I tried Deep Space Astrophoto with this $200 Planetary camera! How did I do?? (QHY5III715C)

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Support me on Patreon!: www.patreon.com/cuivlazygeek QHY's $200 Planetary QHY5III715C camera: bit.ly/43glY6i David Huff's Astrobin: www.astrobin.com/users/Deep_Space_Dave/ Dylan's review of the camera: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jYrFZpdrYpqUjdk

[@KenHonour]

I have been in contact with QHL and they tell me this is only a colour camera when binned at 1x1 if you use 2x2 or 4x4 it fails and produces a strange blue colour. This should have been made clear. I shall be returning mine.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

@@KenHonour thanks for letting us know! I didn't test binning, since it's CMOS binning, which I would advise never to do in a CMOS camera anyway (better to resample in the processing software). From what you're saying, it's doing super pixel binning effectively (which should NOT be Debayered, but treated as a monochrome image). I personally prefer this approach to color binning (which reaches further away for the nearest pixel of the same color, sacrificing more resolution - I don't think it would be a good fit for this camera). But either way, I don't think the in-camera binning functionality should be used unless you have a specific reason for doing so. The exact same (and better) can be achieved in post, off camera. Good luck!

[@deep_space_dave]

Hey Cuiv! Thanks for letting people know about my AstroBin account so they can see for themselves what can be achieved when you pair tiny pixels with fast glass! I am very pleased you were able to achieve similar results with the QHY5III715C camera and I too wish QHY and other vendors would create a cooled version of some sensor that is under 2 microns so we can get more details with our shorter focal length scopes. As always awesome video and review! Clear Skies!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thanks for opening the way Dave ;)

[@HideOut55007]

@deeep_space_dave Your images are truly Amazing Dave!!

[@deep_space_dave]

@@HideOut55007 Thanks!

[@skywatcherca]

This is one of your best videos: I'm not a billionaire, so your analysis of this $200 camera - is extremely helpful. Thank you, Sir - if you have the time and resources, I really appreciate your reviews of items that are a little less costly than the best of the best, top-of-the-line equipment. I just can't afford the best of the best, (I must look to the less costly alternatives) but I still want to have a little fun, with reasonable results. Thank you. For me, to me - this video is extremely relevant.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thanks for your feedback, this is really good to hear and helpful for me! There are many planetary cameras that can be used for deep sky, and this is one of them - its tiny pixels mean it's probably best for large aperture telescopes like that 6 inch Newt!

[@bbasiaga]

Dslr imaging is for you! Can be a lot less expensive if you buy used modded camera. And there are plenty of folks getting great results.

[@DylanODonnell]

Great experiment Cuiv! I couldn't do the same with my larger FL as it didn't make sense, but it's definitely an ideal camera even then for small targets. And thanks for the shout out too :)

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Woohoo, cheers Dylan! So many possibilities with those cameras these days :-)

[@hughevans4665]

Thanks, your enthusiasm is contagious!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thank you for your support!!

[@rogergeorge2403]

You should try the ASI585MC planetary camera. The IMX585 is one of Sony's newer chips designed for better night security camera. I have used it for a year2 now and have had great results with deep sky. Also no amp glow.

[@MrCornweda]

I use a small sensor Mallincam planetary/guide camera for my Astro camera (Sony IMX 224 colour sensor). It is good for EAA and for planetary, planetary nebula, and galaxies that are not too big. I actually use it on a Nexstar 8SE on an Alt/Az mount with 10 second subs and digitally align the image. What I like is that with this image scale, the pixel size more closely matches the resolution of my telescope. This really helps to get closer to the theoretical resolution of my telescope and punch through atmospheric distortion with lucky imaging and time domain transformations (what you call convolutions). Modern software is great for eliminating noise now too. The main disadvantage is that my telescope has a long focal length and I get a very small field of view. The ring nebula is a very nice deep space object with my camera and looks as good as I have seen in any other photo. It was the first time I produced an image that looked like on the boxes of the old Celestron telescope use to show in the 70s. I am an old guy and have been amazed how modern cameras and software are revolutionizing our hobby. Unfortunately I am also saddened how light pollution and my aging eyes are seeing the glory of the night sky disappear before my eyes. I use to go to my grandmother’s house and the Milky Way was so bright it cast a shadow.

[@Tony-Elliott]

Great review Cuiv, like lots of us who are working with limited budgets it great to see what can be achieved with less expensive equipment

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Always a pleasure to try out various stuff! :-)

[@melvyndavis2745]

You and Dylan are going to totally revolutionise imaging! Thanks heaps!

[@ollieSteff]

Thanks

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Wow thank you!

[@ollieSteff]

Now worries I have learnt so much from your KZbin videos. Keep up the good work

[@ross1972]

Im shocked when you put the two photos up side by side the planetry camera looked surprisingly good. Especially on my big screen tv if I was sitting further away. Close up you can really see the noise but still its surprising how extra detail jumps out on the qhy.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Right?! I was surprised as well!

[@fazergazer]

A wonderful result with tonnes of detail! Makes a difference!❤

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thank you! Cheers!

[@IamArtimon-ui4co]

Merci Yannick! C'est chouette de voir que tu as retrouvé la banane, et que tu nous produis à nouveau plein de vidéos intéressantes... Vivement la prochaine, déjà! Stéphane.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Merci Stéphane ! Je t'avoue qu'avec la saison des pluies c'est plus difficile de produire des vidéos haha

[@Demon-tp3bs]

Thanks Cuiv, this is really interesting and thankfully agreed with what I've been working towards for some time. Using my low read noise asi178mm with my equatorial mounted 16" f4.5 with goto and tracking better than 1arcsec. I'm just doing a number on it to improve the optics including work on cooling, mirror cell, flocking, baffles, shroud, shield, blackening paint and spider so your video on the little Quattro has also helped a lot thanks. Gradually getting towards where this video is in terms of overcoming seeing, fantastic keep them coming, all your vids are great. Thanks Nick

[@nicklawson7050]

Although I appreciate it's far more over sampled...

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Oh wow that's a massive, massive scope, well done!! It will be fun to see how short exposures could work for you for lucky imaging!

[@Demon-tp3bs]

That's been my intent but similar to you Quattro getting it optically performing with all the mods is so important. I moved to nina to get access to the online plate solving so everything you do is perfect for me. Great and really really useful fantastic vids - definitely not lazy, cheers Nick

[@MartyGerman]

Why not a clip-op cooltron with heat sink like the old Meade planetary camera had?

[@ralphguppy]

Love your enthusiasm to go beyond the status quo and your critical thinking! It’s that process that makes us all think a little more and who knows what will come out of that effort!!!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thanks so much! It's definitely been fun!

[@terrymaurice6285]

Very interesting! I like it that you are always pushing the technology envelope and I especially love your enthusiasm.

[@JamesTiff]

Love this sort of content! Much more interesting than a camera review! Out of the box experimentation. Great job! You should team up with astrobiscuit?

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Hahaha Rory has already had awesome success with the BAT! I hope he ends up making it to Tenerife with his new scope :-)

[@JamesTiff]

@@CuivTheLazyGeek Yeah, but this is of the same ilk an super interesting. Especially that you're doing it with a big newt and a combination of modern tools and software. Would love to see more of this idea refined!

[@jjjscharf8059]

Very interesting experiment and useful insights relative to pixel size, focal length, under/over sampling... So much to learn! Really enjoy your content!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

It's a fun hobby - in this case many factors changed between the tests but it's still fun to see!

[@MrASquirrell]

Wow! Utterly fascinating thank you!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@qzorn4440]

Sweet little $200 camera for the hobby people. Learning to use budget tools to get great results is rewarding. 🥳 Thanks.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Exactly! And if it doesn't work out it should still be a great planetary and/or guide cam!

[@Gregg69420]

Can you do another DIY smart telescope video? I challenge you to design one on a budget of under $700! (Your videos are honestly incredible btw, I have a few telescopes and a smart one, but I like the DIY essence to it as well.)

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Honestly these days with the Seestar and the Dwarf 2, I don't think such a tutorial is needed. But it could be interesting to assemble the cheapest yet still viable fully goto astro system!

[@Rotceh-r4g]

Great video Cuiv! There's a saying: "You can't teach an old dog new tricks ...." Perhaps you can. This is a great camera for the money. I'm glad you reviewed it. Thanks.

[@billblanshan3021]

Glad you covered this topic! Thanks for your video!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thanks Bill, glad you liked it! I know I need to get back to you on the emails, I'll get to it!

[@astrotherapist]

I've been using a ZWO ASI 120 MC-S planetary camera for two years and doing Deep Sky imaging! It works great for taking photos of star clusters. Not so much for doing galaxies.

[@jonathanr2830]

Fun video! Very interesting experiment. Thank you very much!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thank you! Cheers!

[@jimwitte8785]

I just watched this video and was happy to get confirmation on a concept I "discovered" a couple of years. Working with a W.O. Z61, my first scope after using a T3i, I was frustrated at how small many DSOs were with the 360mm FL and APS-C format. My thought was, what if I went with a smaller sensor to get me more "reach" vs. cropping the larger sensor. But that only made sense to me if if the pixels were smaller as well. The 462mc fit that bill. I then bought a 678mc because it has even smaller pixels. Haven't used that much, maybe it's time to revisit that camera with shorter exposures and no dithering.

[@darkmatterastro]

Hi Cuiz, I've been using the ZWO ASI678MC planetary camera for DSOs, primarily galaxies. I've been having good results with it. The challenges I've been having are with SNR. I'm trying to make a peltier cooler for it to decrease the noise. I have been taking 1 to 2 minute subs, but you've given me a great idea with trying even shorter subs. I would love to see a cooled planetary camera myself. Thanks for the video and the great ideas!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Ohoho, it's going to be a lot of fun trying for really short exposures, enjoy!

[@davidpearce4838]

Fascinating. Excellent explanation. Thanks🙂.

[@captainfruitbatify]

Really interesting results. Gives me confidence that my fan-cooled AltAir 183C should be capable of great results on galaxies and other smaller DSOs.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Should definitely get good results!

[@mikeisss79]

This is an excellent example of how DSO imaging doesn't have to cost an arm and a leg. I started out kind of similarly, with an ASI120MC. It of course has 3.8 micron size pixels, so much larger than the new QHY but still a tiny FOV. Especially since I was using it at 1200mm focal length. I was sampling around .63 arc seconds per pixel! Even at that ridiculous scale, I managed to get some halfway decent results. However, imaging in the summer in Tucson where it's not uncommon to be in the high 90's or even 100 degrees F at 10:00 P.M. was a huge no go. Great review Cuiv 😀

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thanks Mike, and those temps are brutal!! Wow!

[@annihilator1983]

amazing, I agree, many debates about whether smaller pixels are useful with our optics, "wont see the benefit" its great that you did this test to see what difference there may be. Maybe short exposures with tiny pixels might be the way to go. And I d welcome a smaller pixel APS-C size sensor thats cooled!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Yes - It does seem to be a matter of debate, although undersampling vs oversampling is pretty clear cut!

[@ssrattus]

Interesting ideas with the small pixels. Thanks Cuiv!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

My pleasure!

[@chrisjames5223]

Oh heck yeah. I've been debating on dipping my toes into mono using my mono solar camera for deepsky. Great test

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Hey nothing to lose by trying!

[@heliczer]

Lucky imaging and a planetary cam for deep sky… Thx to you and Luke for the idea!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Out pleasure;)

[@jimnjanetriffle4496]

On a whim I purchased this 8MP one shot color. I did some 1 min @ f/2.8 images with a 50mm lens and a fringe killer filter. The filter was to help with the lens out-of-focus blue halo. Anyway, both Siril and DSS consider this as a mono camera. No color result from stacking in them.. However if I go to Maxim DL and go with X0 Y1 I get correct color conversion. This opposite the offset setting for ZWO which is X1 Y0. I couldn't tell from your M101 test comparison if you had a color image from the 715C on screen? Anyone else experienced this camera's color conversion not happening?

[@Si-fp2ij]

Great result !!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thank you!

[@robertvanvugt3371]

Great video Cuiv, I have to agree with you as I have done this myself using a un-cooled ZWO ASI290MC camera with 2.9um pixels on DSOs. It works well enough but processing is complicated due to noise removal. I used longer exposures (3-4min) so my noise levels may have been higher yet this is definitely possible to do using a budget planetary camera. I will revisit this with short exposures at some point as I never tried that but by all means using a planetary camera on DSOs does work if you spend a bit more time in processing...

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Seems the upcoming cooled 585 cameras might scratch the itch to some extent!

[@linuxastro]

Howdee, Cuiv! I've been using a planetary camera for deep space with my 10" Newtonian for quite some time now (ASI178MC). I have always thought that, though I am certainly "overly thrifty," my results were much better than they had a right to be. Thank you for the vindication. I also use a QHY183MC with my reflector. There is an old saying, "Even a blind pig occasionally finds an acorn."

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Glad to be able to offer vindication ;) hey if it works it works and that's it! Should we all say we are blind pigs? ;)

[@perry92964]

as someone who is just getting started in asro photography and doesnt have a ton of money i think a planetary camera like this would be a good choice as a starter camera

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

For a started cam, yes! Do check the 585 cooled cameras though there are some cheap versions out there!

[@my-pixels]

I am so surprised to see the kind of image quality the little camera produces. Especially compared to a cooled one. Great review with lots of details!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Yep, I was surprised as well - but it was a pleasant surprise :)

[@davidnelmsesq]

This is timed perfectly. I'm currently working on the supernova with an ASI678MC planetary camera on my 10" newt. Trying to work out the best exposures in my brief moments of sky clarity. I'm trying to use FireCapture and a 2.5x Barlow on the nova itself.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Oh wow going for a Barlow might be extreme on a 10" Newt with 2" already, but can be fun!!

[@davidnelmsesq]

@@CuivTheLazyGeek FireCapture couldn't see anything at all. I guess the exposure times aren't in range. So I gave up on that and took about 12 five minute exposures then the clouds hosed me. I must be a masochist. Wouldn't whips and chains be cheaper?

[@cjmenagh882]

Great video. Just think what the next 10 years will bring! Tiny pixels in good sized chips with high sensitivity and the storage capacity and processing power to deal with 5000 200 MB images with 2 and 3X drizzling.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

We'll see, exciting times for sure :-)

[@rtpman1953]

That's amazing, Cuiv. If QHY came out with a color version of this, I could see using it to help with detail while also including my ASI2600MM PRO, or as a stand-alone for the fun of it. Hey QHY, listen to Cuiv on this one!!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Definitely fun stuff!

[@rickbattle5706]

Very interesting. The planetary camera has some promise repurposed for DS. Great video.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thanks Rick and thanks for the support as always! And it's always fun to be testing some cheap cameras :-)

[@KurtVW]

I love it when there is "A rhyme to this madness." 😉 Is there also "A method to your reason?"😁 Another great and helpful video tho, thank you!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Hahaha I like making silly mistakes!

[@ericbonneville6837]

Good test! Can you do the test again with 10s exp on the cooled camera to remove this variable? I wonder is the difference is the seeing only

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Good idea, I'll look into it, but I would need to make sure I can do subframes otherwise I wouldn't have enough disk space for that sensor resolution!

[@rashie]

Great vid, Cuiv! Thanks!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

My pleasure!!

[@davewilton6021]

Amazing. I still think the cooled camera will yield better results overall, but there is not doubt that in terms of cost-effectiveness, bang-for-the-buck, the planetary camera is clearly ahead. It's certainly a viable contender for deep space images.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Yep, and the cooled camera will be more hassle free! But the planetary cam can be a great alternative

[@fenice319]

player one and touptek are releasing a cooled 585, that sensor is already incredible at lucky imaging uncooled, I can't imagine how well it will do with a tec cooler

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

That's going to be a lot of fun!

[@leolibbey9852]

Some great tips and ideas. I've got to give this a try with my ASI678 and my Rokinon 135mm f2 lens. I've been trying to find a combo for international travel that takes up as little space as possible. Just no room to add even a small scope. I already take that lens (and two smaller ones) with me, but using the planetary camera might allow me to image DSOs with just a little more reach with the small FoV (as opposed to simply cropping a big pixel camera like the ASI294mc pro).

[@massimogrieco5642]

HI First of all I apologize for the terrible way of expressing myself due to the google translator. I followed your video with great interest: I am a young, old amateur astronomer... that is, I am 67 years old, but only 2/3 years ago I was able to approach observational astronomy. This service of yours is appropriate because I decided, after some fairly successful attempts with the reflex, and not being exactly very rich, to get a sensor that is not exactly small and with a good resolution. Even though I had never tried it, I imagined that the use of a high detail sensor could have some advantages, and in fact for me the detail, the resolution, is one of the fundamental characteristics of a good photo, even at the cost of a little more noise. Can I ask you if in your opinion it would be applicable to a Celestron c8 with gearbox or to an apo 115/800 triplet? what do you think? Thanks and good light to you. P.S.: I write from Italy

[@cyrilt9331]

thanks for sharing such amazing and informative videos. As a beginner I'd like to buy a "budget" camera in order to experiment.

[@avt_astro206]

Great Video Cuiv! I Use a Planetary camera for deep sky imaging here! The ZWO ASI 224mc. That Qhy cam has Fantastic performance indeed, for a 200 dollar planetary cam! Some nice details on the galaxy there!

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thanks for that feedback! I was indeed surprised by the relatively good result I got, and all those details! How do you like the 224MC?

[@avt_astro206]

@@CuivTheLazyGeek I Love Them For sure. It has Very good Noise Control even at High gain. And The Sensitivity is Good too!

[@MrCornweda]

I use the colour version of the IMX 224 Sony sensor in my Mallincam usb camera and love it. Great quantum efficiency when it came out.

[@victormultanen1981]

I learned a lot from this video. Interesting to know how to calculate the optics limitation vs sensor resolution/pixel pitch.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Glad this helps spur curiosity!

[@_traubenkuchen_]

I only use planetary cams for dso lucky imaging. Work quite well with the zwo asi290

[@reglogge]

Thank you for that really good video! I personally have the ASI183MM paired with my 640mm focal length refractor and I'll never part with it! The resolution is really nice and the amp glow can be controlled with good darks :-)

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

That does sound like a great combination! I had a 183MM a long time ago and wish I hadn't parted with it!

[@guyjordan8201]

Fantastic results and very worth the effort. Do you really think that a five second exposure as possible? How about subsecond? I think trying subsecond X exposures with the current device would be very interesting.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Check out Astrobiscuit 's BAT video!! Yes 5s is possible but lower than that read noise can be an issue in most skies

[@guyjordan8201]

@@CuivTheLazyGeek - Thank you, I will

[@khoatran9804]

I can totally sympathise with the flexy wooden deck boards (I also shoot from my rooftop). With a standalone autoguider, I have to take one step at a time, slowly, and watch my Vixen AP's hand controller to know when the guiding corrections have stabilised, and make sure that the guide star hasn't been lost.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

I know the feeling! Fortunately as long as I'm not standing on the balcony, everything is fine! So I always start and manage the imaging session remotely!

[@Clown90125]

Very interesting. I bought an ASI178 based on one of your EAA videos. I think it produces better results than my cooled ASI183MC Pro on my 150P F4 Quattro.

[@ferenc-x7p]

Cuiv, I really like doing unorthodox things myself; stuff that goes against the "astrophotography dogma". I am always experimenting, especially with the partly cloudy weather that seem to dominate this summer for me, I can't seriously just go after a target in these conditions, so I just end up fiddling around with my gear too! I acquired a IMX178 MM for guiding not long ago, but sometimes I end up staring at my guider's picture on PHD2 instead of the main camera subs, because it's giving such a nice and sharp stars and I can even make out the DSO's in 3 second exposures, which is amazing! I've been thinking of sticking that guide camera in as my main and see what I can come up with! It has 2.4microns, so somewhat smaller than the 533mm pro, so I'm sooooo curious to figure out what I could get. I have to figure out whether if I could attach it to my filter wheel, now that's gonna look funny if I can pull it off! I also owned the QHY183C for a short while and yes, it was absolutely sharper and more refined images at lower focal lengths than the 533 sensor - I was using it with a 350mm doublet. The problem was the huge amp glow and noise and small welldepth, it was easy to over expose the images, but absolutely loved the sharpness of the images it made.

[@nsdhanoa]

ZWO used to make a cooled version of that camera, the ASI 178MM-Cooled, which is now discontinued. I have one and it takes very nice images.

[@setnes]

As cameras get more sensitive, the SNR advantages of large pixels will get traded away for the resolution advantages of smaller pixels. I've often thought that the calculators for optimal pixel size gets things wrong, especially for color cameras where the color noise is larger than the pixel size. Sampling beyond the optical limits of the telescope can still be advantageous. Smaller pixels = finer grained noise... there might be more of it because of the SNR trade off, but I find it easier to look at than the large blotchy noise from larger pixels.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

You're absolutely right, since the Debayering algorithm will get information from several neighboring pixels!!

[@HeavenlyBackyardAstronomy]

I would love a cooled planetary camera. I tried some DSO imaging with the Player-one Uranus C with a fan cooler and was rather amazed at the results. I think I would be more amazed if I could cool it to -10C and not worry about making dark calibration frames each night.

[@Kroller9]

Nice video, i just bought this camera! But in my opinion you missed something: the RGB matrix opens up at about 700-800nm so you get a mono nir camera with the right filter.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Good point as well!

[@sjpp71]

I would like it if camera manuf put out a tiny pixeled cooled camera as well! Im a qhy183 user and currently paired my askar 180 mini refractor to my qhy294m in 47mpixel mode (2.3micron pixels). The good is we could use small scopes to capture better detail, so I'll keep an eye out for new developments in this area. Thanks for this review, Cuiv

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

That's already such a cool setup!!

[@sjpp71]

@@CuivTheLazyGeek Thanks! I think a 1.5micron pixels camera with such a small refractor (or a red cat, or an evoguide which is also great astrograph) would still be in the good sampling area.

[@dexterisabo3137]

Great video. It kinda touched on the stage of astrophotography I'm currently stuck in. When I first got a telescope, I didn't have a real mount so I got stuck trying to do EAA with a planetary camera. Now i have an Heq5 pro but I don't have the cash to properly equip it. So now I'm currently just playing around trying to do like you're doing. Just trying all the things that the experts say won't work just to see what I can see until I get better equipment. You should do some livestacking

[@bobbryant4410]

Hi Cuiv, thanks another great video

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

My pleasure!

[@oldyoungArt]

Very interesting experiment! More $$$ is not significantly better. The s/n ratio is a problem, but can be delt with. Great video. Thanks!

[@romans9249]

Hey Cuiv, there's cooled alternative. ASI 294MM which is binned as default, however native pixel size is only 2.3um and runs at a resolution of 47mp! ZWO has released an update 2 years ago or so that alows to run the camera at its native spec on bin1 12 bit ADC.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Yes indeed! Still, I consider the 294MM to be an older sensor tech compared to the 571 generation...

[@actudoran]

this would be a great fit for your Hyperstar 😊 keep the 571 for nebulae and get into detail with 715 ...

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

I'm not sure if Hyperstar is diffraction limited though - but the cooled 585 could be good for it!

[@mandtgrant]

I have tried my Player One Uranus C on small galaxies. The chip is heatsinked, and I added the cooling fan. In winter, I could get 30 second subs without an issue. 15 second subs at 24-26 C look pretty good too. Haven't tried AI processing

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Thanks for the info!

[@drunk_astronomy]

Until I can afford to upgrade I’ve been rocking the Meade LPI-G 6 megapixel color camera, I got it off Orion’s website for $150. Plus I got it’s mono brother for $150 for my guide scope. Other than having to make sure to do good calibration, fight off pesky amp glow. I’ve been getting great results. I’m slightly under sample, but I’m amazed this 2.4 µm cam works in my evostar 72ed. it was a nice affordable way to learn how all the stuff works! lol!

[@4sapphireb]

Is not there a cooling kit for air cooled cameras? What about this on a hyperstar? Many shorter exposures.

[@peterberbee]

Thanks, I like uncooled cameras. They are lighter, smaller and use less power. I have been seen good DSO results with imx585 sensor cameras. Pixels are moderately small. Player One just announced the Uranus-C PRO a imx585 sensor with cooling. I would be interested in a cooled vs uncooled test with a 585.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

That's nice on the 585! Still 2.9um pixels - but for my FL that might actually be the sweet spot!

[@TheRealZygmo]

Cuiv. This is amazing. I have the Celestron Neximage 5 and have tried a couple of years ago (and not too extensively!) a couple of times to get deep sky images with it. Everyone kept saying it is a waste of time to use it anyway. It seems like the problem I had was the camera kept losing focus, and would shut down. I don't know if it has the tiny pixels either. Maybe I will try again and spend a little more time on it this time.

[@cizirf143]

Well done Cuiv... Breaking the rules is a way to enjoy life ! ;-)

[@OuttaControlCro]

How about player One Uranus C Pro? Cooled IMX585

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Others have mentioned it, it does look interesting!

[@OuttaControlCro]

@@CuivTheLazyGeek Well I hope you will get it for testing although I think it is not live yet! I have Svbony SV705C, that is uncooled imx585, and it is awesome sensor it is currently biggest Starvis2 sensor and big step forward if you ask me.

[@LarsBa4]

Nice video! Keep in mind that cooled cameras can cause vibrations from the fan, which can transfer to the housing or sensor.

[@jonmartin2624]

Hey Cuiv, if you ever find the time, I'd really love to see how this camera performs with hyperstar. Since setting my c8 up with hyperstar, I'd really like to just leave it in that configuration and do a simple camera swap for the smaller targets. I'd love to see actual results from the traditional celestron reducer with maybe an asi 533 (which I own) compared against this camera on the hyperstar assembly. P.s. I love these thinking outside the box videos.

[@desbarry8414]

Interesting video Cuiv, Your right both my cameras the ZWO533 and Altair 26C have 3.76 micron pixels, there isn't a cooled non amp glow alternative with small pixels. I have my ZWO178 mono that I guide with but Im gonna try some deep sky with it as its 2.4 micron pixels are the smallest I have.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Will be fun to try for sure!

[@astrogeekman]

Very cool experiment Cuiv, due to a low budget I'm using my asi462mc planet camera with the SV50370ed at 336mm on objects like the Pac-Man nebula. Results are very promising.👍

[@michaelbibby8636]

Its a method made possible by new cmos sensors on fast optics: oversampled with short exposure times for 'lucky' imaging. The 585 sensor has good QE, low noise, and 2.7um pixels, which is great between 750- 1000mm. What percentage of the subs did you throw away?

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

In the end I didn't throw any sub away manually, but just some subs had a stacking weight of 5% or so - just letting WBPP set the weight based on FWHM

[@zazoreal5536]

So the planet camera is better with it's high resolution. But it depends on a great deal of factors. I do mostly do planetary astronomy and it is good to know that I will be able to use a planetary camera for deep space objects if I feel like it.

[@richardkelsch3840]

Would there be any downside to using this camera as an autoguider for a scope in the 300-500mm focal length range?

[@andyrawlins]

I have used my ZWO ASI 224MC with M42 and M101 on my 12mm f6 Newtonian with Similar results. Orion looked amazing - quite noisy and a bit fuzzy but huge detail of a small area. I haven't done as long integrations as you but really see the possibilities - and so much easier to deal with than my full frame DSLR

[@KevinRudd-w8s]

Hi Cuiv, Another really interesting topic.I tried a similar experiment with my GPCAM224 C planetary camera last year but the results were terrible. The mistake I made I think was attempting imaging a large emission nebular (I did improve the final image considerably by combining with Ha data taken with my cooled 183 mono camera) I think that the pixel size of the 224 maybe a bit high as well. PI totally agree with your comments on the 183 sensor, I really like using mine, but the amp glow can occasionally be a pain ( using dark frames does not always totally eradicate it)

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

It was a good experiment! But yeah a 183 successor camera would be nice...

[@Lacquerhead-TX]

So what you need to do is to temperature control the planetary camera, or a cooled camera with the same or similar sensor as the 715C.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Exactly!

[@carvrodrigo]

I know that is an overkill to pair this cam with a 2000FL F10 tube, but aside from that is only the ultra-extreme oversample the issue or there is something else?

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

The extreme oversample (and going way past the Dawes limit!) would indeed be the issue :)

[@carvrodrigo]

@@CuivTheLazyGeek thanks Cuiv!! In the video you said that oversampling is not an issue, why go extreme will be?

[@azzaqmb]

Cuiv could you stack the two together I would be interested in seeing if the extra details from the QHY5III add to the deep sky camera image

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Interesting idea - I'll need to think about the best way of doing this maybe using the 715 as luminance to the 571!

[@azzaqmb]

​@@CuivTheLazyGeek if you do work out a way and more to the point if it works could you please make a video on it. I would say a lot of people who do astrophotography would have some sort of Planetary/Guide camera ok not small pixels like the QHY 715 but still smaller than Deep Space Cameras, and would have never used them for deep space imaging for luminance (possibly). Also if it dose work could you also do some percentage's as well going of the video sounds like you have 3.20hr on the 715 and 5hr on the 571, going to call that as 75% could you do say 50% and 25% ok I know the more data the better but if it dose work what would be the minimum percentage to use. Just thinking that if say 50% is the minimum allows people to work out if it is worth the time in getting that data over say the 571's data. (yes I know it will change depending on target, seeing etc..)

[@davidziegler6620]

Great video. Player One has just introduced the Uranus C Pro. Cooled IMX 585. I thought I had talked myself out of purchasing it, I have a small budget and can't afford the higher cost of most cooled camera's, but at $550, and your video showing that small pixels work well , it might be in my future. It'd be great if you could review it

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Oooh that's great to see more and more choice in the hobby!

[@jeeenyus4385]

I bought the 183c Pro for just those reasons, even knowing it was last gen tech. Having seen how well that little QHY did., I think I possibly overspent in a purely value calculation.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

The 183C Pro is still such a nice piece of kit though.. but the 585 cooled versions coming out will be awesome!

[@4ThoseAbout2RaxxWeSaluteU]

I just got this camera. Is there a focal reducer I can use with this camera? Would that help to take pictures of the moon?

[@andrewwareing7291]

Used a Mallincam planetary camera the same way.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

Awesome!

[@robertrados9965]

So glad I came across this video. I was about to buy a Touptek G3M715c which is actually the same thing as this QHY camera with sony imx 715 sensor. Do you think I would get good results shooting with tis camera and a Tecnosky 70/420 ED ?

[@ninjageezer6802]

can I ask what gain and offset you used please. I have just acquired this little camera and want to try it on my Askar fra 400 just to get a bit of zoom compared to my APS-C sized sensor.

[@skywatcherca]

Mr. Cuiv, I am ONLY interested in photographing/videoing the solar system - if you feel that there would be sufficient interest, would you please consider a video on the various cameras that YOU would suggest are best for planets. (And the sun) Thank you Sir.

[@artyombeilis9075]

These small planetary cameras that are really affordable with affordable small refactor and lightweight mount can make a great EAA rig. I myself use ASI225MC and Meade Lpi-G Advanced Mono (IMX178) with 60/400mm refactor on AZ GTi and it makes super lightweight and portable rig and this very affordable. No external power only 8xAA and Android tablet connected to camera for stacking - just grab and go rig. I captured this supernova with such a rig to realise how bright it was in comparison to the galaxy.

[@koamit]

Keen to see if you test it on C6 with hyperstar.

[@stevehanson5556]

fantastic video! Could you possibly test the ASI 120MM for Deep sky.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

I don't have it :(

[@nikanj]

What about IMX492 cameras? 2.315 micrometer pixels in the native binning mode with excellent QE and read noise. They're pretty much ideal for deep sky lucky imaging. Rising Cam make an IMX492 camera but it's not much cheaper than the ASI294MM or QHY294M.

[@jml7916]

It’s fantastic, I bought the QHY 294m and love it. As a bonus it uses cheaper 31mm filters.

[@CuivTheLazyGeek]

The 492 are interesting for sure, but I'm not ready to go back to monochrome, and that sensor does have amp glow and does require some babysitting with flats for narrowband... I'd want the same but with the 571 tech and OSC :-)

[@jml7916]

@@CuivTheLazyGeek That would be awesome, but I doubt I could afford that. I’ll take the good with the bad, for the money, the 492 is pretty awesome if only in mono.