AstroShed:
Marc Monarcha:
AstroShed:
Why are you even bothering to ask on here, as you have already made you mind up to do this as you are arguing with anyone that tells you it’s not a good idea, so that is a sure sign you have already decided….🤷🏼♂️
I haven’t made up my mind yet…just weighing the pros and cons, maybe looking for something I’m missing as I said! Also, no one said it was a bad idea😂 someone was wondering why I’d do it. They, just like me, seemed open to learn, right or wrong
Well the poll you started gives you your answer, look at those percentages….🤷🏼♂️ I rest my case… Can’t see the poll results tbh. Maybe because I’m using a phone or because I have to participate to see the results. I’ll check on the laptop once I have access. Thanks anyways. And thanks @andrea tasselli and @Dan Kearl |
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I'll be blunt, being oversampled with a redcat doesnt solve your problems. Use your Vixen or Quattro with the 2600 and you'll still likely be oversampled relative to the resolving limit- thats all that really matters. Use the Quattro or Vixen, look at your results, and be happy, because I guarantee you as soon as you use them, you'll forget this idea- instantly.
I'd disregard trying to sample to seeing and just sample to your resolving limit. Less fuss. If you're so worried, just hardware bin.
Plus, 294 is a substantial downgrade in image quality compared to a 2600. You gain absolutely nothing from going to it, infact you lose a lot.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
No No No No No No…
all your images are from a redcat 51. Of course you're undersampled! Unless you provide us with some data that shows some truly exceptional seeing from a large scope, I don't believe you're pulling 1.2" arc second seeing.
294 is less sensitive and has far smaller sensor and pixels. Long story short, you're going to need twice the time AT LEAST to get what you'd get with your 2600.
This is a very horrible idea. You can drizzle your data if you want some more detail. You're in a prime situation for it's use with the redcat 51
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Since you are asking, I must say, no, NO, DON'T DO THAT. The 294 is a tricky camera, very difficult to calibrate. You are going to spend more time trying to calibrate it than doing anything else. Really frustrating.
I had one and ended up replacing it with the 533MM, the 2600mm little brother.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I'd say drizzle is an easy solution.
If you don't like that, I have a 294MM that I was looking to upgrade to a 2600MM - happy to swap ;-)
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Why stop at the 294? The imx751 has 1.45 um pixels. Lol.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Since you are asking, I must say, no, NO, DON'T DO THAT. The 294 is a tricky camera, very difficult to calibrate. You are going to spend more time trying to calibrate it than doing anything else. Really frustrating. I don't think it is such a dreadful camera, just a notch or two below the IMX571 but still pretty good and not that difficult to calibrate. In fact, not al all.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Why stop at the 294? The imx751 has 1.45 um pixels. Lol. Let’s gooo.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
andrea tasselli:
Since you are asking, I must say, no, NO, DON'T DO THAT. The 294 is a tricky camera, very difficult to calibrate. You are going to spend more time trying to calibrate it than doing anything else. Really frustrating.
I don't think it is such a dreadful camera, just a notch or two below the IMX571 but still pretty good and not that difficult to calibrate. In fact, not al all. 100%. not difficult at all.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I'll be blunt, being oversampled with a redcat doesnt solve your problems. Use your Vixen or Quattro with the 2600 and you'll still likely be oversampled relative to the resolving limit- thats all that really matters. Use the Quattro or Vixen, look at your results, and be happy, because I guarantee you as soon as you use them, you'll forget this idea- instantly.
I'd disregard trying to sample to seeing and just sample to your resolving limit. Less fuss. If you're so worried, just hardware bin.
Plus, 294 is a substantial downgrade in image quality compared to a 2600. You gain absolutely nothing from going to it, infact you lose a lot. You gain detail, resolution and ability to crop. But am more inclined to not do the switch tbh. In fact I don’t think I will.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Brian Puhl:
No No No No No No...
all your images are from a redcat 51. Of course you're undersampled! Unless you provide us with some data that shows some truly exceptional seeing from a large scope, I don't believe you're pulling 1.2" arc second seeing.
294 is less sensitive and has far smaller sensor and pixels. Long story short, you're going to need twice the time AT LEAST to get what you'd get with your 2600.
This is a very horrible idea. You can drizzle your data if you want some more detail. You're in a prime situation for it's use with the redcat 51 At least twice the amount of time to capture the same amount of signal is actually a big deal. Never tried drizzling so I’ll be doing that now that I’m aware of it. Also, you can check the seeing conditions for yourself man, village is called Ehden⛰️ at 1500 meters altitude. I go outside the village further into the mountains to an elevation of about 1900 meters with even better seeing.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Dunk:
I'd say drizzle is an easy solution.
If you don't like that, I have a 294MM that I was looking to upgrade to a 2600MM - happy to swap ;-) You should’ve asked me before starting the poll🤣
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Marc Monarcha:
At least twice the amount of time to capture the same amount of signal is actually a big deal. Never tried drizzling so I’ll be doing that now that I’m aware of it. Also, you can check the seeing conditions for yourself man, village is called Ehden⛰️ at 1500 meters altitude. I go outside the village further into the mountains to an elevation of about 1900 meters with even better seeing. You don't "check" seeing conditions, especially on MeteoBlue, you actually measure them by actually moving scope and mount on site and actually measure what comes out at the other end of the scope, that's the camera for you. With the long integrations typical for your settings.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Hi,
Why don’t you get both and do a one to one comparison.
While considering upgrading from 294MM to 2600MM I didn’t understand the theoretical explanation on the difference between the two cameras especially on the bit depth, pixel count and how one could do better than the other.
I got both and compared. One to one comparison helped me pick my camera. Especially to see the difference between cameras in my conditions and my setup (seeing and tracking performance). And most importantly to see if that improvement is something that I felt worth upgrading towards.
Hope it helps!
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
If you have a FL over 1000mm you won't get anything more from smaller pixels. But you will lose a lot in terms of the quality of the sensor. This an an easy decision.
Kevin
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I am very happy with my ASI294MM Pro, but I also have two ASI2600MM Pro's that I would never part with. I guess what I am getting at is keep the 2600 and buy a 294.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Since you are asking, I must say, no, NO, DON'T DO THAT. The 294 is a tricky camera, very difficult to calibrate. You are going to spend more time trying to calibrate it than doing anything else. Really frustrating.
I had one and ended up replacing it with the 533MM, the 2600mm little brother. *** I know the ASI294MC Pro is a bit of a problem child but in my experience the ASI294MM Pro is very easy to work with, I've never had any calibrations issues. The downside to using the ASI294MM Pro in Bin 1 is the files are huge. ***
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
William House:
*** I know the ASI294MC Pro is a bit of a problem child but in my experience the ASI294MM Pro is very easy to work with, I've never had any calibrations issues. The downside to using the ASI294MM Pro in Bin 1 is the files are huge. *** I don't know why such a reputation. I have been using it as my main workhorse for the past 4 years and never let me down (except dewing in the sensor but this is another story).
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
My 2 cents…I happily parted with my 294mm because of its strong amp glow and its weird sensor pattern that Flats wouldn't always correct. I actually traded "down" to the 533mm because I already owned the 1.25" filters. I would've loved the 2600mm, but just couldn't justify the cost. I wanted to love the 294mm, but it just wasn't user friendly.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
My 2 cents...I happily parted with my 294mm because of its strong amp glow and its weird sensor pattern that Flats wouldn't always correct. I actually traded "down" to the 533mm because I already owned the 1.25" filters. I would've loved the 2600mm, but just couldn't justify the cost. I wanted to love the 294mm, but it just wasn't user friendly. Must be some quality control issues, seems people either like or dislike the ASI294MM Pro. ZWO having QC issues is definitely not out of the realm of possibility. But I am definitely in the very happy with my 294MM side of the isle.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I have two ASI294MM cameras. Excellent and versetile camera. But if you are going to use it Bin1 mode, your optics should be fast like F/4 or lower. If not your setup will be diffraction-limited. Of course your setup may be also seeing-limited if your focal length is as high as 2000mm or more. So small pixels are not always a way to high resolution images.
With my Askar FRA/F3.9 and Esprit ED100/F4.1 (with Riccardi reducer) I may use Bin1 mode sometimes. But with my EdgeHD800 F/7.0 never.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I am lucky to have both worlds, i don't use both because i stopped astrophotography long time ago, but once i am back i hope sooner than later then i will put both cameras in use at best they can, i will use 294 only for narrowbanding, period, while imx571 for everything, i will make sure to have perfect scopes to match, in fact i have DSLR lenses which are so fat like f1.4-f2.8, so i believe 294 bin 1 can be a better choice for me here than 3.75 pixel size camera, in fact i was using QHY163/ASI1600MM in the past and still have them to great results, 294 mono was an upgrade to those actually until the new sensors came.
I could go from 294 mono to 2600 anytime, but i won't go from 2600 to 294 at all, buying 294 next to 2600 yes, but not from bigger sensor to smaller, i also can use this 294 camera for solar if i have to, but for DSO it is very very clear that ALL people want to buy a full frame or APS-C of new sensors, if not then at least 533 which is the little brother of two, i am sure if all have the budget they all will move or buy IMX571 or IMX455 or at least IMX533, i bought 294 mono and two IMX571 at cheap prices so i am happy and lucky.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Just drizzle mate, I'd say it's not magic, but actually it's magic.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I own both those cameras and also the 294MC version. The 294MM is tougher to get proper calibration frames(tougher than the MC version). I thought I knew how to take them, and I've done some research as well, but I'm struggling to get flats to calibrate properly. In comparison, the 2600 MM is simple to use and calibrate. I, for one, do not want to spend hours trying to fix calibration issues. So, I would not sell the 2600MM. Maybe buy the 294MM and see for yourself, but keep the 2600 for sure.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
