger) pixels? I stand to be corrected but I think you said the opposite. Thanks again and keep up the good work.
Curtis, really enjoying your videos. I love visual astronomy but the cold night air is starting to bother my old bones 😊. So I am looking to get into EAA so I can be in a tent with my heater and see more details. I will be using my ES 127mm refractor that is f7.5 and a Fl of 952. Will the ASI533MC camera work ok with that scope? Do I need anything else in the optical train for that to work? I will purchase a new mount, possibly the SW EQ6 pro to carry it all. I have a new 100ah AGM battery to run it all. I want to use Sharp Cap to stack with on my 4 year old laptop and move the scope with my iPad. I would love to run it all from my iPad but don’t think I can do it with Sharp Cap. Thanks for all your instructional videos! Clear skies!
My son has the ES 127 and I have used if for EAA a couple of times. The ASI533MC should work fine with that scope. It will have an image scale of 0.8 arc-seconds per pixel which is fine for a seeing of 2 - 3 arc-seconds per pixel. It came with a couple of extension rings which you may need to help achieve but I don't remember the thread size. You may find that you need an M48 to M42 adapter to connect from the camera to the extension rings but I am not sure. Good luck! And if at all possible, don't forget to use my links to either High Point Scientific or Agena Astro below the video for your purchases as these help support my efforts to make more videos.
Really help ❤
I use an uncooled ASI294MC for EAA. Seems to be the most bang for the buck.
That is what I generally recommend. You can use dark frame subtraction on the fly in Sharpcap to clean things up. However, if you think you might get into astrophotography, spend the additional $200 on a cooled camera.
@@astronomytipsreviewswithcu740 yep, ASI air also allows dark frame calibration which helps clean up noise, some.
Thanks so much for the advice! Just a minor correction - the field of view equation doesn't seem right to me. Using the formula provided, a chip height of 13mm combined with a focal length of 2350mm gives me 3488*13/2350 = 19.3 arc-seconds, which is about half the angular diameter of Jupiter. Could you please clarify with the correct formula?
Yes, the equation should indicate that the resulting FOV is in arc-minutes, not arc-seconds. So your calculation is 19.3 arc-minutes. Thank you for pointing this out and sorry for the confusion.
This is an excellent video, Curtis! Thank you so much. Astronomy is something I've always wanted to get into. Which forum(s) would you recommend to join for someone like me? I'm located in Northern Nevada, if that makes any difference.
Thanks, Mike. You might try the Cloudy Nights forum as it seems to be the biggest with lots of individual categories or specialties. Good luck with your endeavor.
Hello Curtis! Excellent guide for EAA! I'm trying to choose a camera, but I'd like to do Planets AND also DSO with an intermediate camera - not the most basic, but not the cost and complexity of the cooled ones. One point is what you mentioned in the video, that non-cooled cameras are easier for beginners and to be used on most basic mounts (I have the Celestron NexStar 8SE with the standard AZ mount), and do not require extra power source. So I was looking to the ASI678MC or ASI585MC, that are lower noise non-cooled planetary cameras. I have no pretension to have a noise free image nor doing perfect astrophotograpy, just see and save some recordations (EAA). I have the 0.63 focal reducer for the C8 SCT. Will I be able to see "some" of the brightest nebulas and galaxies with these cameras?
You will absolutely be able to view lots of nebulas and galaxies with both of these cameras, not just the brightest ones. While ZWO classifies them as planetary cameras many people use these for DSOs as well. I have used the ASI224MC for DSOs and it is also listed as a planetary camera. Between the two, I would suggest the 585 as it has a much bigger sensor which will allow you to fit lots more objects in the FOV and will make it easier to find the objects to begin with. Both cameras you are looking at have Zero Amp Glo. Plus, use can use Dark Frame subtraction on the fly to reduce background noise so you can see more detail. If you can, please show your support for my channel by using one of my links to purchase your camera and accessories. If not, no worries. Good luck!
@@astronomytipsreviewswithcu740 Very encouraging! Thank you! I was reading the articles on your site regarding EAA - very good contents, it is a book, actually an EAA course! Congratulations!
Although the 585MC can do the job, what about higher options of uncooled cameras, like the 533 and the 294, due the higher resolution and larger sensor and pixels - should they be considered? (to be used with a C8) And, although all the considerations about the size and complexity, investing on a cooled camera like the 533MCPro may worth LONG TERM for EAA?
And what about auto-guiding - is it helpful for EAA?
Regarding the links in your channel, just clicking on it and navigating between some products, will the website still identify that I came from your referrer?
@@marcelorsc If you can afford one of the more expensive cameras go for it as it will provide better results and give more options. The 294 has been a very popular camera for years, but the 533 is one of the newest models with zero amp glo. It has smaller pixels which will help for planetary. Both are good cameras. For me, I would go with the 533 and it is a bit cheaper.
Auto guiding can be very helpful for long exposures which is common in astrophotography. But for EAA we take fairly short exposures (5 sec to 30sec) and stack them in real time so guiding is not as useful. You can guide, but it adds another layer of complexity. Guiding is certainly not needed for planetary work. Start without guiding and see how things work. You can always add it later.
As for the why the referral works, once you connect to the vendor using one of my links below the video you can go anywhere in their web site and I will still get a small commission if you make a purchase. And it costs you nothing extra while helping me to do more videos like this. Thanks.
@@astronomytipsreviewswithcu740 Thank you again Curtis! I don’t want to overshoot with the camera if the remaining equipment is not proportional - makes no sense to spend more in the camera than in the whole telescope (same thought about eyepieces). But where I live this stuff is 3x more expensive, and as I’ll be in USA next month it will be an opportunity to buy a camera thinking for the future. Besides the suggestion for the 533MC (good for DSO, still good for planets), the decision question now is if cooled or not - not much because price ($600 to $800 for the 533), but due the other factors, like size, using it in the original 8SE AZ mount, extra power source… Would cooling it improve EAA enough to justify this option? I don’t see myself doing several hours of astrophotography to grab a single image, I think EAA will be the way, but as I can see it is a virus, it is a question of time for the EAA astronomers want to improve their pictures and equipment... 😀
PS: I’ve seen great images with the 533, but the square sensor is polemic - it gives the “sensation” of being smaller than wide sensors, what are your thoughts about it? (BTW, what models are the cameras in this video, besides the 224?)
@@marcelorsc As I say in the video, if you do not seeing yourself doing astrophotography you can save yourself the added cost of a cooled camera and just use dark frame subtraction during live stacking. The other cameras are the ASI1600MC, discontinued, and the ASI2600MC Pro. You have to decide for yourself whether your prefer a rectangular chip to the square chip. I don't personally see the problem.
what do you recommend for a c8 evolution alt az with a 6.3 focal reducer with minimum extras. like the idea of revolution imager because dont have to take all the extra gear low weight but as you said old tech shame they dont do a modern version just have a mini monitor couple of power banks compact and lightweight, instead with zwo need laptop power pack tons of wires or would you recommend a dslr if so which make model? thanks
With the Revolution Imager you won't have to use a computer but you will need something to view it on. A small LCD screen or your own TV at home if it has video inputs will work, plus power. This requires a separate power and video cable to the camera. The RI is not expensive but it is old technology with a very small sensor ~6mm diagonal which gives a very small field of view making it hard to locate DSOs. And you will have to make adjustments using the tiny buttons on the back of the camera in the dark. A CMOS camera like those from ZWO only requires a single USB cable but does require a computer which can be your viewing screen. You can use the free software from SharpCap to align images to get more detail. I recommend a CMOS camera. don't forget to use my links for your purchases if you can.
In the table is there an error in the resolution of the ASI482MC? 2.07 seems to be very different from the neighbors.
This is not a mistake. The Table is accurate. The ASI482 has 2.07 Mega Pixels. Both it and the ASI224 with 1.2Mega Pixels are the two cameras in the table with the least number of Pixels. The 482 has a much larger diagonal than the 224 due to a much larger pixel size and more of them.
What about Kepler 4040 for EAA? Is it good?
I assume you meant this comment as a joke. At $17K I would say extreme overkill.
@@astronomytipsreviewswithcu740 Overkill. 😀 I thought it will be, but it fits all recommendations: big sensor, big pixels.
@@anata5127 Yes it will work but who can afford it at that price!
@@astronomytipsreviewswithcu740 Yes, very expensive, but very attractive 😋. I looked who are users of this camera on AstroBin. Their scopes and mounts are also pricey. >50K for rig.
No wonder that we are forcefully married to ZWO, etc.