 #...
·
1
like
|
|---|
| That's it--I am done with this piece of crap camera. ZWO should be ashamed to sell it and should be liable for misinforming thousands of people. I do get the lousy diffraction pattern at short focal length. I can't image IC-443 because the sensor sucks? Come on. I can't even sell it--who the hell wants to buy a piece of garbage like this. I am really pissed. Its about time the camera is pulled off the market or it should come with HUGE disclaimers about its shortcoming. People should get a refund. I feel conned. |
 #... |
|---|
| I feel your pain Rodd, this is really the biggest downfall of this camera. Value/cost ratio makes it so desired, one can get decent images with it, but of course, for sure not the best. When my bank account is a bit higher again I will look for a new one as well! |
#... |
|---|
Uwe Deutermann: Everything is falling apart. Something is wrong with the FSQ-the stars are terrible, I get horrible halos with my blue filter, and the camera sucks due to diffraction patterns. I really think they should pull the camera from the market. In my opinion it is unusable. I can make it to the grocery store by pushing my car, but that is not how it is supposed to work! |
9.53
#... |
|---|
| I agree with you Rodd. Did you recently get the camera? You would think you could return it if that's the case. I returned the ZWO 294 c a couple of years ago because of a contaminated sensor window. |
#...
·
1
like
|
|---|
Elmiko: It has been too long......I have lived with it. I have not had good customer service from ZWO. The filter wheel was not aligning properly and they were no help. Besides, they don't think there is anything wrong with the camera because it is" up to spec". Even Takahashi said the same thing. I sent some subs of my atrocious stars to the optician in Japan (through my vender Tak America) and all they said was "it is up to spec" when the stars were obviously impaired. I added a 1mm spacer ring to the system and the stars did not change. I really think there is something wrong with the scope. I suppose it could be tilt--but I have no idea how to even assess that. Besides--I am using a small sensor--not even APS-C. The scope is designed for full frame sensors. No way. |
0.90
#...
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
I feel your pain Rodd, it's a deeply flawed sensor which is why I sold mine. Bright stars are terribly ugly. To be fair Qhy, Atik and others use the sensor too so we shouldn't blame Zwo for this. I will add though that the camera had been released for quite a while before you bought yours and the flaws were well highlighted on SGL by me and others. The microlensing is also more pronounced in some systems, I didn't get it with my Tak Epsilon 130 or my WO Star 71 for example. I don't understand why you say you can't sell it, I sold mine and they sell on SGL all the time. You may however take a hit with the release of the mono Imx571. Regards, Richard. |
#...
·
1
like
|
|---|
I feel your pain Rodd, it's a deeply flawed sensor which is why I sold mine. Bright stars are terribly ugly. Well--it happens on some systems but not others--do you know how much research I do before I buy anything---weeks, months. And usually everyone has there own opinion. In the end, it doesn't help. You just don't know until you try. And to be fair--this camera was touted heavily as being better than the KAF 8300--that's all I heard about--direct comparisons between the ASI 1600 and KAF 8300--not the other cameras. they may use the sensor, but the ASI 1600 was like the birth of the savior. I bought my camera just after they came out with the pro model--micro lensing was not hinted at from anyone I talked too, which included several vendors and many people on the forums. All I heard was ...the ASI 1600 is better than the STT-8300. Chart after chart, graph after graph. I don't know if those other cameras throw the same diffraction patterns. If they do, maybe thats why you don't hear much about those models. Part of why I won't sell it is the fact that I honestly believe it is unusable--and it seems to be worsening somehow. I paid $1,200 for it because I did not need the filters. What could I possibly get for it $400? maybe. and the time it would take. I need the money immediately so I can replace it. I'd rather take a 5 pound sledge to it for the satisfaction. What makes matters worse is you often can't tell the diffraction pattern is there until you stack and stretch your data. I wasted 3 hours last night thinking I was getting good data on IC-443--in the field the subs look good. When i stacked and integrated them I realized it was all unusable because of the diffraction. pattern. |
|
9.53
#... |
|---|
| Hey Rodd. I get the same ugly stars when I use the L-Extreme filter. Especially on bright blue stars, big ugly halos. It's a PIA. I fix them in post processing. It's a shame but can be somewhat fixed. |
#...
·
1
like
|
|---|
Elmiko: I don't use PS--just PI. No way to fix them really. i can reduce them--but it causes other issues. Besides-its the diffraction pattern--not halos that are the problem. I am getting halos with the blue filter--but that is a separate problem I am trying to work out with Astrodon. I am done with it. It goes into the trash bin as soon as I find a suitable replacement. Actually--I might use it for lunar imaging with the C11Edge-- |
2.94
#... |
|---|
|
Very funny, i don't have FSQ or any Takahashi telescope not even Tele Vue, and i don't have Astrodon LRGB filters or even from Chroma [i have narrowbanding filters from them], and i only got ASI1600MM last year while i already have QHY163M since i started in 2017 and it is same sensor as ASI1600mm, i can't give up those cameras at all, and i saw amazing and even many IOTD here from this camera with many different scopes, so i don't know why you just giving up now with issues. Last time i was test this ASI1600mm on 3 targets, it was last year, one of those targets is HorseHead Nebula, it was only Ha filter and no colors and i was using an achromatic scope with generic reducer, i liked the result although it is a simple one not good processed, i did see much ugly star by Al-Nitak the most enemy star for DSO imagers, but maybe i didn't make more filters to judge, it could be in blue that has that halo or diffraction pattern for example? The bottom line is, since 2017 i keep enjoying results from ASI1600mm from others, and that is why i bought it last year when i found an offer for it, i didn't think about it being outdated or even has bad sensor, i was happy with my QHY163M regardless of issues, and i am still learning and a beginner, looking at your gallery i just wish to have results like yours with ASI1600MM, so when someone just giving up a nice camera for his own personal experience i just feel like it is either his own skills/processing or he got a bad copy of camera and it is not necessary bad copies to all others, and i agree that this camera sensor isn't any special or amazing, that is why they made new camera to overcome it, but it doesn't mean all of people must give up this camera or never buy it if it is still around with good offers. |
#... |
|---|
Tareq Abdulla: It cant be processing. The diffraction pattern appears before any processing is done. I did not have this issue with the STT-8300. Not at all. The whole reason I got it is because it was supposed to be superior to the STT-8300 (KAF 8300 sensor). I refute that (now after 2 years using it). It is possible I got a bad model--but then ZWO should have replaced it. instead, they don't even return my emails. If someone needs great processing skills to overcome a sensor deficiency....that sensor is not for me. You may like it and use it....that is up to you. There are too many other things in this hobby to overcome....I do not need images being ruined because of a sensor deficiency. If I was a millionaire I would be happy to replace poorly designed gear with new gear designed to replace them--like the new ZWO cameras. they even say in the advertisement that there are no ugly diffraction patterns like the ASI 1600. As for me...I would never recommend this camera to anyone without letting them know that they will not be able to image some targets due to the diffraction pattern (unless they can overlook them). the fact that some get it and some don't makes it even worse, because one never knows and must use trial and error. This hobby is too expensive for trial and error |
11.91
#... |
|---|
|
I own that camera and the sensor from a noise and resolution standpoint is certainly superior to the KAF8300. The lack of an AR coating on that sensor is a huge drawback. My images of the Horsehead and IC443 and even the California Nebula have suffered because of it. It just can't handle bright stars, and I ended up using a DSLR for an M45 image I am working on. The diffraction issue is even seen on the bright stars around M42. When it came out, there was nothing comparable, so we had to live with it. I don't believe ZWO had many other mono sensors to pick from; it did bring AP to the masses so to speak. Now there are other, better options - better in noise, QE, FWC, and have an AR coating. ZWO's support and QC has certainly gone down with their success. I've had some filter/camera issues I've had to deal with as well. |
|
2.94
#... |
|---|
|
A general statement or judgement sometimes isn't good either, i mean i did read comments in groups or sites or forums of members cursing or giving up a certain model of cameras, be it new or old, i remember someone gave up QHY163M and then many members defended that camera, and he answered the same as you, he is not interested to keep using a camera that he has defective issues with it, and he definitely doesn't care about others experiences, this is understandable, but it is not good if i come say "Oh no, this camera is a s..t, please people, stay away from it", let people decide, let them know why or if that is a common or a fact thing of the camera, and with bad service from a manufacturer this is beyond my advice. I have QHY294M, a good replacement of ASI1600MM and a mono version of QHY/ASI294CM, and you know what, in forums many are just talking and showing about many issues of this camera already, in both manufacturers, and even some are giving up already, they don't want to wait or see if that can be fixed, so there is no another option anyway, they brought this camera to be a better replacement or upgrade of that Panasonic 4/3" sensor, and yet it has issues also, we can think about that it is in a "Beta" stage now, i bought it and i can't return it, so if they have a newer version of it with fixed issues, i can't sell my Beta or return, means i must live with it, same scenario i can see with yours, i don't force or ask you to just live with it, but i can't just tell people please stop buying this new camera 294 mono because it has issues, some might not have those issues and then they will be happy, or there will be a fix later either to same camera by firmware/drivers or by sending it back later to manufacturer if they find a way to fix. For now i am happy with ASI1600MM, your post making me to think about issues now more than how it performs, and if i think about selling it then i must tell others who want to buy about issues you talk about it or i think about, sure you will tell me it is my own decision, but this decision is based on someone else experience also. |
#... |
|---|
I own that camera and the sensor from a noise and resolution standpoint is certainly superior to the KAF8300. The lack of an AR coating on that sensor is a huge drawback. My images of the Horsehead and IC443 and even the California Nebula have suffered because of it. It just can't handle bright stars, and I ended up using a DSLR for an M45 image I am working on. The diffraction issue is even seen on the bright stars around M42. They really have not come up with anything yet with the same size or larger sensor--The ASI 2600 is yet to come out in mono. The 6200 requires 2" filters--so the cost between camera, filter wheel and filters (for good ones) will be close to $8,000. And I may not be able to use my 36mm filters with the 2600 due to the 10 mm tilt plate. On paper the sensor may be better in some ways--but those differences are not noticeable in a completed image. being 12 bit doesn't help. Cooling was better on the STT-8300, filter wheel accuracy was better (for flats), and I NEVER got the diffraction pattern. I'll take a little more noise any day. I don't see a difference--I need 30 hours of data with both, background sucks with both, I don't see the benefit of the asi 1600. And its not only bright stars--its 5th magnitude and brighter stars (for me)--that is a lot of targets that will be impacted. If it wasn't for the fact that I can't use the STT-8300 and self guiding filter wheel on the FSQ with .6x reducer (back focus issues), I would not be using teh ASI 1600. |
#...
·
1
like
|
|---|
Tareq Abdulla: *That's my point--I was not given the choice. ZWO should have disclosed the issue. I bought my camera long before the diffraction pattern was common knowledge. One can't be expected to read EVERY post. I asked numerable people, did the research, talked to vendors. What more can one do? I researched the heck out of it. Started multiple forum posts inquiring. If I had known--I would not have bought the camera. For me--the diffraction patterns are so bad its a deal killer. |
|
2.94
#... |
|---|
Rodd Dryfoos: From your research, did you know about that diffraction patterns before you buy the camera or after? And did it appears from the beginning when you bought the camera or later? I asked because i didn't hear about it before, if i knew it has that then i won't buy the camera either, but this is the first time i hear about it, in fact the only thing i hear about it with brightest stars is what is called "Microlensing", if that is what you are talking about then yes, it is a characteristics of this Panasonic camera, not with with ZWO alone, but also QHY and maybe Atik, it is Panasonic sensor, and for this i really don't care about it, i bought it regarding of this issue, so if it is this issue you are talking about then it is subjective, i can live with that, if it is another issue then i must use my cameras more and then see, but with many results i posted either mono or very few colors no one pointed out to this diffraction patterns, but they all know about that Microlensing issue and many are ok, and many others hate it and replace it. So now what, will you use a new camera of same sensor size newer one it doesn't have diffraction patterns with bright stars but it has amp glow and it has banding with calibration subs, is that fine for you then? or just go with more expensive camera? I am also not rich, i wish to go with larger sensors cameras or better, i only have those three mono small sensors camera, no CCD, means i have no choice myself, and definitely i can't sell them all and save more to afford another, so i will survive with what i have now. It is bad if you have been ignored for service, it is not helpful, not respectful, ZWO or whomever should follow customers, i heard many are complaining about ZWO customer services, but some others are happy with them, i have a seller i bought my QHY163M from, he can help me really if i need any service, so i am not worry about QHY service, and about ZWO, all what i can do is i try to use their cameras for the best i can combined with another cameras so it will minimize or hide issues, i recall that this pattern isn't with all scopes or filters, so very easy for me then is to use the filter or scope that will hide that pattern with this camera and i stop complaining, if that is not the case with yours or can't do it then yes, you should just get rid of this camera, but good your brought this topic, it is just bothered me when you started by saying this camera should vanish or stopped in market, why so, if some can live happy with it then let it be, you even didn't give people the choice and just wanted this camera to be out of stock and production yourself. |
#... |
|---|
Tareq Abdulla: *Of course I did not know...that's my point. I bought this camera before anyone really knew. And this camera has amp glow too--but amp glow calibrates out so its not an issue. Yes--defective pixels, if they are many, is a deal killer too. I have not had that issue. When I bought this camera, not one person mention microlensing (I think their diffraction patterns but we are talking about the same thing). No one mentioned it. Not one vendor, not one "friend" I asked for opinions, not one article that compared the KAF to the 8300. Manufacturers should disclose things about their camera. They are quick to point ot the QE efficiency and full well depth and sensor size, blah, blah, blah. But not the negative things. I'll spend 25 hours collecting data only to find the image is ruined from this? Really--you are OK with this? I am after the best possible image that can be made considering my sky. this microlensing pattern ruins images. maybe you can overlook them in an image--I can not. I am glad you are happy with the camera--You can have mine if you want it. |
|
11.91
#... |
|---|
| ZWO is not Canon, Sony or Nikon. They don’t do a whole lot of rigorous beta testing before releasing cameras. That’s why you hear issues about filters, tilt, micro lensing, dew etc ad nauseam. Your best protection is to wait a year or so for issues to be ironed out before buying a new camera. Sad but true. |
|
2.94
#... |
|---|
Rodd Dryfoos: In my case i knew about it and yet i bought it, so i assume that you bought it very very long time ago when no one expected it, that is understandable, but if you bought it like 1-3 years ago then it is your fault, i knew about this issue since 2017, i didn't know when i bought my QHY163M and i was ok about it, but it didn't stop me from getting ASI1600 anyway, and i am fine, if i don't see this issue with mine or barely it is there then why should i complain? What do you say about those IOTD, if that pattern is a basic there with this camera, then those shouldn't be chosen from this camera: Search - AstroBin To my eyes i feel i see this pattern more with refractors than with reflectors, i can't confirm it anywhere, and i got enough discussions about this issue from this camera already, and yet people are still buying it around, i think ZWO will stop it sooner or later as they did with some cameras, but for now it is still one of their top best selling camera around, i swear i did read someone bought this camera and happy with the pattern, but i am sure me and those people aren't of high level and pro type of astro imagers, we don't use high end scopes or mounts or filters, so i can understand the frustration from some with high end gear, it is not acceptable. |
#... |
|---|
ZWO is not Canon, Sony or Nikon. They don’t do a whole lot of rigorous beta testing before releasing cameras. That’s why you hear issues about filters, tilt, micro lens if, dew etc ad nauseam. Your best protection is to wait a year or so for issues to be ironed out before buying a new camera. Sad but true. *Good advise...wish i knew. Now I am backed into a corner. If I use my STT-8300 I can't use the .6x reducer--which is the whole reason I got the asi 1600. I do not have a huge interest in using the FSQ at F5 (native) with these small sensors. Getting a camera is a huge PITA--especially when no-one can answer my questions. Tak America does not carry ZWO. OPT is too busy to return calls (so I have to buy blind). Tolga wont tell me what spacer I need unless I buy the scope from him. I just want to take pictures! (good one!). I can't afford a mistake |
|
2.94
#... |
|---|
ZWO is not Canon, Sony or Nikon. They don’t do a whole lot of rigorous beta testing before releasing cameras. That’s why you hear issues about filters, tilt, micro lensing, dew etc ad nauseam. Your best protection is to wait a year or so for issues to be ironed out before buying a new camera. Sad but true. Better to say "True but we are sad"   |
#... |
|---|
|
Sad but true is the phrase, though. Kind of like when someone does something really stupid and you stand there and shake your head and say "sad". You are not saying you are sad, necessarily. You are saying "it is a sad thing that you are such a fool" A nice way to get away from all things ASI 1600!!! |
|
2.94
#... |
|---|
Rodd Dryfoos: Your only solution for now it to try squeeze this camera with whatever you have, can you test it with another scopes? can you test others ASI1600mm? Can you try using different filters if you have? I doubt you really have to use different filters than what you have from Astrodon, but maybe it could be the filters somehow, or better you keep calling and messaging ZWO no matter how long they take to answer you, post your message on forums or Facebook ZWO page also, you just can't sit crying and only thinking about getting rid of this camera as soon as possible, i know you tried all solutions, but try one more time, if this issue id there long time ago then people won't buy this camera anymore in last 2-3 years and also ZWO will take it back out of production or selling, but that didn't happen, means it is still going or people found ways, and some just don't mind extra time of processing or modifying somehow, i kept using my ST80 an achro scope until now as it is the only refractor i have, sometimes this is the way of doing this, and i really don't mind if you throw this camera to garbage, i won't buy it from you because i have one already, you want to get rid of it at much cheaper than half price then maybe me or people will be interested, i have a brand New Polemaster and i failed to sell it anyway at good price very close to new but less. |
|
2.94
#... |
|---|
Rodd Dryfoos: Good thing is that i am Arabic, so i don't understand most phrases Later i will test my ASI1600 with my Newt and see if that any different, i will try with my high end NB filters, still i don't have high end LRGB filters, and not sure which one to buy to replace my current one or just have new one next to my NB filters [i borrowed my LRGB filters from my planetary setup actually, so i still don't have LRGB set for DSO with my ASI1600mm or 1.25" NB filters, i have for my QHY camera at 36mm but not high end either]. I will test this camera with my Mak, on something bright such as Al Nitak, and see if i can see the issue, so here what i want to ask, if i didn't see issues, will that make any difference for you anyway with your camera? |
|
0.90
#...
·
1
like
|
|---|
 This was taken by me in 2016, about 2 years before you got yours. To be fair the issue was a well known one. Obviously you missed it when doing your research. That's one seriously ugly star  |
