elpajare
Member
Posts: 438
home town/country: Girona-Spain
time zone gmt +/-: 1
|
Post by elpajare on Nov 1, 2019 11:06:56 GMT
Two new Risingtech cameras with Sony IMX 432 M / C and IMX 428 M / C sensors. Especially impressive is the model with the IMX 432 that has a higher G sensitivity dark signal on the market at this time = 8100 mv although the Color model is not far behind and has a sensitivity of 4910 mv much more than the current star of Video Astronomy which is the IMX 294C. What do you think of these chips for Video Astronomy, you who are more technical and specialists?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2019 13:48:49 GMT
|
|
elpajare
Member
Posts: 438
home town/country: Girona-Spain
time zone gmt +/-: 1
|
Post by elpajare on Nov 1, 2019 15:10:47 GMT
It seems that this sensor shortens IMX294 exposures by half.
This could go very well by combining it with narrow band or anti-pollution filters to be within the maximum range of 30 seconds of exposure.
The large pixel will subtract resolution with short focal telescopes (¡¡) and the chip size is slightly smaller than the IMX294 (smaller FOV).
The price is quite contained to be a cooled camera.
For the Video Astronomy the arrival of any sensitive camera is good news.
|
|
elpajare
Member
Posts: 438
home town/country: Girona-Spain
time zone gmt +/-: 1
|
Post by elpajare on Nov 1, 2019 15:18:32 GMT
Jim Thompson (CN) compares the color IMX294 with the IMX432 Mono.
It should be seen how the IMX432 Color works.
Maybe the expositions would not be half and would be in something like this:
IMX294C 30 "expo = IMX432C 20" expo
According to the sensitivity table that Risingtech offers.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Nov 2, 2019 11:46:44 GMT
There is always a compromise until new technology is invented: Larger pixels = Shorter subs but lower resolution Smaller pixels = higher resolution but longer subs We all still wait for the day a camera under $10,000 can do both short subs and high resolution. High resolution Live video costs money, lots of it. This new IMX 432 has 9µm pixels. That's a large pixel. The technology is getting better, but still not where we want it. Manufacturers aren't going to spend millions in research and development in the hope of selling only a few hundred cameras to us Video Astronomers Industrial and Scientific Labs don't need cameras as fast and as sensitive as we want them, so there's no rush for manufacturers to develop them yet. But they ARE getting better
|
|
elpajare
Member
Posts: 438
home town/country: Girona-Spain
time zone gmt +/-: 1
|
Post by elpajare on Nov 2, 2019 19:30:33 GMT
I agree with you, we will wait for a new IMX294C to appear with 5,000 mv sensitivity minimum and € 1000 cost..
These two chips that have taken out do not represent any improvement over the IMX294C and are also smaller and more expensive
But the interesting thing is to be aware of everything that comes out.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Nov 3, 2019 5:56:38 GMT
Yes Carlos, we need to keep an eye on any development and new sensors released.
Manufacturers are constantly trying to improve on sensor sensitivity and resolution, but they also need to design in cost cutting methods like the fact that the new IMX432 is actually an already existing hardware but permanently binned 2x for better sensitivity, but killing resolution. All for the sake of saving dollars at manufacturing. The IMX432 has the same size pixels as the xtreme and xterminator with their square blocky pixels which give ugly stars.
If only the price would come down on the high res super sensitive cameras like the Ikegami Ultra Low Light camera (currently US$10,000) :
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2019 7:03:45 GMT
I wonder why there is no uncooled version of the IMX432m available.It would at least bring the price down. It seems that astrophotographers are not interested because of the poor resolution. That leaves videoastronomers who want short exposures only. cheers Paul
|
|
elpajare
Member
Posts: 438
home town/country: Girona-Spain
time zone gmt +/-: 1
|
Post by elpajare on Nov 3, 2019 8:29:33 GMT
In my opinion these cameras they don't work for Video Astronomy. Except IMX432 Mono for H alpha using.
With max. 30 second exposures you don't have to spend money on cooled cameras. Simple Darks eliminate dead pixels and electronic noise well enough. And if you also do an efficient postprocessing the problem disappears.
Strangely, Video Astronomy has not just had a presence either in the Forums or in the manufacturers, it is a very minority hobby.
In Spain, the largest store of astronomy products does not have a special section for Video Astronomy nor does the most important European suppliers have this section (TSoptics/Astroshop)
|
|
|
Post by howie1 on Nov 4, 2019 1:00:10 GMT
If only the price would come down on the high res super sensitive cameras like the Ikegami Ultra Low Light camera (currently US$10,000) : Well, it really has come down Ken. I've previously posted up that super low light video using the Sony A7S (here it is again in the link below). It's currently $2,487 Australian dollars at CameraWarehouse down the road from me in Brissie ($USD 1770). If I had the cash I'd get one as its low light capability sure beats the heck out of my EOS650D! From what I see in the video of that Ikegami, I see the equivalent (or better) out of the A7S video I post below. As my preference is those single 30 second images with the 650D ... I'd absolutely love to see what I could get with the A7S. I need to find some rich benefactor to help me pay for the A7S. LOL ps very slow boring bit at the start so fast forward to 3':38" into the video where he starts with a lowish ISO and then goes up and up from there. www.eoshd.com/2014/07/astounding-sony-a7s-low-light-test-philip-bloom/
|
|
|
Post by davy on Nov 4, 2019 11:04:38 GMT
If only the price would come down on the high res super sensitive cameras like the Ikegami Ultra Low Light camera (currently US$10,000) : Well, it really has come down Ken. I've previously posted up that super low light video using the Sony A7S (here it is again in the link below). It's currently $2,487 Australian dollars at CameraWarehouse down the road from me in Brissie ($USD 1770). If I had the cash I'd get one as its low light capability sure beats the heck out of my EOS650D! From what I see in the video of that Ikegami, I see the equivalent (or better) out of the A7S video I post below. As my preference is those single 30 second images with the 650D ... I'd absolutely love to see what I could get with the A7S. I need to find some rich benefactor to help me pay for the A7S. LOL ps very slow boring bit at the start so fast forward to 3':38" into the video where he starts with a lowish ISO and then goes up and up from there. www.eoshd.com/2014/07/astounding-sony-a7s-low-light-test-philip-bloom/,, Like yourself Howie I use 650ds and a few other canon cameras,, I'm very certain I won't buy another dedicated astronomy camera,, given weather conditions it's a poor choice for me,, been rebuilding my kit to the most basic I can,, Ease of portability and set up. Part of this I have achieved with the azgti and star adventurer,, what is slowing me down is the camera side,, don't get me wrong I love my canon DSLR and backyard Eos and this is my preference over zwo 178mc but I have like yourself been watching and waiting on the a7s dropping its price,, and it's now around the £600 for the older version,, like in the video. The way it transforms night into day is amazing and reminds me a bit of when I used my watec 902h first time. The a7 is my goal as well ,, would suit my needs perfect
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Nov 4, 2019 14:03:58 GMT
If only the price would come down on the high res super sensitive cameras like the Ikegami Ultra Low Light camera (currently US$10,000) : Well, it really has come down Ken. I've previously posted up that super low light video using the Sony A7S (here it is again in the link below). It's currently $2,487 Australian dollars at CameraWarehouse down the road from me in Brissie ($USD 1770). If I had the cash I'd get one as its low light capability sure beats the heck out of my EOS650D! From what I see in the video of that Ikegami, I see the equivalent (or better) out of the A7S video I post below. As my preference is those single 30 second images with the 650D ... I'd absolutely love to see what I could get with the A7S. I need to find some rich benefactor to help me pay for the A7S. LOL ps very slow boring bit at the start so fast forward to 3':38" into the video where he starts with a lowish ISO and then goes up and up from there. www.eoshd.com/2014/07/astounding-sony-a7s-low-light-test-philip-bloom/Ahhh, yeah I remember that Video Howie. Pity the camera is so big and heavy. For our use we don't need the internals housed in a DSLR body. Just a little tin box Yeah, I know, you are going to say the A7S isn't' big or heavy, but compared to every other Astro camera I have, it is.
|
|
|
Post by howie1 on Nov 5, 2019 0:43:00 GMT
Well, it really has come down Ken. I've previously posted up that super low light video using the Sony A7S (here it is again in the link below). It's currently $2,487 Australian dollars at CameraWarehouse down the road from me in Brissie ($USD 1770). If I had the cash I'd get one as its low light capability sure beats the heck out of my EOS650D! From what I see in the video of that Ikegami, I see the equivalent (or better) out of the A7S video I post below. As my preference is those single 30 second images with the 650D ... I'd absolutely love to see what I could get with the A7S. I need to find some rich benefactor to help me pay for the A7S. LOL ps very slow boring bit at the start so fast forward to 3':38" into the video where he starts with a lowish ISO and then goes up and up from there. www.eoshd.com/2014/07/astounding-sony-a7s-low-light-test-philip-bloom/Ahhh, yeah I remember that Video Howie. Pity the camera is so big and heavy. For our use we don't need the internals housed in a DSLR body. Just a little tin box Yeah, I know, you are going to say the A7S isn't' big or heavy, but compared to every other Astro camera I have, it is. Indeed ... DSLR's are far heavier than astro cams, but the A7S is actually a 2.5 ounces less than my EOS 650d in body only battery inserted configuration!!!. But, while it used to cost AU$4,000 body only and is now only (eek!) AU$2487, it' still very much true that amount of money will get a cooled and lightweight astro cam and probably even a 5 slot filter wheel (minus filters)! If I shopped for second hand, it'd get the full monty of small and lightweight cooled astro cam plus motorised filter wheel and maybe even some ZWO filters. Now where's that rich ol' biddy who'll shout me the money. LOL
|
|