Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ccd-newastro] Re: single shot color

Expand Messages
  • Ron Brant
    I agree. I live in suburban San Diego, Ca, and at best have mag 3.2 skies, and I have used both a ST -8XE and the ST2000XCM, and for just getting nice photos,
    Message 1 of 10 , Jul 8 9:15 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      I agree. I live in suburban San Diego, Ca, and at best have mag 3.2 skies, and I have used both a ST -8XE and the ST2000XCM, and for just getting nice photos, I find the XCM to be alot fun and much less effort.
      rb
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Don Singer
      To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 8:36 AM
      Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: single shot color





      Roger has a point...color balance and how deep you can go in LP skies is reduced by an OSC, but that in no way means you cannot capture very good color images in an urban location with a OSC camera, and not have fun at the same time. I do it all the time. I rarely have a chance to leave the City for an imaging session, and I do not have the time to image through filters (takes much longer since you have to image three times...nothing wrong with that if you do have the time), so I use an SXVF-H9C and am happy with it and have fun..and, that is what it is all about. If you are very particular about your results and do not mind mono shots, Rogers advice is very good. But, you can also achieve good results with an OSC in the City. I live just above downtown Portland, OR and LP is bad.

      Don

      --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, Roger Hamlett <roger@...> wrote:
      >
      > > David,
      > >
      > > Mike Siniscalchi did an excellent head-to-head test between mono and color versions of the ST-2000. It's the best discussion I've seen on the pros and cons of single-shot color versus filtered mono imaging.
      > >
      > > http://www.helixgate.net/Xm-XCM-1A.html
      > >
      > > Regards,
      > > Kevin Nelson
      > > www.QSImaging.com
      > >
      > > --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, "David Bailey" <davealta@> wrote:
      > >> My experience is only with a SBIG ST10-XME.
      > >> Where can I read the pro and con of using a single shot color such as a STL-11000CM vs a STL-11000M?
      > >>
      > >> Dave Bailey
      > There is also a critical 'point', that the balance between the cameras,
      > _will_ shift, with your location.
      > One shot cameras, do _not_ lend themselves to imaging from light
      > polluted skies. I have a 'one shot', and take this with me for holidays,
      > to locations with less light pollution, than my 'home' site. The biggest
      > advantage, is the reduction in cabling, and weight. In dark sky sites,
      > it is great. However at home, light pollution is so bad, that if I want
      > to see dimmer objects, I _have_ to attenuate the light pollution, and
      > this means switching to narrow band imaging. Though you _can_ narrow
      > band image with a 'one shot' camera, you then have a camera with just
      > half the resolution of an equivalent mono unit. If you have significant
      > light pollution, I'd go 'mono' every time. If you want the simplicity of
      > no colour wheel, then I'd image without colour at all, just doing
      > narrowband images....
      >
      > Best Wishes
      >





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Dave Bailey
      There are seven responses to the OSC vs mono camera question, and there are several good leads. Mike Siniscalchi s paper is impressive. The SBIG section is
      Message 2 of 10 , Jul 8 3:54 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        There are seven responses to the OSC vs mono camera question, and there are several good leads. Mike Siniscalchi's paper is impressive. The SBIG section is helpful. Your personal opinions and experience in light polluted areas weigh heavily.
        Thanks to each of for your response.

        Hmmmm I think mono is winning
        Dave Bailey


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Kevin Nelson
        To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 8:58 AM
        Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: single shot color





        David,

        Mike Siniscalchi did an excellent head-to-head test between mono and color versions of the ST-2000. It's the best discussion I've seen on the pros and cons of single-shot color versus filtered mono imaging.

        http://www.helixgate.net/Xm-XCM-1A.html

        Regards,
        Kevin Nelson
        www.QSImaging.com

        --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, "David Bailey" <davealta@...> wrote:
        >
        > My experience is only with a SBIG ST10-XME.
        > Where can I read the pro and con of using a single shot color such as a STL-11000CM vs a STL-11000M?
        >
        > Dave Bailey
        >





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Luke Jones
        Do you use a light pollution filter with your OSC camera? I bought a relatively cheap Astronomik CLS filter, and although I m a neophyte in the context of this
        Message 3 of 10 , Jul 9 7:24 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Do you use a light pollution filter with your OSC camera? I bought a relatively cheap Astronomik CLS filter, and although I'm a neophyte in the context of this group, I'm extermely happy with the results I'm getting from my QHY8 OSC camera.
          When I subtract the bias frame from my subs under moon-free conditions the histogram for the red and blue channels start relatively close to the "zero point". It suggests to me that I'm getting almost no skyglow/pollution in red and blue for 10 minute subs (CLS targets skyglow lines). The green channel is quite different, and the CLS filter is noted for it's green tinge.
          I'm a family guy who'se somehow never managed to make it to a dark site with his 8" SCT, and has always imaged from his heavily polluted suburban back yard 16 km from the city centre of Perth, Australia.
          The quality improvement since I got my CLS (not narrowband, obviously) makes me very happy, though I admit it may make experts here cringe.
          Perhaps its worth consideration?

          I loved the article though, and can't say how much I appreciate well delivered information like that. I'm sure that narrowband imaging will eventually figure in my astro imaging journey. I'm hoping that with it I can make good use of otherwise reasonable conditions when the moon's out.

          > There is also a critical 'point', that the balance between the cameras,
          > _will_ shift, with your location.
          > One shot cameras, do _not_ lend themselves to imaging from light
          > polluted skies. I have a 'one shot', and take this with me for holidays,
          > to locations with less light pollution, than my 'home' site. The biggest
          > advantage, is the reduction in cabling, and weight. In dark sky sites,
          > it is great. However at home, light pollution is so bad, that if I want
          > to see dimmer objects, I _have_ to attenuate the light pollution, and
          > this means switching to narrow band imaging. Though you _can_ narrow
          > band image with a 'one shot' camera, you then have a camera with just
          > half the resolution of an equivalent mono unit. If you have significant
          > light pollution, I'd go 'mono' every time. If you want the simplicity of
          > no colour wheel, then I'd image without colour at all, just doing
          > narrowband images....
          >
          > Best Wishes
          >
        • Don Singer
          Yep, use a Hutech IDAS LP filter which works very well. Don
          Message 4 of 10 , Jul 10 8:01 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            Yep, use a Hutech IDAS LP filter which works very well.

            Don

            --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, "Luke Jones" <luke_jones@...> wrote:
            >
            > Do you use a light pollution filter with your OSC camera? I bought a relatively cheap Astronomik CLS filter, and although I'm a neophyte in the context of this group, I'm extermely happy with the results I'm getting from my QHY8 OSC camera.
            > When I subtract the bias frame from my subs under moon-free conditions the histogram for the red and blue channels start relatively close to the "zero point". It suggests to me that I'm getting almost no skyglow/pollution in red and blue for 10 minute subs (CLS targets skyglow lines). The green channel is quite different, and the CLS filter is noted for it's green tinge.
            > I'm a family guy who'se somehow never managed to make it to a dark site with his 8" SCT, and has always imaged from his heavily polluted suburban back yard 16 km from the city centre of Perth, Australia.
            > The quality improvement since I got my CLS (not narrowband, obviously) makes me very happy, though I admit it may make experts here cringe.
            > Perhaps its worth consideration?
            >
            > I loved the article though, and can't say how much I appreciate well delivered information like that. I'm sure that narrowband imaging will eventually figure in my astro imaging journey. I'm hoping that with it I can make good use of otherwise reasonable conditions when the moon's out.
            >
            > > There is also a critical 'point', that the balance between the cameras,
            > > _will_ shift, with your location.
            > > One shot cameras, do _not_ lend themselves to imaging from light
            > > polluted skies. I have a 'one shot', and take this with me for holidays,
            > > to locations with less light pollution, than my 'home' site. The biggest
            > > advantage, is the reduction in cabling, and weight. In dark sky sites,
            > > it is great. However at home, light pollution is so bad, that if I want
            > > to see dimmer objects, I _have_ to attenuate the light pollution, and
            > > this means switching to narrow band imaging. Though you _can_ narrow
            > > band image with a 'one shot' camera, you then have a camera with just
            > > half the resolution of an equivalent mono unit. If you have significant
            > > light pollution, I'd go 'mono' every time. If you want the simplicity of
            > > no colour wheel, then I'd image without colour at all, just doing
            > > narrowband images....
            > >
            > > Best Wishes
            > >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.