 #...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Joe Linington: Joe. The OSC and mono each have their strengths and weaknesses and indeed that is why I held on to my OSC when I bought the mono camera. The OSC does a fine job on RGB (especially with Bayer CFA 1X drizzle) and is more convenient for quick set up short window imaging of broadband objects like star clusters and galaxies - and especially under UK conditions where it is often a case of accumulating images over short windows of opportunity over many nights. It is also much more fun for simple EEA observational astronomy ! There is a mono/ osc cost difference but I don't agree that it is huge relative to the overall costs of everything - mount, telescope, software etc. The 294 MM costs about £500 more than the MC and then maybe another £500 for a set of NB and colour filters (depending on quality). But set against that is a fairly similar sum that you might pay for a pair of O3/ SII and O3/ HA dual band filters? The OSC system plus dual band filters can work for NB but it really is slower - 4X slower in fact as far as the SII and HA components go and if either of these are the limiting band for your particular targeted image (SII ususally is) then there is no way around that. Furthermore in addition to its better performance on NB the mono camera also brings a lot else for that £500. In the case of the 294 MM not only does it give you the facility to add luminance - which can make images sharper - but you can also unlock the 4.63 um pixels down to 2.315 um and so alter the image scale which can be useful for lucky imaging of brighter objects. I agree that it is important not to be negative -- but it is also important to be accurate - and part of the purpose of these threads is to provide good impartial advice to folk who are just setting up and purchasing their systems. Personally - on that score - I would definitely go with NB and a mono camera -- ideally backed up with an OSC camera as well. But of course buyer confirmation bias is also a fact of psychology -- so I would say that wouldn't I :-) Tim |
#...
·
|
|---|
Arun H: I enjoyed doing it and find that the practical demonstration helps crystallise my own understanding. I once even imaged the galaxies in the Coma cluster using an SII filter just for the satisfaction of seeing the H-alpha in a couple of active galaxies - not that I was really questioning either that the galaxies are 350 Mly away or that the Universe is expanding - but it was just nice to see it in reality :-) |
3.87
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Tim Hawkes:Joe Linington: I would likely go Mono plus an OSC too but my confirmation bias comes from someone on a super tight budget using used mirrorless cameras that cost me $300. My whole V1 rig was $2000 or less. From that POV, mono is EXPENSIVE and I do my best with what I have. I planned to buy 2 cooled cameras but inflation has been crushing and I chose a better filter and mount first. If I find a used 1600mm or 183mm package with filters I may scrape the pennies together but even those humble cameras are catching crazy dollars used. So I guess my position from my confirmation POV is of course mono is better, but great things can be done with OSC and patience so don’t let it stop you. |
11.91
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
I also own an OSC and a mono and use them both. I'll use the OSC for RGB data when I travel to a dark site. It is convenient, and at that site better than mono. It has the benefit that I have a full set of data at all times if my session is cut short. Yes, it is very cloudy here. I will them supplement that data with mono luminance. Here is an example image: https://astrob.in/araagr/ When shooting from home (Bortle 6), I'll use the mono at all times. Both are capable and both have limits and are solutions to different constrained optimization problems. It is best to understand both in their entirety to make the choice that's best for you. FWIW, I don't judge people for their choices. I am mainly interested in the physics. |
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Joe Linington: Yes of course. It is not about ever more gear and there is a great deal of satisfaction in getting the best out of what you actually have. I spent an enjoyable year or so just working with my pre-existing goto dobsonian and the then new OSC camera exploring how to optimise that set up. |
2.94
#...
·
|
|---|
|
Ok, a question then Which of the following cases or ideas would you prefer? A. Two OSC cameras [one with dual band for Ha + OIII and one for RGB stars] + one mono camera [With SII and Lum] B. Two mono cameras [one with Ha and OIII and one for SII and Lum] + one OSC camera [for RGB stars or targets colors] C. One mono and one OSC of big sensor + one mono and one OSC of smaller sensor, the big ones for Ha and Lum and RGB details, smaller for OIII/SII and RGB stars. |
11.14
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| https://xkcd.com/1445/ Sorry but I couldn't resist  Gathering data from multiple setups will lead to exponentially more possible pre/post processing workflow paths. The cloudy nights time of the entire universe won't be enough to explore all of them!  |
|
11.91
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Die Launische Diva: Well said. We tend to think that if only we had camera X or camera Y or some combination of them, we would be punching out IOTDs by the dozen. It is rarely that simple. Maximize the use of what you have, understand where it and your limits are, and what you want to buy next will become obvious. Often, you may conclude that you don't need to buy anything. |
