0.00
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
Hello fellow astrophotographers! So i was looking into upgrading from a DSLR to a dedicated astrophotography camera, and i was worried about pixel size, oversampling, undersampling etc. I’m looking into a color camera and I plan to pair it with a Samyang/Rokinon 135mm lens. Is the ASI183MC pro any good because of the small pixel size (2.4μm)? Any ideas/suggestions? Thank you. |
0.00
#...
·
·
8
likes
|
|---|
| ZWO ASI2600MC |
1.51
#...
·
·
5
likes
|
|---|
Awni Hafedh: +1 for the 2600MC had some great results with it when paired with the Samyang 135mm F2...the 533MC has worked well for me too! It's a great lens and you'll love it, so best of luck! Cheers from Scotland!  |
 #...
·
·
5
likes
|
|---|
If you see the technical card of the lens, as an Ultimate subscriber you can see the top 10 equipment items that this lens is most often used with on AstroBin:  This should help a bit in your research! |
0.90
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
| At this focal length you are going to be undersampled no matter what camera you choose. So choose based on camera features and desired FOV. I have used with this lens 1600MM, 294MM, 2600MC. All yield good results. |
4.36
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
| I use the 533MM and it is excellent and way more reasonable than the more desired 2600 that has a larger sensor. |
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
| ASI2600MC - works like a dream but if I was you then I’d get the Duo version for a bit less hassle and deeper well depth should you need it. You will need to ensure the camera is adjusted for tilt to use it wide open. I have also successfully used it with my Sony A7S full frame camera in previous years. Also the NBZ filter works well at f/2 and is halo free. |
|
7.90
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
| I'd suggest that the realistic (see this test: https://www.astrobin.com/full/ijq903/0/ ) average PSF is around 10 microns fully open, so any imager at around 4 um (or slightly less, such as 3.76um) would do the lens justice. I'd not go with the ASI 2.4 um imager at all given the poor effective dynamics and overall efficiency. |
|
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
andrea tasselli: Thanks for the advice @andrea tasselli however I am a bit confused. I've seen reviews of the asi183mc pro and it seems to be a good camera at a budget price as well, and for a beginner, such as myself, it seems like a good choice. I'd like to make an informed choice so it would really help me if you can explain why you think the overall efficiency and effective dynamics are poor for this camera. Thank you. |
3.94
#...
·
|
|---|
|
As your camera is APS-C size your field of view will not change when you buy a asi2600mc pro or a much cheaper no-name version with the same imx571 sensor. Even pixel size is the same so when you do 1x drizzle and are happy with the rendering of your small stars then there is nothing to worry about with this kind of sensor. When buying a smaller size sensor you will loose FOV, there you must ask yourself if this is a pill you want to swallow. You can easily check the loss of FOV in Stellarium to gain some insight. Michael |
|
4.36
#...
·
|
|---|
andrea tasselli: I'd honestly take a hard look at the 533 vs the 183 if that's the price range you are looking at. Newer tech and much cleaner images, the FOV is basically the same except for the format. I've never really gottten why certain people are against the square format. It has less noise, no amp glow, higher full well depth, larger pixels, 14 bit ADC. On paper it's just better than the 183. I was in the same boat when considering which camera to choose and ended up with the 533 rather than say the 183 or 294. It was based on what I was told by the vendor (FLO), advice on CN and reviews from all over the place. I am using mono so the jump in price between a 2600 and a 533 is rather massive when taking filters into the consideration, just not worth it for a bit more FOV imo. I was doubting it before I actually used the camera, but I haven't been regretting it. I'm glad I went the "new tech route" rather than buying a old camera just to gain a little extra MP. As for the 2600 it has a larger sensor - but you can easily do mosaics with a smaller camera to match it. There isn't much difference between the 533 and the 2600 except for the size of the sensor. Another big advantage of the 533 are file sizes, they are coming in at 17mb which is very handy. A big camera like the 2600 will require more computer power to process as well as significantly more storage space. |
3.61
#...
·
|
|---|
|
Hi Melenaos, I've enjoyed my Samyang 135 for several years now, with both and EOS 6D (6.5 microns pixels ) and an ASI 178 (2.4 microns pixels). The 6D undersamples but gives a very wide field, while the ASI178 samples correctly (barely at the center of the field) but has a much smaller field (the 183 would be better in that sense). So it really depends on what you want to do, either wide field, or try to use the full resolution of the lens in the central field. CS, Frédéric |
3.34
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| The ASI2600MC Pro is a great camera with lots of flexibility. You can successfully use it at its APS-C size or zoom in for tighter images. Its 26MP image size gives you a lot to work with and the newer tech provides cleaner images and no amp glow. If you can deal with the higher $, you will never look back and regret the purchase. |
|
7.90
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Thanks for the advice @andrea tasselli however I am a bit confused. I've seen reviews of the asi183mc pro and it seems to be a good camera at a budget price as well, and for a beginner, such as myself, it seems like a good choice. I'd like to make an informed choice so it would really help me if you can explain why you think the overall efficiency and effective dynamics are poor for this camera. Thank you. It isn't a very good camera (12-bit dynamic, relatively high read noise, high thermal noise for the sensor pixel size, small sensor) but it is indeed cheap. For just a little bit more money (or about the same if you don't buy ASI) you'll get a far much better deal using a IMX533-based camera. |
|
0.00
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
Please be aware, which ever camera you choose, that various colour cameras come with different optical windows. For instance the ASI2600MC comes with a UV-IR cut window, the ASI533MC and ASI183MC both have an AR (anti reflection) window. For the latter two cameras you will most likely need to pair them with a UV-IR cut filter - just so you know. For me, between the 533 and 183, I would probably choose the 533. The frames will be easier to process as you can probably get away with just bias and flat field calibration frames. Framing will also be easier as you can just leave the camera sensor aligned NSEW knowing that you’re unlikely to need to rotate to frame the subject. I had an ASI183MM and although it was a great camera I always needed matching darks to calibrate the sensor properly. Correction the ASI2600MC cover glass is infra red only so a UV cut might be needed with some optics as per the 183 and 533. Note that I’ve never needed a UV cut for any telescope with this camera. |
2.94
#...
·
|
|---|
| IMX571 sensor camera |
1.20
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
I sold my ASI183MC pro to purchase ASI533MC Pro. Works great with my Samyang 135mm f/2 and accessories. It is my wide field rig. |
0.00
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| I too use the 135mm with my recently purchased 533 MC Pro. I think it is a wonderful combination and has been producing some real nice images. I recommend using a bahtinov mask when sharpening focus - easy and fast to do. I use with with my ASIAir and then zoom into the bright star I am focusing on and it all works a charm. Good luck. |
0.90
#...
·
|
|---|
|
Also quite happy with the Samyang 135mm and the ASI533MC Pro. Sure it’s undersampled a lot but I manage to get details with drizzling (yes it degrades SNR but shooting the lens wide makes base SNR quite healthy to start with). Only caveat I found was tilt. At 2.8 - and even with special 3D printed mounts to secure the camera - the image train presents noticeable tilt in my case. I bought the ZWO tilt plate to try and fix it. Obviously, any camera that comes with one integrated will make this a little easier. |
3.01
#...
·
|
|---|
| Almost everyone shooting widefield is undersampled. Just dither and drizzle integrate and make the best of it with whatever camera you want. The 533 being 14bit and the 2600/6200 being 16bit... i'd be curious about the 2600 Duo with its -25 gain and deep well how it performs on this setup |
3.31
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
Look into the Ogma 26CC (IMX571) sensor it comes with a tilt adapter. I am very happy with it. I used to pair it with the ASI533MC Pro and even though it is a superb camera, I was unhappy with the FOV.  |
|
0.90
#...
·
|
|---|
| @Dcolam , that looks like a dual telescope setup with the 135 piggy backing on a larger refractor, doesn’t it ? Are you imaging with both scope at the same time ? I wanted to try the same and was concerned about the fine alt-az adjustment of the 135 vs the primary scope. would be glad to know how you use this setup and your feedback … |
|
3.31
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Gael Gibert: Hi Gael, Yes, it is piggy backing the Esprit 100ED and I am testing all eventualities before I'll install it in a remote observatory in Spain What do you mean with alt-az adjustments? The FOVs are so different, that they don't need to be align perfectly. My first tests worked well, I am still figuring out synchronization of dithering via NINA. But I am very happy with it. Maybe in a year or two I will swap the lens with a second telescope. Good luck with your setup. How will it be composed? |
|
0.90
#...
·
|
|---|
Gael Gibert: What I had in mind was: 1) compose with the 135mm for a large nebula 2) adjust (with a alt-az platform) for the main scope to target a specific more narrow object within this nebula 3) in the end get both a nice wide field image of the nebula and a more narrow field image of the detailed part that would use both scopes data i have the feeling that if I don’t adjust the scopes with regard to one another, then I won’t be able to frame the wide field correctly and will just get whatever is around my main target (instead of a properly composed wide field image) |
4.53
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Hi Menelaos, I own a ZWO ASI 183MM Pro as well as the QHY 183c. The first one was the camera I started with. The color version I bought used later. The 183MM Pro is still in use although it is an older sensor. The 183c I use less just because I am into mono sensors. I want to make clear, that most suggestions of the comments above, which try to lead you to another camera are true. All the suggestions are worth their price and they are indeed the better choice. But I assume, buying a camera twice the price of the 183 ones may be quite an investment. So I want to share some of my experiences. As long as you stay in the focal length range up to maybe 800mm, you may be fine with the pixel size. At 135mm a sensor with smaller pixels has it's advantages. I use the 183 mainly with an 350mm telescope and it fits it really well. So that's the positive side. If you go with a mono version (which I may never miss again), the smaller sensor will allow you to use 1,25" filters which are much cheaper than it's bigger brothers. But the color sensor will work, although it is much less sensitive. That's mainly why I rarely use it. I assume, you will use some kind of filter (CLS or duo narrowband or whatever) so the sensor glass may not be a problem. Honestly, I even took images without a filter and I can't see any issues. Keep in mind, that those smaller sensors will give you a narrower field of view. Coming from a DSLR with at least an APS-C sensor, you will be much more "zoomed in" which may be a good or a bad thing for you. It depends on your interests. I am thinking of a real downside or a bad experience with the cameras, but they always worked for me. As I began to use scopes with longer focal lengths, I ran into some issues with oversampling. But that may be another story. Subjects with a really high contrast (such as the orion nebula) may be problematic. But there are workarounds. A sensor with a higher full well capacity will help, but it is absolutely possible to use the IMX183 sensor as well. Although this may sound nice, I would also suggest to look for a camera with a more modern sensor. The ASI533 may be a good coice as well. The square sensor format may be a benefit or not. Sometimes, I wished I had this format at hand. If you can afford it, go for the ASI2600 or similar cameras. But they are much more expensive, although they may be really good. I do not own one, because I decided to invest in some other things first. I own two IMX 294 sensor cameras as well and I am absolutely happy with them. No matter how you decide. From my point of view, the ASI183 may not be the best fit nowadays, but you absolutely will be able to get good results with it. It's a tool and it does the job. If money is a problem, you won't have much choice. If you can afford it, another camera may really be a better choice. I hope this helps in any way. CS Christian |
