Proof the Uncooled OSC Is Ready to Compete With Cooled Color and Mono Cameras

[@OldGirlPhotography]

One thing I love about this hobby are the options for equipment, processing and presentation. I've made some deliberate choices on all and am very happy with those choices. Part of that decision making is around the effort I wish to expend collecting and processing images. Some love the task of getting every pixel "right", whereas I'm just looking for that pretty picture with a modest element of scientific reality.

[@julianpinol1572]

Totally agree. I am satisfied with my AZ-GTI with EQ firmware, TS Optics 60 Photoline (FPL53) and my Nikon D7500. I'm going to make the jump to OSC and without a doubt my camera is the Uranus -C, although due to the price difference I'm going to buy the PRO, in summer the nights are very warm in my area. There is a lot of good talk here about the 1" square IMX533 sensor, although in my sky (Bortle 3-4) due to the pixel size Uranus is better suited. Camera is also very valid for planetary.

[@Artsmitica]

Outstanding.

[@mashpotatomountainobserver3338]

Completely agree. Using the Uranus C with the cooling attachment like yours myself and it's been amazing views paired with the Tri band IDAS D3 filter which blocks LED lighting. So glad I didn't spend a ton of money on those other more expensive cameras with amp glow and oil leaks. Great video.

[@SKYST0RY]

Glad you enjoyed it! I would like to get a camera with more megapixels but with the way the tech is developing, it's pretty obvious that for photographic purposes the old cooling and narrowband methodologies are about to become past-tense. I'm sure they will have applications long into the future for scientific purposes, but unlikely for ordinary photography. The new OSCs are so incredible, and Player One has done an incredible job developing technology to eliminate amp glow, dead pixels and resist thermal noise. What thermal noise does show up in the initial stacked image is easily and quickly removed in color calibration and a quick noise removal process.

[@KJRitch]

The Uranus C is a 585 sensor. I have the ZW0 version. I have a C8 SCT and the small sensor I can only use it for small targets. I did try it on M27 6 months ago when I was first starting out with an ASIAir. Since then I’ve added an ASI071MC Pro and a Starizona focal reducer, Celestron OAG, filter drawer. This combination gives me a wider view but not as much as your rig. I’ve been concentrating on galaxies but your videos on using a duo band narrow band filter has me thinking of trying one of these filters. Do you just take your lights with only the duo band filter?

[@SKYST0RY]

A weather control scope!

[@anthonygondola3086]

I own both a 585MC and a cooled 585MC Pro by ZWO. The uncooled version was great in the winter but fails in the heat of an Oklahoma summer. The thermal noise just makes it almost impossible to use for deep sky imaging. The uncooled version is a great camera but it has it's limits and really isn't a substitute for a cooled unit.

[@SKYST0RY]

Probably true in a much hotter region like yours. Nights here in Canada are rarely warmer than 18C, though I've used mine on a few nights up to 25C and gotten good results.

[@bakerfx4968]

Now we just need suggestions for a inexpensive scope and we’ll be good to go haha

[@SKYST0RY]

Svbony 550 is a good APO, or spend a bit more for FPL-53 glass and get a Williams Optics ZenithStar.

[@davidkennedy3050]

A Sharpstar 61.

[@rschellie]

I was watching is video and I am getting ready to purchase a dedicated Astro camera. I am considering ZWO ASI533MM and this video brings up the issue of whether to get a cooled or uncooled camera. If I take the normal calibration photos (bias, darks and flats), how much advantage will the cooled camera have over the uncooled camera with calibration shots included? Can post processing eliminate the difference?

[@SKYST0RY]

The cooled camera will have a little advantage, especially if you live in a hotter region. We had a really hot night (for us in Canada, anyway) of about 29C, and there was a little heat noise in the image, but you had to zoom in to see it. But we do seem to be moving into an era where it matters less. Calibration friends are still necessary. I only use bias and flat frames with modern sensors. I haven't found any real need for dark frames. Cuiv did an assessment on dark frames in a video (I think from earlier in the year) and found the noise they address is so minimal in modern sensors he felt it wasn't worth the effort. That's an opinion I agree with.

[@chrislee8886]

Great video! Perhaps at some point you might review your approach but using James Ritson’s free Affinity Photo Astrophotography suite as an alternative to some of the need for any Pixinsight kit? Like you i use Siril and Affinity Photo.👍

[@SKYST0RY]

I am not a huge fan of PixInsight. I don't dislike it, either. Though, I can say the only reason I bought PI was so I could use the RC Astro tools. Nothing else really compares to what those tools can pull off.

[@chrislee8886]

@@SKYST0RY of course you can use RC-Astro in Affinity (i do) bit sadly not BlurXterminator. Not prepared to stump up the cost of PI just for this one app

[@baz_astra]

Which one is better? The mono narrowband one is significantly better in every way.

[@SKYST0RY]

This video isn't really about which is better, but you should probably watch the next video and read a few of the scientific papers on assessing the merits of either before standing too firmly on that position, too.

[@davidkennedy3050]

@@SKYST0RY I guess you mistyped the title of this video... The one where you mentioned "compete".

[@Top-Code]

Using ai is controverial, because there are plenty of ai denoise or deblur programs that will make up stuff(cough cough samsung cough cough), and there is risk of over fitting and all that. But a well made, properly trained ai wont create new data, and wont cause many issues.

[@SKYST0RY]

Absolutely. It would be easy to use CGI and AI simply to bypass making an image altogether, if one wanted. The trick is having the AI learn to recognize what is there and denoise or deblur constructively, as in deconvoluting objects, without adding detail. An important trick to keep an image true to its source.