Yes - it's the cocoon nebula again!
I recently bought a ZWO 2600MM and was curious: Would the very impressive specs of this camera show in the field? What difference would I find between the quite common and widely appreciated ZWO 1600MM and the new 2600MM.I must say, the raw stacked R,G,B and Ha are very clean and I nearly felt like uploading the unprocessed RGB. In addition the calibration was just as easy and the camera seems just a well behaved as the 1600MM.
In order though, to compare two processed images I went ahead and tried to process my 2600MM data in a similar manner as the previous image with the 1600MM. As you probably can tell – it’s similar but also there are some differences. Anyway, you get the idea.
I, for my part, think the results are quite close and you’ll have to look in detail to see the advantages with the 2600MM. For instance, the stars are a bit more under control with the larger full well depth.
One could argue, the main difference is in the processing. As we know, results vary from time to time.
Your welcome to compare the two results. Here is the link to the image taken with the 1600MM (
https://www.astrobin.com/4dix4f/)
What do you think? Let me know in the comments!
Also I’m thinking about combining the data from the two cameras – what are your experiences with combining data from two different cameras in Pixinsight?
Comments