New Camera QHY5 178
-
- The Sun?
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2016 6:46 am
New Camera QHY5 178
Hi all, I have LUNT 152 and an 127mm APO awarded by CBSAP. I have been using DMK21 (old version) for years. Now is the time to upgrade the camera. This one seems really nice. What are your thoughts about it.
http://www.qhyccd.com/QHY5III.html
https://www.telescopi-artesky.it/qhy-cc ... usb-3.html
http://www.qhyccd.com/QHY5III.html
https://www.telescopi-artesky.it/qhy-cc ... usb-3.html
- Montana
- Librarian
- Posts: 34722
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:25 pm
- Location: Cheshire, UK
- Has thanked: 17974 times
- Been thanked: 8907 times
Re: New Camera QHY5 178
I have no idea about that particular camera but there are some interesting comments in this post viewtopic.php?f=4&t=17660&p=170130&hili ... ch#p170130
Alexandra
Alexandra
- marktownley
- Librarian
- Posts: 42559
- Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:27 pm
- Location: Brierley Hills, UK
- Has thanked: 20828 times
- Been thanked: 10502 times
- Contact:
Re: New Camera QHY5 178
I personally think the pixels are rather small. You won't be able to ramp the focal length up too much without oversampling.
http://brierleyhillsolar.blogspot.co.uk/
Solar images, a collection of all the most up to date live solar data on the web, imaging & processing tutorials - please take a look!
-
- The Sun?
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2016 6:46 am
Re: New Camera QHY5 178
Thanks Alexandra for sharing the link.
Mark, Smaller pixel will allow me to avoid barlow, which should result in a bright image (unlike using a barlow). Don't you think that will be better?
Mark, Smaller pixel will allow me to avoid barlow, which should result in a bright image (unlike using a barlow). Don't you think that will be better?
- GreatAttractor
- Almost There...
- Posts: 965
- Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 1:04 pm
- Location: Switzerland
- Has thanked: 748 times
- Been thanked: 757 times
Re: New Camera QHY5 178
Nope, it's not the case. Consider a camera with 1 µm pixels (Cam1) and another with 2 µm (Cam2). For a given telescope, to obtain the same image scale (arc seconds/pixel) on both cameras, you'd need a 2x Barlow for Cam2. Such a Barlow creates a 2 times larger image with 4 times less surface brightness, however Cam2 has 4 times larger pixels than Cam1, so the captured image brightness (photons/pixel) is the same as in Cam1.Umair Asim wrote: Mark, Smaller pixel will allow me to avoid barlow, which should result in a bright image (unlike using a barlow). Don't you think that will be better?
The questions of smaller vs. larger pixels can be important if you have a setup with very large effective focal length, e.g. a Quark. In such case it's better to have big pixels, so the image is not oversampled (and not too dark). For small pixels with such a setup you'd have to use a focal reducer, which is much less reliable (possible optical aberrations, uneven brightness) than using a Barlow.
On the other hand, having large pixels and a short focal length telescope is not a big problem, you just use a Barlow (which usually doesn't introduce significant image problems) to enlarge the image to optimal scale.
From my experience, for 3.75 µm pixels a focal ratio of f/11.2 gives appropriate sampling. For 2.4 µm, as in e.g. QHY5III178, this would be ~f/7.2, so close to Lunt 152's f/8. However, I cannot say anything about QHY's performance in Hα.
- PDB
- Almost There...
- Posts: 702
- Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 4:23 pm
- Location: Belgium
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 149 times
Re: New Camera QHY5 178
2.4 µm is indeed small for longer focal lengths. I have the ZWO 178 (same chip as th QHY) and if i use that for solar i use 2x binning which brings appropriate sampling at around f/15. (Actually bought that camera for primary focus work at f/10 with my C8) I used the camera for Hα and the only problems i got were interference rings (which dissapeared wit focal reducer, 2x binning or camera tilt). But of course this was the ZWO model.
None of my posts or images may be shared on Facebook, Twitter or any other social media other than SolarChat without permission.
-
- The Sun?
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2016 6:46 am
Re: New Camera QHY5 178
hmm. thanks for the help guys. I actually have been using DMK21 for years now and desperately need to upgrade it. What do you think i should look at for Lunt 152 telescope?
- Montana
- Librarian
- Posts: 34722
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:25 pm
- Location: Cheshire, UK
- Has thanked: 17974 times
- Been thanked: 8907 times
Re: New Camera QHY5 178
I would PM Pedro Re, he has a Lunt 152 and has trialled a lot of cameras on it, I think he would be a good person to recommend one. Gabrieli is another 152 owner with many cameras you could try.
Alexandra
Alexandra
- marktownley
- Librarian
- Posts: 42559
- Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:27 pm
- Location: Brierley Hills, UK
- Has thanked: 20828 times
- Been thanked: 10502 times
- Contact:
Re: New Camera QHY5 178
I'd go for something with 4-5um pixels.
http://brierleyhillsolar.blogspot.co.uk/
Solar images, a collection of all the most up to date live solar data on the web, imaging & processing tutorials - please take a look!
-
- The Sun?
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2016 6:46 am
- Montana
- Librarian
- Posts: 34722
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:25 pm
- Location: Cheshire, UK
- Has thanked: 17974 times
- Been thanked: 8907 times