Player One Apollo-M IMX432, unbox, and ZWO ASI-174 comparison.

[marktownley]

Tee hee hee Rainer. I thought you would say something like that when i posted it

So, your other option, use a barlow to bring the effective focal length closer to 1300mm and take more panels to make your full disk mosaic

[rsfoto]

Tee hee hee Rainer. I thought you would say something like that when i posted it

So, your other option, use a barlow to bring the effective focal length closer to 1300mm and take more panels to make your full disk mosaic

Hi Mark,

Guess what ? I have another CANON teleextender which is a 1.4X capable of being stacked on the already existing 2X, and that would mean I get 1260 mm missing just 134mm of focal length in order to reach 1394 mm ... missing ~ 10%

But making a full disc with that focal length is quite a big job. I need to calculate what that would mean ... I will come back later to this suggestion ...



Rainer

[marktownley]

At the end of the day it's all about finding a workable balance

[rsfoto]

Hi,

I did the Step Down test and you can take a look here ...

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=34602

at the end of the message

[cmas]

So, what is the current understanding with this Apollo m-max: What is the max frate with full resolution at 12 bit mode and in high speed mode? Or is it the same regardless of the bit depth? And does the bit depth really matter in solar H-alpha.

I am wondering if this camera is better in image quality using mica based etalons with 3-4x telecentrics compared to imx174? First hand experience is welcomed!

[Dennis]

So, what is the current understanding with this Apollo m-max: What is the max frate with full resolution at 12 bit mode and in high speed mode? Or is it the same regardless of the bit depth? And does the bit depth really matter in solar H-alpha.

I am wondering if this camera is better in image quality using mica based etalons with 3-4x telecentrics compared to imx174? First hand experience is welcomed!

I dont know much about cameras, but the big advantage of the Apollo m-max seems to be that you dont need to use a reducer with mica etalons. Saves lenses while keeping the f-ratio at the etalon high. If a closer look is wanted you can do it with barlows in front of the etalon. The real interesting feature is the quantum efficiency in the red spectrum compared to the 174mm, which means you dont need as much gain as with the 174mm as far as i understand.

On the downside compared with the 174mm i see a reduced pixelamount.. but is that an actual downside?
Also the speed of the camera seems to be limited to around 130 fps with full resolution. And im asking myself why dont these new cameras support usb 3.1 or 3.2?
I think usb 3.0 is not really up anymore to modern demands and chip capabilities nowadays.

[TareqPhoto]

So, what is the current understanding with this Apollo m-max: What is the max frate with full resolution at 12 bit mode and in high speed mode? Or is it the same regardless of the bit depth? And does the bit depth really matter in solar H-alpha.

I am wondering if this camera is better in image quality using mica based etalons with 3-4x telecentrics compared to imx174? First hand experience is welcomed!

I dont know much about cameras, but the big advantage of the Apollo m-max seems to be that you dont need to use a reducer with mica etalons. Saves lenses while keeping the f-ratio at the etalon high. If a closer look is wanted you can do it with barlows in front of the etalon. The real interesting feature is the quantum efficiency in the red spectrum compared to the 174mm, which means you dont need as much gain as with the 174mm as far as i understand.

On the downside compared with the 174mm i see a reduced pixelamount.. but is that an actual downside?
Also the speed of the camera seems to be limited to around 130 fps with full resolution. And im asking myself why dont these new cameras support usb 3.1 or 3.2?
I think usb 3.0 is not really up anymore to modern demands and chip capabilities nowadays.

So i have ASI174, is it worthy to upgrade to Apollo-M or even any Player One 174 sensor equivalent?

[Dennis]

So, what is the current understanding with this Apollo m-max: What is the max frate with full resolution at 12 bit mode and in high speed mode? Or is it the same regardless of the bit depth? And does the bit depth really matter in solar H-alpha.

I am wondering if this camera is better in image quality using mica based etalons with 3-4x telecentrics compared to imx174? First hand experience is welcomed!

I dont know much about cameras, but the big advantage of the Apollo m-max seems to be that you dont need to use a reducer with mica etalons. Saves lenses while keeping the f-ratio at the etalon high. If a closer look is wanted you can do it with barlows in front of the etalon. The real interesting feature is the quantum efficiency in the red spectrum compared to the 174mm, which means you dont need as much gain as with the 174mm as far as i understand.

On the downside compared with the 174mm i see a reduced pixelamount.. but is that an actual downside?
Also the speed of the camera seems to be limited to around 130 fps with full resolution. And im asking myself why dont these new cameras support usb 3.1 or 3.2?
I think usb 3.0 is not really up anymore to modern demands and chip capabilities nowadays.

So i have ASI174, is it worthy to upgrade to Apollo-M or even any Player One 174 sensor equivalent?

I will have a look because i want to make that 95% QE work for me compared with the ~45% of the 174. Though i might have to use barlows in front of the telecentric of the quark to really go in up close.

[cmas]

So, what is the current understanding with this Apollo m-max: What is the max frate with full resolution at 12 bit mode and in high speed mode? Or is it the same regardless of the bit depth? And does the bit depth really matter in solar H-alpha.

I am wondering if this camera is better in image quality using mica based etalons with 3-4x telecentrics compared to imx174? First hand experience is welcomed!

I dont know much about cameras, but the big advantage of the Apollo m-max seems to be that you dont need to use a reducer with mica etalons. Saves lenses while keeping the f-ratio at the etalon high. If a closer look is wanted you can do it with barlows in front of the etalon. The real interesting feature is the quantum efficiency in the red spectrum compared to the 174mm, which means you dont need as much gain as with the 174mm as far as i understand.

On the downside compared with the 174mm i see a reduced pixelamount.. but is that an actual downside?
Also the speed of the camera seems to be limited to around 130 fps with full resolution. And im asking myself why dont these new cameras support usb 3.1 or 3.2?
I think usb 3.0 is not really up anymore to modern demands and chip capabilities nowadays.

So i have ASI174, is it worthy to upgrade to Apollo-M or even any Player One 174 sensor equivalent?

You will not gain anything in real life by changing Zwo to PO with the same sensor. Yes, there is the tilt adapter in PO but I doubt that a bit different passive cooling system will provide to be really useful. I was thinking of updating to Apollo max, but in my setup I get good images with f/30 and imx174 even if the critical sampling is theoretically f/22 for that sensor. Based on this, I decided to benefit from higher frame rate compared to Apollo max and continued with my asi174mm and I've been happy. But if your setup is much more than f/30 then use reducer after the Quark or similar or consired Apollo max. With higher QE your exposure times should drop but if you are somewhere around 6 ms or less, I would not worry about it as you can get max fps of imx174 to compensate in a way.

[Dennis]

I dont know much about cameras, but the big advantage of the Apollo m-max seems to be that you dont need to use a reducer with mica etalons. Saves lenses while keeping the f-ratio at the etalon high. If a closer look is wanted you can do it with barlows in front of the etalon. The real interesting feature is the quantum efficiency in the red spectrum compared to the 174mm, which means you dont need as much gain as with the 174mm as far as i understand.

On the downside compared with the 174mm i see a reduced pixelamount.. but is that an actual downside?
Also the speed of the camera seems to be limited to around 130 fps with full resolution. And im asking myself why dont these new cameras support usb 3.1 or 3.2?
I think usb 3.0 is not really up anymore to modern demands and chip capabilities nowadays.

So i have ASI174, is it worthy to upgrade to Apollo-M or even any Player One 174 sensor equivalent?

With higher QE your exposure times should drop but if you are somewhere around 6 ms or less, I would not worry about it as you can get max fps of imx174 to compensate in a way.

You forget that not only exposuretimes are affected..
With similar exposuretime you dont need to use so much gain anymore - significantly i think. Which means you dont have to stack as many pictures as before to get a similar result. So in theory framerate should be more than compensated. Additionally the harddrive will have more space since the reduced frames taken.
As soon as i have the Apollo-Max i will tell you if it rocks or not : )

[cmas]

Sure. Let us know! Then there is also the matter of matching the pixel size with rest of the setup. And resolution of the sensor affecting the image size. Indeed Apollo M is interesting but I did not find enough reasons to change the camera at this point with too little data around. Maybe when you share us enough info

[rsfoto]

I will have a look because i want to make that 95% QE work for me compared with the ~45% of the 174. Though i might have to use barlows in front of the telecentric of the quark to really go in up close.

Hi Dennis,

From where do you have those QE values ? Are you comparing IMX 174 from Player One to IMX 174 from ZWO ?

While ZWO gives the QE as an abolute number with 77% Player one is giving a relative QE number, eg. Player One takes the 77% as 1 and raises all other values accordingly ...

[Dennis]

Hello Rainer,

seems i was taken wrong about the absolute QE values.
i took these informations for the comparison, hope they are comparable if we assume 1=77% at the 432 graph:
So the 174mm gets around 49% at 650nm, while the 432 gets around 0,74% at the same wavelength.

[rsfoto]

Hi Dennis,

I fuinally found a decent page qith QE values for Sony image sensors and there is the IMX 432 (3rd generation) with a QE of 77.25% @560nm and the IMX 174 (1st generation) with a QE of 77.2% @510nm.

Looking for the interested 650nm the IMX 174 has 50.82% and the IMX has 63.9%

Have fun herewith https://thinklucid.com/tech-briefs/sony ... pregius-s/

[Dennis]

Hi Dennis,

I fuinally found a decent page qith QE values for Sony image sensors and there is the IMX 432 (3rd generation) with a QE of 77.25% @560nm and the IMX 174 (1st generation) with a QE of 77.2% @510nm.

Looking for the interested 650nm the IMX 174 has 50.82% and the IMX has 63.9%

Have fun herewith https://thinklucid.com/tech-briefs/sony ... pregius-s/

Thank you. So the difference is not that big. Still a bit puzzled how it fits to the graph shown on the player one page (around 95% of something at 650nm).
Nevertheless the camera might be useful for using with my c9 once i get a d-erf for it.
Will see if i keep the trusty 174mm.

[rsfoto]

Hi Dennis,

I finally found a decent page qith QE values for Sony image sensors and there is the IMX 432 (3rd generation) with a QE of 77.25% @560nm and the IMX 174 (1st generation) with a QE of 77.2% @510nm.

Looking for the interested 650nm the IMX 174 has 50.82% and the IMX has 63.9%

Have fun herewith https://thinklucid.com/tech-briefs/sony ... pregius-s/

Thank you. So the difference is not that big. Still a bit puzzled how it fits to the graph shown on the player one page (around 95% of something at 650nm).
Nevertheless the camera might be useful for using with my c9 once i get a d-erf for it.
Will see if i keep the trusty 174mm.

Hi Dennis,

I do not know but if you take the IMX 432 curve maximum of 77.25% at 560nm and put that as 100% then the 63.9% at 650nm will be ~82.7%.

Dreisatz 77.25 = 100 wieviel ist 63.9 ?

[Dennis]

Hi Dennis,

I finally found a decent page qith QE values for Sony image sensors and there is the IMX 432 (3rd generation) with a QE of 77.25% @560nm and the IMX 174 (1st generation) with a QE of 77.2% @510nm.

Looking for the interested 650nm the IMX 174 has 50.82% and the IMX has 63.9%

Have fun herewith https://thinklucid.com/tech-briefs/sony ... pregius-s/

Thank you. So the difference is not that big. Still a bit puzzled how it fits to the graph shown on the player one page (around 95% of something at 650nm).
Nevertheless the camera might be useful for using with my c9 once i get a d-erf for it.
Will see if i keep the trusty 174mm.

Hi Dennis,

I do not know but if you take the IMX 432 curve maximum of 77.25% at 560nm and put that as 100% then the 63.9% at 650nm will be ~82.7%.

Dreisatz 77.25 = 100 wieviel ist 63.9 ?

Hi Rainer,
yes, but the imx 432 curve in the above picture (not in the picture of the link) is showing 95% (of 77.25%) at 650nm. This would be 0.95 * 77.25 = 73.4%.
Not the same like in your link.

hab ich nen Denkfehler?

[rsfoto]

Thank you. So the difference is not that big. Still a bit puzzled how it fits to the graph shown on the player one page (around 95% of something at 650nm).
Nevertheless the camera might be useful for using with my c9 once i get a d-erf for it.
Will see if i keep the trusty 174mm.

Hi Dennis,

I do not know but if you take the IMX 432 curve maximum of 77.25% at 560nm and put that as 100% then the 63.9% at 650nm will be ~82.7%.

Dreisatz 77.25 = 100 wieviel ist 63.9 ?

Hi Rainer,
yes, but the imx 432 curve in the above picture (not in the picture of the link) is showing 95% (of 77.25%) at 650nm. This would be 0.95 * 77.25 = 73.4%.
Not the same like in your link.

hab ich nen Denkfehler?

Hallo Dennis,

Well, I do not know from where did Player One get the curve they are using.

I am just using the info on the page I linked and that seems to be reliable ? information. One never knows how the Marketing departments work ...

Frag Ihn doch mal ?

[fedele]

I buyed the apollo max 1 month ago' but not yet tested with Quark Cromo and Fs60cb (full disk amd grab and go) and TSA120
But i buyed also a Neptune in substitution of an asi224 and i don t like it for my bad approche to sharpcap thta i don like and i m not expert in. I had also aquisition problems.
I like instead Asistudio for its semplicity.... so i want to give to apollo m a possibility, but probably i will exange this with the asi 174

[Dennis]

I buyed the apollo max 1 month ago' but not yet tested with Quark Cromo and Fs60cb (full disk amd grab and go) and TSA120
But i buyed also a Neptune in substitution of an asi224 and i don t like it for my bad approche to sharpcap thta i don like and i m not expert in. I had also aquisition problems.
I like instead Asistudio for its semplicity.... so i want to give to apollo m a possibility, but probably i will exange this with the asi 174

You dont like the player one cameras because they dont work with Asistudio?
I would be surprised if it was supported.
Cant wait for mine to arrive.. i sure know what to do with it : )

[Dennis]

Hallo Dennis,

Well, I do not know from where did Player One get the curve they are using.

I am just using the info on the page I linked and that seems to be reliable ? information. One never knows how the Marketing departments work ...

Frag Ihn doch mal ?
[/quote]

Hallo Rainer,

for now this chip remains a little mystery to me.
So far on the internet i didnt find consistent information about the maximum framerate. And i found 3 different values for the peak QE value for the imx432 ranging from 70% - 80%. QE curves i also found around 3 different.
I didnt find proper answers in forums about what the maximum fps is with 10 bit or 12 bit.
Nevertheless im curious enough to just try and find out myself.

(Habe ihn gefragt, noch keine Antwort)

[marktownley]

Maybe the camera manufacture who is active on this forum will clarify?

[Dennis]

I think i finally found a proper QE curve for the chip. This curve makes sense and would mean that i get around 22% more QE than with the 174mm in H-A. Should be interesting for very high focal ratios like i do.

https://www.axiomoptics.com/products/c-blue-one/

[rsfoto]

I think i finally found a proper QE curve for the chip. This curve makes sense and would mean that i get around 22% more QE than with the 174mm in H-A. Should be interesting for very high focal ratios like i do.

https://www.axiomoptics.com/products/c-blue-one/

I find it interesting that SONY as the producer can not publish a QE curve diagramm ...

... or does this also depend on the UV/IR filter or protection glass which are located before the chip itself ?

[Dennis]

the apollo max just arrived, tmr i will test it at the sun.

What i can say so far about the fps (i have a fast PC with fast ssds):

8 bit: 126 fps average with datatransfer of around 220 mb/s (why not more fps?)
12 bit: 109 fps average with datatransfer of around 370 mb/s (much closer to the usb3.0 maximum)

It seems the camera is designed to work natively with 12 bit mode.

Will keep you updated about how it performs tmr.

[Dennis]

So far everything works well with the cam and there is a significant increase of s/n compared with the 174mm, i dont need to stack as many pictures as before. Its weird to have the same fov like with the 174mm but the etalon at around f/68 with the f/8 scope + the quark telecentric and the 2" TV Big Barlow in front. But to me it seems this still causes a noticable increase of contrast compared to f/45 (8x4,3x1.3x glaspathcorrector).

Another interesting behaviour of the Apollo Max is that the fps are being dropped if the gain reaches a value of 320.
So until 319 the fps reach a maximum of 109 fps, at 320 and beyond it drops to around 84 fps.

First pictures are being processed now, maybe i can show sth in the evening.

[cmas]

Excellent. Please link your images also to this thread. It would also be nice to see how clean the stacked image is with e.g. 400 frames stacked and with what ever low number of images you now stack with Apollo-max. As a reference compared to imx174 to get a better overall idea about the performance.

[Dennis]

Excellent. Please link your images also to this thread. It would also be nice to see how clean the stacked image is with e.g. 400 frames stacked and with what ever low number of images you now stack with Apollo-max. As a reference compared to imx174 to get a better overall idea about the performance.

for now i can show the first results with the apollo max (30 second recordings):
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=36053&p=335864#p335864

i did not do a direct comparison but this are results with similar editing styles, also 30 second recordings but with the zwo asi 174mm:
viewtopic.php?p=335103#p335103
viewtopic.php?p=334830#p334830

maybe this helps in a way.
So far im pleased with the new toy and will look forward how it performs on moon and even planets.

regards
Dennis

[Dennis]

Excellent. Please link your images also to this thread. It would also be nice to see how clean the stacked image is with e.g. 400 frames stacked and with what ever low number of images you now stack with Apollo-max. As a reference compared to imx174 to get a better overall idea about the performance.

Maybe this gives a better impression:
Here is a comparison of stacked images (Autostakkert autosharped previews, same method), each of them was the result of a 30 second video.
5% of the best pictures of the 30 sek. timeframe were stacked for both. The only thing that makes comparison a bit difficult is the different max. framerate / resulting exposuretime of the 2 cameras. Also the zoomlevel is not exactly the same.

first one is with the zwo asi 174mm (5% of 4819), second one is with the apollo max (5% of 3278).

[rsfoto]

Excellent. Please link your images also to this thread. It would also be nice to see how clean the stacked image is with e.g. 400 frames stacked and with what ever low number of images you now stack with Apollo-max. As a reference compared to imx174 to get a better overall idea about the performance.

Maybe this gives a better impression:
Here is a comparison of stacked images (Autostakkert autosharped previews, same method), each of them was the result of a 30 second video.
5% of the best pictures of the 30 sek. timeframe were stacked for both. The only thing that makes comparison a bit difficult is the different max. framerate / resulting exposuretime of the 2 cameras. Also the zoomlevel is not exactly the same.

first one is with the zwo asi 174mm (5% of 4819), second one is with the apollo max (5% of 3278).

Hi Dennis,

Interesting but difficult to judge as you are comparing two different areas. Much easier would have been exactly the same area. IMHO

... but OK and honestly I see no difference ... IMHO again

[Dennis]

Excellent. Please link your images also to this thread. It would also be nice to see how clean the stacked image is with e.g. 400 frames stacked and with what ever low number of images you now stack with Apollo-max. As a reference compared to imx174 to get a better overall idea about the performance.

Maybe this gives a better impression:
Here is a comparison of stacked images (Autostakkert autosharped previews, same method), each of them was the result of a 30 second video.
5% of the best pictures of the 30 sek. timeframe were stacked for both. The only thing that makes comparison a bit difficult is the different max. framerate / resulting exposuretime of the 2 cameras. Also the zoomlevel is not exactly the same.

first one is with the zwo asi 174mm (5% of 4819), second one is with the apollo max (5% of 3278).

Hi Dennis,

Interesting but difficult to judge as you are comparing two different areas. Much easier would have been exactly the same area. IMHO

... but OK and honestly I see no difference ... IMHO again

Hi Rainer,
that is true. I will leave a "proper" comparison up to the vendor or others, since i sold my 174mm : )

[cmas]

What exp time and gain are you using as you are really pushing the f/ratio close to 70?

[rsfoto]

Hi Rainer,
that is true. I will leave a "proper" comparison up to the vendor or others, since i sold my 174mm : )

Hallo Dennis,

Well that changes completely the picture ... and I withdraw my comment ...

[Dennis]

What exp time and gain are you using as you are really pushing the f/ratio close to 70?

Hi,
here is a part of the fileinfo for the image with the apollo:

FireCapture v2.7.09 Settings
------------------------------------
Camera=Apollo-M MAX
Filename=2022-05-11-0632_7-U-G-Sun_Halpha.ser
Date=110522
Start=083230.861
Mid=083245.867
End=083300.873
Start(UT)=063230.861
Mid(UT)=063245.867
End(UT)=063300.873
Duration=30.012s
Date_format=ddMMyy
Time_format=HHmmss
LT=UT +2h
Frames captured=3278
FPS (avg.)=109
File type=SER
Binning=1x1
Bit depth=12bit
Data=Mono
ROI=1608x1104
ROI(Offset)=0x0
Shutter=9.067ms
Gain=282 (45%)
AutoExposure=off
AutoGain=off
Brightness=45
USBTraffic=100
Histogramm(min)=1931
Histogramm(max)=3637
Histogramm=88%
Noise(avg.deviation)=n/a
eADU=n/a
Sensor temperature=46.3°C

[Alto]

I came to understand the Apollo, and my braincell exploded...

[TareqPhoto]

I keep thinking about Player One cameras for solar or even planetary as i already have 4 ZWO cameras before i know about Player One to be exist in the past, now i don't know if i should replace and move to PO or not, the only thing that is holding me is if one day i might buy ASIAir which is dedicated for ZWO products, i use Mini PC as Raspberry Pi and windows laptop, and maybe will buy another mini PC for windows who knows, so i want a strong reason to move away from ZWO to Player One cameras.

[rsfoto]

I keep thinking about Player One cameras for solar or even planetary as i already have 4 ZWO cameras before i know about Player One to be exist in the past, now i don't know if i should replace and move to PO or not, the only thing that is holding me is if one day i might buy ASIAir which is dedicated for ZWO products, i use Mini PC as Raspberry Pi and windows laptop, and maybe will buy another mini PC for windows who knows, so i want a strong reason to move away from ZWO to Player One cameras.

Hi Tareq,

Which ZWO cameras do you have ?

And for which Player One cameras do you want to switch ?

BTW, did you know that the Sean Wang, now the maker of Player One cameras, was a former collaborator of ZWO before ?

[TareqPhoto]

I keep thinking about Player One cameras for solar or even planetary as i already have 4 ZWO cameras before i know about Player One to be exist in the past, now i don't know if i should replace and move to PO or not, the only thing that is holding me is if one day i might buy ASIAir which is dedicated for ZWO products, i use Mini PC as Raspberry Pi and windows laptop, and maybe will buy another mini PC for windows who knows, so i want a strong reason to move away from ZWO to Player One cameras.

Hi Tareq,

Which ZWO cameras do you have ?

And for which Player One cameras do you want to switch ?

BTW, did you know that the Sean Wang, now the maker of Player One cameras, was a former collaborator of ZWO before ?

The ZWO cameras i have as following even the one that is damaged:

- ASI120MC [USB2.0]
- ASI385MC
- ASI290MM
- ASI178MC
- ASI174MM

I want to replace few such as that ASI174MM to same sensor from Player One, and maybe buy a color version but newer sensor of that 290 with same pixel size, i won't change that 385 or 178, but even 178 i feel i might also replace to same sensor model from Player One, but the two cameras in my mind to buy separately without sacrifice my ZWO yet are Apollo-M Max and maybe Neptune-C II, the first for solar and the second for lunar and planetary.

I didn't know about that Sean Wang was a former ZWO collaborator, he is doing good job with his products, i just missed the opportunity to win one of his cameras back when he made competitions to win something, now i won't buy anything until i sell my ZWO camera and replace to same sensor, and if i get budget by luck then i buy extra cameras, but i have to find a reason to move to Player One from ZWO for same models, i don't want to regret doing it later in future for any reason, and i am not in rush, for solar i will wait the winter by end of this year so i might have budget for Apollo model, while for planetary i will wait until i buy a larger aperture scope first.

[rsfoto]

I am using an ASI 290MM for my white light images using 630mm focal length and a 1st generation Baader Herschel wedge.

I would suggest first start taking images for a year or two and then think about buying new cameras unless you want to spend money now

[TareqPhoto]

I am using an ASI 290MM for my white light images using 630mm focal length and a 1st generation Baader Herschel wedge.

I would suggest first start taking images for a year or two and then think about buying new cameras unless you want to spend money now

Hi Rainer,

I have to spend money as soon as possible because life is getting crazier every time, i could have a budget today but tomorrow maybe not, and i always hate to wait longer, and i don't need 1 year to learn, i can image the sun say 1 week if it is not very hot outside and i can learn everything i need, i learn fast but i image very slow or less, so i only follow my new rule:

"Buy everything now and cry/sell later"