Asi2600 Mono vs Color: Is the Mono worth the extra money?

In this video we will compare 2 ASI2600 cameras (MM and MC) and discuss pro's and con's of both. We will have an analysis of theoretic photon numbers from Galaxies and Nebula. And we will compare images from M101 and M16 to see real world differences. Finally we have a summary. Clear skies and Enjoy! Tom

[@kirostar12]

Years ago I was using one shot color camera with narrowband filters and I had very good results. The advantage was that with one shot color camera I could extract the HA emission with the attached HA filter and I had almost the same result as the mono camera with the same filter. At least to my eye, the difference was next to nothing. With the same color camera I also was able to get the real color of the stars without the filter and than combined in Photoshop for one beautiful nebula with RGB stars. Now I shoot mostly with the mono camera beacouse is 16 bit and my old one shot color is 12 bit, but my tests have shown that the difference is very very minimal between the mono and the color camera. It's all a matter of whether you have the necessary time at night to deal with changing filters and refocusing with each filter and many sleepless nights, or are you looking for the easy option with almost the same result. I'm thinking of doing another test soon. Thanks!

[@bronco_fv]

When you use filter offsets you don’t have to refocus and it’s certainly something which can be automated, no sleepless nights necessary.

[@HeavenlyBackyardAstronomy]

Good comparison video, Tom. I have both, mm and mc cameras and agree with you. The mm gives sharper details while the mc is easier to process in post. Yes ... "Less Expensive ... not Cheaper". - Patrick -

[@michakubisz535]

Great comparison, thank you!

[@rvoykin]

Ha I did this same video a few months ago same camera and didn’t see you already had done it. Good stuff! I thought when I got to 2600 color camera with the new technology it was so good it could bridge the gap until I got the mono version and realized how much better it still is

[@testboga5991]

I didn't care so much about ultimate quality, but time to get there. To get the same picture quality, the MM needs a fraction of the time because the increase in signal to noise is only the square root of imagine time! The "small difference" that people usually report under the same test conditions are therefore a bit misleading, as most of the "little" in the improvement is already due to how improvement physically happens across time.

[@vdoshavdosha4563]

Очень информативный обзор камер! Большое спасибо! Я как раз думал о приобретении моно-камеры к уже имеющейся 2600mc.

[@unrealspetznaz]

Thank for that amazing comparison. When you look at the photons captured by each type of camera, though, you seem surprised that the osc is a winner at some point - I cannot pinpoint the exact moment as I watched the video some days ago. At any rate, at that moment I think you "missed" something you had actually mentioned just a little bit earlier: that osc is interpolating photons that it never received in each exposure, 50% to 75% of the photons actually. Thats why even if the number of photons captured is the same, the osc and mono images will difer.

[@AmatureAstronomer]

As a beginner, it seems to me that one shot color cameras take photographs and mono camera using narrow band filters produce data with which the artist can then produce a beautiful painting. I use Sharp Cap and auto stack/color and do no post processing, in hopes of getting a photo that would look the same if I got close to the nebula and saw it through binoculars. I could very well be very wrong and misunderstanding of every thing. Don't know. 🤔

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

you are correct, however the photos have more depth than when you just view through a bino as you stack them and increase signal vs noise. this is not feasible for the human eye.

[@TheMacastronomer]

I would love to see the same test with the mono camera set to bin 2x2. My thoughts are, the resolution of the higher camera can be empty (depending on the other equipment and environmental conditions) and by lowering the resolution it would than nearly equal the color camera but with a gain in signal:noise ratio (because the capture of photons per pixel well is higher). I’m just curious what the result would be.

[@astrojourneyuk]

A great comparison video, very interesting. Deep pockets required to own 2600MM and 2600MC Pro cameras for the comparison. :)

[@ASTROindi]

Nice video.

[@taraswertelecki3786]

I would say monochrome cameras are worth the extra money, because of the greater flexibility they allow during processing of the light frames.

[@bokvaj]

I was very hyped when i saw your video. Its exactly my prblem. Have 2600MC and want to go mono. But is it worth? Watched the video, where are some interesting examples, BUT, I have few things to say - 1st - the whole 25% / 25% / 50% in MC is truth, BUT, all forget, that the rest of the pixels are computed afterwards by all surrounding pixels. Quite effectively. So, you end up with 100 / 100 / 100, but in red are 75% artifical, blue aswell and green 50% artifical signal. 2nd - you compared apples to stones there in NB - l Enhance isnt true narrowband for OSC, its quite wide at all the targeted wavelengths. I would love to see true narrowband battle - lets say processed 5nm filtres in mono camera vs hubble palette from antlia duo narrowband 5nm, with same scopes and same aperture. or at least You could try to use your mono filtres with the color camera - would be same result in my opinion. Also you didnt mention (or i missed it) if the RC and the newton were same F number, but i doubt it simply by the design of the telescopes. So my conclusion - mono will render theoretically 4x more non-artifical sharpness detail in all channels, but with atmosphere/mount errors/stacking, you end up maybe +10-30% sharpness. OSCs will give you more noise, just because of bayer computation of the pixels. But most interesting thing is, that is winning this battle for me is, that you CAN DO MORE ONE CHANNEL in mono narrowband. So, if you are in more polluted areas, you can do more OIII to simply boost the blues in your pictures, without being flooded like hell by noise. Clear skies, Tom.

[@TareqAstroPhoton]

First, thank you very much for the video. Second, nice German accent, i can't mistaken it lol Third, both cameras are great, i have the cheap brand of both and i hope to test them later once i finish my setup with both, and i trust both cameras no matter what.

[@marcelomunoz84]

Thank you, I thought it was a very good analysis. I have had the ASI2600MC for a couple of months, which I use with the L-extreme and have achieved excellent results. I hope to purchase the ASI2600MM in the near future as here in the Southern Hemisphere we have many nebulae to photograph.

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

Marcelo the mm will give you more details under good skys but consider that you need good narrowband filters and more time to accomplish the task. Cheers tom

[@GrundleStiltSkin]

For me, OSC because I setup every session from scratch. When I eventually get pier-mounted, sky shed/dome, mono will be a nice increase in detail.

[@bronco_fv]

Just curious, why would setting up from scratch make difference?

[@MaS-yx8zz]

Thanks for the informative video! I am interested in your thoughts about using an RC8 and the Asi2600mc with regards to pixel size and focal length. Is it a good idea to bin (2×2)? In theory the pixel size is too small for that scope. Thank you, Martin

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

your resolution is at 1x1 at 0.47 arc sec and at 2x2 at 0.95. I would do still 1x1 however the seeing is possibly the limiting factor not the binning. I still use 1x1 with my meade 10" f10 and its ok. cheers and cs, Tom

[@gregmckay666]

Very nice comparison of the two. But honestly, unless your images were taken on the same night at the same time with side-by-side identical scopes, the one factor that is not taken into consideration in your images is the nightly differences in seeing and transparency conditions.

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

GregMcKay yes I agree with you, that would be the ideal comparison, however that was not feasable for me ;)

[@alexands1]

Hi Tom. If you were to were add more time to the color camera - increase the integration time- do you think it would catch up to the mono?

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

Hi! With more integration time that will work out but probably not getting the faint parts as good as it is when you use a mono. Cs Tom

[@ASTROindi]

Anothe comparison I was interested in was a (Mono + Acromat) Vs (colour + Apo)

[@radioparisment628]

Thank you Tom. I've got excellent results in nebulas astrophotography with my 2600MC. Later, I plan to buy a 2600MM camera. In order to save time ( I'm a nomad astrophotographer ), I think to use the two cameras in a dual rig the MM for luminance and a better resolution, the MC for RGB channel. Am I good or wrong ?

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

Radioparis ment: I think that is an excellent idea to get all data in one session. What about the telescopes? Identical ones? Please let me know your plans, sounds interesting to me. Cs Tom

[@radioparisment628]

I think that the new Askar 107 PHQ ( x2 ) is the good bet. It's a Petzval quadruplet, native F/D 7 ( vs FSQ 106, a good challenger ). So, no problem with working distance, autofocus, that's all, with very excellent colour correction !!! One is set upon a Tandem Guiding and Aiming Device ( @ADM, Robin Casady's design ). About, the mount ? My dream is an Astro-Physics AP 1100 ( encoders are not necessary ), used one and Berlebach Planet tripod... You know, I need savings for this ! Best regards. Claude

[@paulbenoit249]

Very interesting comparison. I wonder if the option to get the luminance data from the mono and the rgb data from the Color sensor and have it all merged together would not provide the best of both words result? That way, no bother with acquiring 3 different Color channels.

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

Paul Benoit actually I do exactly this nowadays. Using L data from mono sensor and add rgb data from color sensor into one pic. Good suggestion, cs tom

[@olaftopper4813]

Nice comparison with a result to be expected! But when you perform your calculation you take 100% QE without taking the differences of MC and MM into account. Or do I miss something?

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

Hi, the QE of Imx 571 is different for the r,g and b wavelengths, both put at 100% for mc and mm was because topic is complex enough. But it definitely is worth a deeper look into that. Cs Tom

[@blanejnasveschuk6351]

Excellent comparison of MC and MM cameras. TY for clarity regarding the distinction between both. For MM cameras, what is your current choice for best quality LRGB and 3nm narrowband filters?

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

Blanejnasveschuk6351: many thanks for your comments. My choice for best nb and lrgb would be still the 2600 mm because of the quality, ease of use and price otherwise I would opt for a fullframe sensor if I could afford it ;). Cs tom

[@denniscollyer8161]

⁠​⁠@@tomsastrophotochannel3243I think the question was what filters do you use? Do you have a recommended make/model?

[@freeandcriticalthinker4431]

I just caught something that shocked me. You said the OSC sensors are sold with an IR cut filter, on both DSLR and deviated cooled Astro cameras? I know that was the case for your typical DSLR, but I assumed there was no such filter on the Astro cameras. I am about done with my mirrirless DSLR and was about to start seriously researching for a purchase in another month or maybe less. Well if there the case , if you confirm that back for me if you have the minute. Would appreciate that .

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

Hi, the 2600 MC has an protective window in front of the sensor, called D60, it is basically a UV and IR cut, so no transmission of light in UVIR. Hope this helps, Tom

[@UssSamuG]

Is it only me, or a great advantage for MM is ability to shoot with the moon quite up? I'm currently 'choosing the path' switching from DSLR, shoothing in B5-6 at home or B4 driving ~40 minutes from home. I think mono gives me mote shooting time (in my location) - there are lots of cloudless night with the moon and not so many ones without it :( I've tried my ff dslr with L-eNhance, but the results are hard to postprocess and the resolution is not the best. The proce is almoust twice as big for mono, but I can start shooting in H-alpha only, without the rest od filters and FW.

[@taraswertelecki3786]

You certainly CAN shoot astronomical photos with a mono camera during full moon, especially while using narrow band filters. I took images of nebula with hydrogen alpha filters during full moon from the middle of a city.

[@Artsmitica]

Good video, but needs clarification.Actually the RGB split is 1:2:1 (R:G:B), not 1:3:1. And the resolution for both cameras is the same. (Equal pixel density and total number).

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

You are absolutely correct, for clarification please see my comment to Alan Rockowitz below, thanks and clear skies, Tom

[@alanrockowitz379]

Why is it 1:1:3 for color and not 1:1:2 if it's RGGB?

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

Alan Rockowitz: you are correct, however I started with 10 Photons/ sec so question is how to divide the 10 in the right relation. I might have used 3:3:4 but that is not correct either. So I fixed it to 1:1.3 or 2:2:6. hope the explanation helps in understanding why I have chosen the one over the other.

[@kirostar12]

Am I to understand from your research that to photograph galaxies with the color camera you simply need almost double the time to have the detail of the mono camera photo? Since the color camera has 240 photons, and the mono camera has 400 photons. This is not very difficult to achieve. And for the photo of the nebula, I think it can be corrected with proper processing. The colors were too different between the two photos and maybe there are some processing errors. Greetings!

[@peterlaubscher3989]

Many thanks for this summary - I am still being pulled in both directions. My bank manager says "No ways" to having both of them!

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

Hi Peter, then go for MC it will go faster and save money and your account mgr will be more happy ;) cheers Tom

[@peterlaubscher3989]

@@tomsastrophotochannel3243 Thanks, Tom, I'll keep you posted - It will be some time before my 'manager' releases the funds to me :)

[@hael8680]

You should consider the Touptek cameras. Same sensor, similar cooling same results and cheaper.

[@peterlaubscher3989]

@@hael8680 Yes, Indeed, I have a beady eye on them. Hoping to order in September:)

[@TareqAstroPhoton]

@@peterlaubscher3989 So did you order? Waiting you to join us TT cameras users.

[@Mistr_A]

Your processing for the colour image using the L-Enhance needs work as you didn't bring out any of the o3 apparent when you work on it the workflow is completely different to normal colour workflow

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

Nik Ax can you give me a suggested workflow for Triband filters for PI please? Any help will be appreciated.

[@Mistr_A]

Also I use astropixel processor to separate the channels then recombine them, in pixinsight you can use pixel math to do the recombination.

[@Astro_Shed]

I’m not sure you figures are correct, the distribution is 1:1:2 not 1:1:3, so your calculation are not correct, or am I missing something….for every 1 blue and 1 red pixel there are 2 green…. 1:1:2, how do,you get 1:1:3..?

[@tomsastrophotochannel3243]

AstroShed you are correct, please see to my answer to Alan Rockowitz below, i hope this explains, cs tom

[@user-br1yj7ev7y]

Please more please about cosmos and astronomy. Add. Like all about space. All subscriptions about Space 😮

[@woody5109]

I don’t get the monochrome thing, you pay a fortune for the camera to remove the colours, then you pay another fortune in filters to put the colours back in….the difference can only be seen when side by side and barely at that. It’s an old fashioned idea, much like guiding.

[@netizen78]

This is nonsense. Did you watch the video until the end? There are some clear adavantages of monochrome cameras, especially if you have to deal with light pollution and still want to get the most out of the collected light. You also have much more options in post processing. There are good reasons why monochrome cameras are the de facto standard in professional astrophotography. What is used on telescopes and satellites like Hubble, JWST, DSCOVR? Right - monochrome cams. Additionally it seems you haven't understood what guiding is and why it is used (and necessary). You have a lot to learn.