ZWO ASI220MM Mini Guide Camera Unboxing and Overview

ZWO ASI220MM Mini Guide Camera Unboxing Video
Just got the new ZWO ASI220MM Mini guide camera, so this is an unboxing video as well as a brief overview of the camera and comparison to two other ZWO Mini guide cameras that I own, ASI290MM Mini & ASI174MM Mini, as well as some info on using it with both guide scopes and off-axis guiders (OAG).
Askar M54 OAG (Off-Axis Guider): • Askar M54 OAG (Off-Axi...
Askar OAG vs. ZWO OAG vs. Celestron OAG: • Askar M54 OAG + M54 Fi...

[@Patrick-S]

Nice video! So the 220 mini's Sensor is slightly too large for the new ZWO Oag right? What guide camera would you recommend? I currently use a 120 MC-S and would like to get a more sensitive guide camera.

[@dalehollenbaugh6084]

If you have the original ZWO OAG, made before Aug 2021, with the 5.5mm aperture, then the ASI290MM Mini is probably a bit better. If you have the newer ZWO OAG, with the oblong aperture, then the ASI220MM Mini is a good camera. The 290 has smaller pixels, so would help more for shorter focal lengths. You have a non-Mini camera, and a color one at that, so if you get a mini, get the ZWO helical focuser as well. Actually, the ASI120MM Mini will be more sensitive than your ASI120MC-S, due to the simple fact that it is monochrome and many people still use the budget guide camera very effectively.

[@Patrick-S]

@@dalehollenbaugh6084 Thank you very much for your help! I have the new ZWO OAG, so I'll probably upgrade to the ASI 220MM Mini. My telescope is the Skywatcher 150P with a focal length of 750mm.

[@wildweedle6012]

I just bought one, but now thinking the large pixel size will be a detriment. We'll see.

[@dalehollenbaugh6084]

I think the larger pixels would only matter for guiding short focal length telescopes, but as the focal length decreases, the guiding becomes less critical, so the inefficiencies don't really matter. I use it currently with my RedCat51 (250mm focal length) and a William Optics 32mm UniGuide scope (120mm focal length) and it works just fine. Actually, I've heard of people with long focal length scopes 2X binning their guide scopes to get more signal for fainter stars, so the larger pixels in this would help alleviate the need for that.

[@bencaddoo1777]

I'm thinking of buying this camera for some astrophotography, it would be my first time however doing this so do you think it would be a good choice for a camera or are there better choices out there?

[@dalehollenbaugh6084]

I would not recommend any of the ASI "Mini" cameras for astrophotography. They are best used for guiding. They are all monochrome, not color, and their form factor isn't directly compatible with a filter wheel typically used with mono cameras as well as their connection is USB 2.0 and not USB 3.0, so the speed of the camera wouldn't be good for planetary imaging where you typically want very fast speeds. It CAN be used, but I would recommend one of their color planetary cameras instead (ASI585MC, ASI678MC, ASI662MC are great choices), or a used ASI224MC, ASI385MC or ASI178MC if on a budget. That being said, I did use my ASI174MM Mini camera to take pictures of faint moons of Saturn. I was taking longer exposures than typical planetary imaging and wanted the higher sensitivity of the mono camera and wide field of view of the larger IMX174 sensor to be able to capture more moons in a single frame (got eight moons)

[@bencaddoo1777]

@@dalehollenbaugh6084 Thank you very much, I've heard people say that the ASI178MC can be used on deep space as well, do you know any more about whether that's an option or would it be worth it to eventually buy a camera meant for deep space photography?

[@dalehollenbaugh6084]

@@bencaddoo1777 The main differences between planetary cameras and deep sky object (DSO) cameras is the typical size of the sensor and whether it is cooled or not. The DSO cameras typically have thermo-electric cooling and you can set a constant cold temperature to both reduce noise as well as have a consistent noise level for your your many photos that you stack together for form an image. The cooled cameras typically cost about $300 more than the same sensor camera. The sensors also tend to be larger to capture a larger field of view. Planetary cameras are typically used to take short videos of the planets with many very short exposure images that are typically very small and very high frame rates that can be run through software to stack and create images of the planets. My favorite planetary camera is ASI585MC and it has a relatively large field of view for a planetary camera, and I have used it for DSO work, but it does have more noise than cooled camera. Another option is to use a DSLR or Mirrorless camera like a Canon/Nikon/Sony/etc. These aren't cooled, but typically have sensors that are as large as the cooled DSO cameras and can be a great way to start into astrophotography, especially if you already have one.

[@IIIRotor]

the only downside I found... it's not seen in windows as a camera, but rather an imaging device, and my tracking software does not know what to do with it, so now have to use OBS and capture the ASI software as a window, then emulate a soft-cam that I can then feed the tracker... other than that, it's damn nice...

[@JethroXP]

I doubt that's unique to this camera, but rather common to all the ZWO cameras. What tracking software are you using?

[@IIIRotor]

@@JethroXP It's a little home-writen app that I wrote to get my scope to do some ISS/satellite tracking, nothing fancy like Goto or any of that... just bare bones optical dot-location .. it sees a dot/blob and tries to keep it in the centre of the CCD...

[@JethroXP]

@@IIIRotor That's cool!

[@VolklgirlKat]

volume

[@eprohoda]

outstaanding ,wanna more followers?~ Dale.