Back to forums

ASI432MM for beginner monochrome narrowband imaging?

ZWO ASI432MM Planetary Camera Deep Sky
14 replies•893 views
Oscar avatar
Oscar avatar
I went to compare all ZWO's mono planetary cameras; this one had the largest pixel size (9µm) and decent specifications; I thought it could actually be used for DSOs.

I found this Flickr thing; it shows a gallery of images taken with a Mallincam DS432M (the same 432 sensor)  https://flickr.com/search/?text=ds432m

I don't know whether the Mallincam is cooled or not (I think it is), but look at these AB images taken with the uncooled one NGC 1514 LRGB | M57

My point is, why don't more people test out their uncooled 432 cameras with deep space? I think it will work very good.
Engaging
andrea tasselli avatar
andrea tasselli avatar

 
I went to compare all ZWO's mono planetary cameras; this one had the largest pixel size (9µm) and decent specifications; I thought it could actually be used for DSOs.

I found this Flickr thing; it shows a gallery of images taken with a Mallincam DS432M (the same 432 sensor)  https://flickr.com/search/?text=ds432m

I don't know whether the Mallincam is cooled or not (I think it is), but look at these AB images taken with the uncooled one NGC 1514 LRGB | M57

My point is, why don't more people test out their uncooled 432 cameras with deep space? I think it will work very good.

I'll be trying that in the near future.
Andrea Girones avatar
Andrea Girones avatar
So Player one uses that sensor in their Cooled Apollo Max. If ZWO had one I might try it for some planetary nebula.
daywalker avatar
daywalker avatar
https://astrob.in/6bh4qy/B/
Inever worked out why i got this speckled effect.I think i chose the wrong gain setting but it was an interesting experiment...
Oscar avatar
Oscar avatar
Thanks for the responses. One more thing I wanna mention: Whoever is willing to test out NB with the 432, It would be nice if it's tested with both 7nm filter(s) and 3nm filter(s), just see the difference in signal and noise. I'm only saying it would be nice, not you have to do that.
Oscar avatar
Oscar avatar
I have an update:

This guy uses the 432mm https://www.astrobin.com/users/BartekHnatio/ One of his 2 images is of the "Sivan 2" nebula; supposedly 15 hours integration with the ASI432mm and a 6nm H-a filter; it doesn't look too good for 15 hours, but the nebula is a dim one. I'm hoping it's just his processing technique that made it look like that...

I'm gonna wait for Andrea's result and anyone else's. Daywalker's result looked okay I think; it just needed NXT maybe.
Rafał Szwejkowski avatar
Rafał Szwejkowski avatar
The pixel size is just a bit much, even my 2000mm setup would be undersampled with it.  It also came to my attention that this sensor has amp glow (maybe someone can confirm/deny).  Combined with the price and lack of cooling I don't think it's an attractive option for DS.
andrea tasselli avatar
andrea tasselli avatar
Rafał Szwejkowski:
The pixel size is just a bit much, even my 2000mm setup would be undersampled with it.  It also came to my attention that this sensor has amp glow (maybe someone can confirm/deny).  Combined with the price and lack of cooling I don't think it's an attractive option for DS.

I don't think that there would be any actual undersampling in typical seeing (3") and I'd rather be undersampled that oversampled. But, yes, there is significant EL glow which seems to rule out uncooled operation, realistically, unless it is for very short durations. Player One however sells a cooled camera (Apollo-M Max Pro) sporting the same sensor so this might be an option.
Jan Erik Vallestad avatar
Jan Erik Vallestad avatar
@andrea tasselli Did you get around to do some testing? I've been eyeing the Player One version a bit now myself as it would suit the Edge 8 very well on paper for DSO's. The stuff I've seen with the uncooled camera certainly isn't off putting in any way.
andrea tasselli avatar
andrea tasselli avatar
Not yet, as the original source hiked the original price so I had to drop it but hoping to get another source in a few week's time.
Jan Erik Vallestad avatar
Jan Erik Vallestad avatar
I see. It's tempting, though my priority ideally is another IMX571 first.
Jan Erik Vallestad avatar
Jan Erik Vallestad avatar
I contacted Player One about this and as I feared they confirmed that this wouldn't necessarily be a very good match. Lower bit depth, lower resolution and much higher read noise than other available cameras these days. It would make more sense to get a 533 and bin the data in post, especially since the price point between a cooled 533 and the Apollo M-Max isn't that huge.

With that in mind I shelved the entire idea for now, though there are other sensors out there that could work from the likes of ToupTek.
Well Written Insightful Respectful Concise
Armin Lukas avatar
Armin Lukas avatar
What about the ASI678MM? 2µm pixel size and monochrome. It can be used for planetary and DSO. I don't have one, but but found this picutre:
https://www.astrobin.com/3bd5kq/?q=ASI678MM

What about the 183MM Pro or 533MM Pro? Bigger sensor and cooled. I think all the cameras can be used with 1,25" filters as well.
Jan Erik Vallestad avatar
Jan Erik Vallestad avatar
I have the 678MC. I've only done two tests so far but got less than ideal results with it for DSO's. The small pixels goes against the whole idea of getting ideal sampling with larger focal lengths. The 533 is a solid choice though.

Player One, and others, make cooled planetary cameras that looks interesting, but you sacrifice FOV and pay almost as much as you would for the IMX533 that is very good.

1.25" filters are good all the way up to 4/3 sensors, so that isn't an issue with any of these cameras.
Helpful Concise
Tony Gondola avatar
Tony Gondola avatar
I've used the 585mc for about a year and got good results. It is very capable of doing deep sky imaging as you can see on my astrobin image page. Just two things to watch out for. Any uncooled camera is going to be a noise factory if you have hot summer nights. I found that out the hard way and recently upgraded to the cooled version of the 585. The other things is while it is a large chip, the overall resolution, meaning number of pixels is fairly low. You also might have trouble matching your optical system to such a huge pixel size.
Helpful Insightful Respectful Concise