asi2400mc pro or asi6200mc pro? - Forums

Hello,
so ive been imaging with the asi183mc pro for the past year, that was my first dedicated astro cam. now I want to get a new camera because over the year ive build up some systems, but the only camera I have is the asi183mc pro and sometimes I shoot with my Nikon d5300 full spectrum dslr. the scopes that I have are a rokinon 135mm f/2, Redcat 51, and a svbony 503 ed doublet f/7 (560mm) and with a .8 reducer that brings it down to about 450mm f/5.6. now budget is not a problem that's why I wanted to buy 2 cameras, both full frame one color one monochrome. first the asi6200mm pro as the monochrome camera, but im struggling to decide if I should buy a asi6200mc pro or the asi 2400mc pro as the color camera. I would tend to buy the asi2400mc pro because of the Full Well Capacity of 100k, and also if I want to have a high resolution picture with those 62MP I would just shoot the designated target with the monochrome camera, but im not so sure still. later on Im also gonna buy a c8 edge hd with a hyper star. my mount is the am5.
any thoughts greatly appreciated

Are you planning on running several mounts or just the one? I would probably consider two complete setups in stead of two separate cameras for alternate use if that's the case.

The thing to consider, especially with the Edge 8HD, is that it doesn't cover full frame with the reducer nor with a Hyperstar I believe. You can shoot the 6200 in APS-C mode although it might be obstructing a tad too much in front of an 8" opening? The APS-C sensor is very forgiving in terms of backfocus compared to the full frame version as well, especially when you pair it with fast f-ratios like the 135mm. That takes extreme luck and/or precision.

Next there's the computing power and storage needed to process and archive all those large files.

Since your budget is literally "limitless" I will assume any added costs like computer hardware, large filters etc isn't of any concern, if so then why not go for two 6200's?

Are you planning on running several mounts or just the one? I would probably consider two complete setups in stead of two separate cameras for alternate use if that's the case.

The thing to consider, especially with the Edge 8HD, is that it doesn't cover full frame with the reducer nor with a Hyperstar I believe. You can shoot the 6200 in APS-C mode although it might be obstructing a tad too much in front of an 8" opening? The APS-C sensor is very forgiving in terms of backfocus compared to the full frame version as well, especially when you pair it with fast f-ratios like the 135mm. That takes extreme luck and/or precision.

Next there's the computing power and storage needed to process and archive all those large files.

Since your budget is literally "limitless" I will assume any added costs like computer hardware, large filters etc isn't of any concern, if so then why not go for two 6200's?

yeah I know that the Edge 8HD doesn't cover full frame, but ill mostly crop in or just use my asi183mc pro for that one. I also want to do planetary swell so that's why the edge 8HD. I plan on running 2 systems at once, I want to do mosaics with the rokinon, and then normal targets with the redcat 51. and honestly my initial decision was to buy 2x 6200 cameras, but that's because I didn't know that the 2400mc existed. know that it does, it seems tempting. I guess my question is how much does the 100k really make a difference compared to the 51k or the 6200mc pro?

Many things have to change with the size of the sensor. First of all, an optical tube with a generous image circle
(there are not many products that exceed 44mm when using a reducer) or a Takahashi product range,
and a corresponding 50mm filter (2-inch filters cause vignetting. It varies depending on the optical system structure, but prepare with M54),
workstation grade. PC performance and large storage for data backup must be provided,
so there will be no difficulty in working with full-frame imaging. In the end,
if you are planning to invest everything, go for full frame, otherwise go for APS-C.

kim younghoon:
Many things have to change with the size of the sensor. First of all, an optical tube with a generous image circle
(there are not many products that exceed 44mm when using a reducer) or a Takahashi product range,
and a corresponding 50mm filter (2-inch filters cause vignetting. It varies depending on the optical system structure, but prepare with M54),
workstation grade. PC performance and large storage for data backup must be provided,
so there will be no difficulty in working with full-frame imaging. In the end,
if you are planning to invest everything, go for full frame, otherwise go for APS-C.

just wondering, for aps-c what cameras would you reccomend? im in the zwo ecosystem with the asi air and EAF and so on so I would go with a zwo camera

Claudio Boicu:
kim younghoon:
Many things have to change with the size of the sensor. First of all, an optical tube with a generous image circle
(there are not many products that exceed 44mm when using a reducer) or a Takahashi product range,
and a corresponding 50mm filter (2-inch filters cause vignetting. It varies depending on the optical system structure, but prepare with M54),
workstation grade. PC performance and large storage for data backup must be provided,
so there will be no difficulty in working with full-frame imaging. In the end,
if you are planning to invest everything, go for full frame, otherwise go for APS-C.

just wondering, for aps-c what cameras would you reccomend? im in the zwo ecosystem with the asi air and EAF and so on so I would go with a zwo camera

*The ZWO ASI 2600mm or mc is a good APS-C camera. Stay away from the 2600MC that has the built in Autoguide sensor......I haven't heard a lot of good things about it, especially when using narrow band filtration.

Patrick

Patrick Graham:
Claudio Boicu:
kim younghoon:
Many things have to change with the size of the sensor. First of all, an optical tube with a generous image circle
(there are not many products that exceed 44mm when using a reducer) or a Takahashi product range,
and a corresponding 50mm filter (2-inch filters cause vignetting. It varies depending on the optical system structure, but prepare with M54),
workstation grade. PC performance and large storage for data backup must be provided,
so there will be no difficulty in working with full-frame imaging. In the end,
if you are planning to invest everything, go for full frame, otherwise go for APS-C.

just wondering, for aps-c what cameras would you reccomend? im in the zwo ecosystem with the asi air and EAF and so on so I would go with a zwo camera

*The ZWO ASI 2600mm or mc is a good APS-C camera. Stay away from the 2600MC that has the built in Autoguide sensor......I haven't heard a lot of good things about it, especially when using narrow band filtration.

Patrick

yeah the one with the auto guider is a good idea, but has many things not working because of it. ive seen some people on cloudynights talking about using a c8 edge hd with a full frame camera, and apparently the vignetting is peretty well correctable with proper flats, and much more in number, even with an off axis guider, the shadows that are big and really deep, you can calibrate out with good flats.

Claudio Boicu:
yeah I know that the Edge 8HD doesn't cover full frame, but ill mostly crop in or just use my asi183mc pro for that one. I also want to do planetary swell so that's why the edge 8HD. I plan on running 2 systems at once, I want to do mosaics with the rokinon, and then normal targets with the redcat 51. and honestly my initial decision was to buy 2x 6200 cameras, but that's because I didn't know that the 2400mc existed. know that it does, it seems tempting. I guess my question is how much does the 100k really make a difference compared to the 51k or the 6200mc pro?

For the 183 an Edge 8 would do just fine for planetary and DSO. But with an image circle which is several mm less than 30mm across with the Hyperstar (I believe 28mm or so?) prepare to crop a lot as it simply wont calibrate out with flats, and also lose quite a bit of light if you mount a 6200 in front of it. Without the Hyperstar you would also need the Celestron OAG and a large sensor guide camera on top. Without the reducer it will support full frame but at F/10 you would need a lot of time on most of your targets.

If it's only for planetary though there might be a lot of cheaper options, and you wouldn't need the Hyperstar at all.

I can't speak for how the 2400 full well size compares to a 6200 but I suppose there is a reason why they are selling so many 2600's.

Good luck with your purchase, I wish I had your budget limit (or the lack of one, so to say)

Claudio Boicu:
yeah I know that the Edge 8HD doesn't cover full frame, but ill mostly crop in or just use my asi183mc pro for that one. I also want to do planetary swell so that's why the edge 8HD. I plan on running 2 systems at once, I want to do mosaics with the rokinon, and then normal targets with the redcat 51. and honestly my initial decision was to buy 2x 6200 cameras, but that's because I didn't know that the 2400mc existed. know that it does, it seems tempting. I guess my question is how much does the 100k really make a difference compared to the 51k or the 6200mc pro?

For the 183 an Edge 8 would do just fine for planetary and DSO. But with an image circle which is several mm less than 30mm across with the Hyperstar (I believe 28mm or so?) prepare to crop a lot as it simply wont calibrate out with flats, and also lose quite a bit of light if you mount a 6200 in front of it. Without the Hyperstar you would also need the Celestron OAG and a large sensor guide camera on top. Without the reducer it will support full frame but at F/10 you would need a lot of time on most of your targets.

If it's only for planetary though there might be a lot of cheaper options, and you wouldn't need the Hyperstar at all.

I can't speak for how the 2400 full well size compares to a 6200 but I suppose there is a reason why they are selling so many 2600's.

Good luck with your purchase, I wish I had your budget limit (or the lack of one, so to say)

honestly the sct is mainly gonna be for planetary and sometimes dso, and if I want to do a honestly good image ill have to compare the 2 cameras, wich one is better just shooting normal with the 183 or just cropping in its the 6200.

Running an EdgeHD on DSOs at f/10 or f/7 you should definitely go for the big pixels of the 2400MC and crop for the light falloff. For Hyperstar and your Fracs 2600MC might be a better match. My 2c

actually, I was thinking about selling my 183mc pro and buying a 294 instead, because you can switch the binning mode on it, and ive seen that its a pretty popular pair up.

I run the 2400 on the Edge HD 8, absurdly good combo, sensor is slightly too large for the celestron T-adapter (M42 when the baffle is 44mm), but you end up with a really nice field of view if you just crop. I would totally go for it, over all else. I've exposed for 30 minutes at a time without clipping the whites.

2400 is also really, really good in Infrared when the D60 UVIR cut is removed from the camera.

I see no reason to chose a 6200mc over a 2400 on an SCT.

Claudio Boicu:
Hello,
so ive been imaging with the asi183mc pro for the past year, that was my first dedicated astro cam. now I want to get a new camera because over the year ive build up some systems, but the only camera I have is the asi183mc pro and sometimes I shoot with my Nikon d5300 full spectrum dslr. the scopes that I have are a rokinon 135mm f/2, Redcat 51, and a svbony 503 ed doublet f/7 (560mm) and with a .8 reducer that brings it down to about 450mm f/5.6. now budget is not a problem that's why I wanted to buy 2 cameras, both full frame one color one monochrome. first the asi6200mm pro as the monochrome camera, but im struggling to decide if I should buy a asi6200mc pro or the asi 2400mc pro as the color camera. I would tend to buy the asi2400mc pro because of the Full Well Capacity of 100k, and also if I want to have a high resolution picture with those 62MP I would just shoot the designated target with the monochrome camera, but im not so sure still. later on Im also gonna buy a c8 edge hd with a hyper star. my mount is the am5.
any thoughts greatly appreciated

Hi Claudio,
Just an opinion, based on experience with many scopes and cameras for you to think about.
I'd be looking at sampling, i.e. the pixel size in relation to the FL of your OTA. The simple principle is that the shorter the FL, the smaller the pixel size should be to be within a decent sampling. The other element that will influence this is seeing. You can check your camera-OTA combination with the CCD Suitability Calculator: astronomy.tools.
So, if you want total flexibility, i.e. any of your cameras on any of your OTAs, the future C8+Hyperstar included, I'd go for a pixel size of 3.76 microns.
CS
Manuel

I run the 2400 on the Edge HD 8, absurdly good combo, sensor is slightly too large for the celestron T-adapter (M42 when the baffle is 44mm), but you end up with a really nice field of view if you just crop. I would totally go for it, over all else. I've exposed for 30 minutes at a time without clipping the whites.

2400 is also really, really good in Infrared when the D60 UVIR cut is removed from the camera.

I see no reason to chose a 6200mc over a 2400 on an SCT.

Exactly, used without Hyperstar ... then the pixel size is perfect in good seeing!

I run the 2400 on the Edge HD 8, absurdly good combo, sensor is slightly too large for the celestron T-adapter (M42 when the baffle is 44mm), but you end up with a really nice field of view if you just crop. I would totally go for it, over all else. I've exposed for 30 minutes at a time without clipping the whites.

2400 is also really, really good in Infrared when the D60 UVIR cut is removed from the camera.

I see no reason to chose a 6200mc over a 2400 on an SCT.

alright then its settled it guess, gonna get the 2400mc pro and 6200mm pro, probably gonna sell my 183 and still buy an 294 because I still wanna do a lot of hyper star stuff

Claudio Boicu:
actually, I was thinking about selling my 183mc pro and buying a 294 instead, because you can switch the binning mode on it, and ive seen that its a pretty popular pair up.

This is only the case for the 294MM (i.e. mono) - the 294MC is stuck in 2x2 mode.

Hmmm, now that you have settled on the 2400MC….

I use the 2400MC full frame sensor on C9.25 EdgeHD. With the .7 reducer, even with somewhat careful choice of large OAG etc, I do experience quite a bit of field limitation. However, I do definitely have more usable area than the 2600MC APS-C sensor would offer. But, here is my thought. The 2600 and 6200 both have the same pixel size, tyhe difference just being sensor size APS-C vs full frame. Therefore, you could go with the 6200MC on the EdgeHD and definitely get better-than-APS-C field of view, and unless the seeing is excellent, you could 2x2bin the images (1x1 with <5um pixels on Edge8 and larger is useless). But when using 6200 on your other shorter focal length optics, you will appreciate the finer pixels. If I recall, the 2600 and 6200 have 3.8'ish micron pixels, versus the 2400 5.96 or so. To me, the 6200 seems more flexible if you're planning on any use of the color camera on something that's not a long focal length.

Mark Fox:
Hmmm, now that you have settled on the 2400MC....

I use the 2400MC full frame sensor on C9.25 EdgeHD. With the .7 reducer, even with somewhat careful choice of large OAG etc, I do experience quite a bit of field limitation. However, I do definitely have more usable area than the 2600MC APS-C sensor would offer. But, here is my thought. The 2600 and 6200 both have the same pixel size, tyhe difference just being sensor size APS-C vs full frame. Therefore, you could go with the 6200MC on the EdgeHD and definitely get better-than-APS-C field of view, and unless the seeing is excellent, you could 2x2bin the images (1x1 with <5um pixels on Edge8 and larger is useless). But when using 6200 on your other shorter focal length optics, you will appreciate the finer pixels. If I recall, the 2600 and 6200 have 3.8'ish micron pixels, versus the 2400 5.96 or so. To me, the 6200 seems more flexible if you're planning on any use of the color camera on something that's not a long focal length.

though I will use the 2400 with shorter focal length, I now don't see much of a point to get two 6200 rather than just convenience to buy a color 6200 if I already have a mono one. that's why I would get the 2400 color, because I still have full frame, and also I can get other uses out of the 2400. when I buy 2x 6200 I kinda limit myself to the 51k that they have. my thought process is that if I want to use the sensor of the 6200 ill use the mono one, and for other things I can use the 2400. also I have a really bad habit to blow out stars.

I run the 2400 on the Edge HD 8, absurdly good combo, sensor is slightly too large for the celestron T-adapter (M42 when the baffle is 44mm), but you end up with a really nice field of view if you just crop. I would totally go for it, over all else. I've exposed for 30 minutes at a time without clipping the whites.

2400 is also really, really good in Infrared when the D60 UVIR cut is removed from the camera.

I see no reason to chose a 6200mc over a 2400 on an SCT.

how do the subs look like with a target like the Orion Nebula? can you actually see the trapezium? or is it "less blown out", and like what exposure time would you recommend? I guess its varying from target to target, right?

Claudio Boicu:
I run the 2400 on the Edge HD 8, absurdly good combo, sensor is slightly too large for the celestron T-adapter (M42 when the baffle is 44mm), but you end up with a really nice field of view if you just crop. I would totally go for it, over all else. I've exposed for 30 minutes at a time without clipping the whites.

2400 is also really, really good in Infrared when the D60 UVIR cut is removed from the camera.

I see no reason to chose a 6200mc over a 2400 on an SCT.

how do the subs look like with a target like the Orion Nebula? can you actually see the trapezium? or is it "less blown out", and like what exposure time would you recommend? I guess its varying from target to target, right?

subs are about 30% dimmer than my VIS data. Barely blown out at 480s, gain 158. Its not like the old days where 10M = 10s visible anymore.