ccd camera help

Well the time has come to buy a ccd camera for ones observatory i know witch camera to buy the atik 16hr. the problem is do i buy the 16hr colour
or the 16hr with filters and filter wheel.as you all know im new to astro photography with the help of my mentor mr david grennan i got some fine images on webtreatz.com.

Personally, I'd get a monochrome camera and forget the filters. Colour images require faaar too much work in my view and monochrome looks fine to me. Monochrome cameras are usually far more sensitive than colour ones.
Just my 2cent.

Carl - its a tricky choice.

One-shot colour CCD's give you a colour imager in, err, one shot. The advantage of that of course is you don't have to fiddle about with filters or do a lot of post-processing. The disadvantage is really down to the CCD chip iteslf. Pixel per pixel, a colour chip will be less sensitive/lower resolution than a mono chip. What that means is your one-shot colour image will not be as detailed as the same image taken with a mono chip. There may also need to be a little post processing to get the colour balance right. There are other disadvantages but too technical to go into here.

Mono chips on the other hand don't suffer these problems. However, in order to take colour images you must use filters and by definition, a filter wheel. The filters themselves can be expensive for the quality ones as can the filter wheel. Filter wheels can go wrong so can be another headache to deal with. To take a colour image, you shoot through each filter (RGB) and take a luminance shot (no filter or a clear filter). So you need four images to get a colour image. Four times as long as a one-shot colour. But it doesn;t end there. For each shot, you'll likely have to refocus. Also, you'll need to do a good bit of post processing to layer you four images to get a good colour rendition.

These are just some of the issues you'll need to consider. I don't know what the price difference would be so that could be another issue you'd consider.

Personally, I would always go with a mono chip but my primary goal is science. You goal might be different and a one-shot colour might suit you far better.

Best of luck with your choice.

Dave

Carl - Michael has another point I really didn't consider.

With a mono CCD of course you can only take mono images. But mono images can look just as cool as colour ones.

And of course, when you have mastered astrophotography with your mono chip, you can then invest in the filters and the wheel.

Make no mistake, astrophotography is a very steep learning curve. You should carefully think about what you want to do (what you'd like to image and why), research the equipment you will need then go and buy it.

The most important item you need to buy is a mount. With the best CCD in the world for a ton of money, if it sits on a so-so mount, you will only get so-so images.

Have a look at this for a bit more info:
www.astroshack.net/downloads.php
See the beginner's guide

Another €0.02

Dave

I've been trying to talk Carl into getting the colour version, here's the reasons why I think the colour version is best for Carl.

I know Carls wants to see colour images. Carl is a complete beginner to deep sky astrophotography. Now we all know that DS photography can be an utter nightmare for beginners and even experienced people for that matter!! There's enough to be worrying about (guiding, focus, framing etc etc etc) without having to introduce the complication of filter wheels, and the associated quadrupling of the workload (capture and processing).

This leads me to another point, I have the mono version of the Atik 16HR, only once since I got it have I managed to get a complete LRGB set, most nights I either run out of time or the cloud rolls in.

As mentioned the colour version is less sensitive but that can be compensated for by a longer exposure. Agreed resolution suffers too, but lets face it, the seeing in this country rarely permits the theoretical resolution limit of a setup to be acheived anyway.

Then there is another point, Carl lives very close to me and is a very good friend. I have the mono version, so it carl fancies having a crack at LRGB imaging we can always swap cameras for a bit anyway.

What I'm saying in short is that on paper the mono camera will always win but in practice it can be a completely different matter.

Dave - well put.

The key decisions in choosing a CCD imager are, at least initially, nothing to do with money.

The prospective imager really needs to think long and hard about what they want to do and how much punishment they are prepared to put up with.

If you want to take reasonable pretty pictures with a minimum of fuss then go for a one-shot colour imager, couple it to a short focal length OTA and concentrate on the brighter deep-sky objects. This will give you quick colour images that won't tax your mount and will be of reasonable cost.

If you want to take drop-dead colour images of small faint deep sky objects (nebulosity etc) prepare to invest a substantial sum in mount, OTA and CCD imager. There are good one-shot CCD's out there that will give you the quality but you'll pay hansdomely.

You can up the quality further by going the mono route and investing even more dosh in filters and wheels. But your mount and OTA are going to have to be top quality.

When you add in the software required and learning all about FWHM, PSF's and so on, you are entering the realms of significant time and money investment.

I decided a good few years back that I was going to concentrate my efforts on science but I still wanted to take the odd shot I could hang on the wall. When I made this goal, my decisions became a little easier (but not easy!).

The first purchase was the mount - that was a no-brainer. The DSI was my first imager purchase - not because it would achieve my goals but I really had to learn the ropes. I could have spent 10 times the amount on a better imager but I know I would have quickly become swamped with the technolgy and techniques and probably given up.

Along the journey I have learned so much, but more importantly, realised precisely what equipment I need to purchase next to move along rather than taking guesses in the dark.

Clearly, the setup I have now has enabled me to contribute scientifically and produce the odd picture I really like. But I know what kit I need to get in order to expand my horizons further and start achieving more of my goals.

I think that the best advice I could give to anyone starting off in astrophotography is to:

1. Set goals
2. Read as much as possible about the subject matter
3. Start with a small reasonably priced setup and build your way up
4. Prepare for the long-haul - you won't get quick results

As far as Carl's situation goes, your decision logic is sound and he's lucky to have a very knowledgeable neighbour willing to help out.

Dave