When buying a 2nd hand Boren-Simon powernewt, the seller threw an Atik 383+ Mono (KAF 8300 CCD) into the deal, filters and all included. My only mono experience is with CMOS cameras, and chiefly using ZWO cameras and Asiair combos. Before starting to learn NINA/APT/Stellarmate or other capture software: Is it worth it? Are there benefits with this some 10 year old tech that still surpasses modern CMOS? This particular Atik cam is apparently still on sale for prices that seems very high, but then again maybe it is still worth it?
CCD - still worth it?
Engaging
Not really, the KAF 8300 even more so. The only real benefit in a CCD nowadays is that you can bin in hardware and get the same RON of a unbinned pixel but it is still a lot higher than a comparaable CMOS, QE is in the 50% ballpark for this sensor, again trashed by the current offering in the CMOS arena. On possible benefit is that they have bigger pixels, in the main.
Mono CCD is still fine, if you have one of the newer ICX sensors from Sony, but the KAF/KAI sensors lack behind CMOS sensors for the most part (Full well, QE, system noise). I switched from CMOS OSC over to Mono CCD only, because the camera (SX-814 Pro) was disgustingly cheap and you can lower the dark current AND read noise with deeper cooling.
So, if you don't get a big discount on the Atik it may not be worth it. If you can recycle the filter wheel and filters with a CMOS, you can still sell the Atik and get a Mono CMOS like the IMX533 oder IMX492.
So, if you don't get a big discount on the Atik it may not be worth it. If you can recycle the filter wheel and filters with a CMOS, you can still sell the Atik and get a Mono CMOS like the IMX533 oder IMX492.
Helpful Insightful Concise
Thanks, point taken. I already have the Atik as the seller gave it to me for nought when I bought the newt. From what you say, it doesn’t seem worthwhile the hassle to learn - say - NINA just to try out this cam.
Hans P. Strifeldt:
Thanks, point taken. I already have the Atik as the seller gave it to me for nought when I bought the newt. From what you say, it doesn’t seem worthwhile the hassle to learn - say - NINA just to try out this cam.
Oh, you already have it? I don't think it's a hassle to learn NINA, because there are tons of turtorials on youtube. When I first started out with Nina (and OSC) it was pretty straight forward. I was concerned switching over to Mono, but with all the plugins and automation possibilities it's rather easy. I like the focus offset module a lot. No focus routines between filter changes, it's lovely. IMO this way mono is more fun than OSC.
CS
Tobi
Hans P. Strifeldt:
When buying a 2nd hand Boren-Simon powernewt, the seller threw an Atik 383+ Mono (KAF 8300 CCD) into the deal, filters and all included. My only mono experience is with CMOS cameras, and chiefly using ZWO cameras and Asiair combos. Before starting to learn NINA/APT/Stellarmate or other capture software: Is it worth it? Are there benefits with this some 10 year old tech that still surpasses modern CMOS? This particular Atik cam is apparently still on sale for prices that seems very high, but then again maybe it is still worth it?
Whether or not it's worth it depends on the camera and on the price. A KAF 8300 CCD camera isn't worth a lot and I personally would't touch it. It's a small sensor and it's pretty old. On the other hand, a KAF 16803 CCD based camera on the right telescope is still pretty good. It's a large sensor (36 mm x 36 mm), it is nearly as sensitive as a IMX455, and it has larger pixels, which may be a better match for a larger, slower telescope (e.g. a C14 or a CDK1000). CCDs have a few characteristics that are different than CMOS but they are mostly very easy to deal with. I really like my IMX455 based cameras so my FLI-16803 cameras stay on the shelf; but, with the right camera, some of those old CCD based cameras still can produce very respectable results. The real problem is that the price of high performance CMOS cameras is about half of what the old CCD cameras used to cost. So, the only way a CCD camera makes any sense is if it is either a special fit to a particular telescope -OR- it is very cheap. The price should be maybe half of what a "similar" CMOS camera costs.
John
Helpful Respectful Engaging Supportive
I always had a terrible time calibrating out few of those KAF 16803s, even with Class 0 chips. I wouldn't really be keen on doing that on a standard basis.
While it's past it's best before date, you could consider using it with a second setup and have two rigs running.
While it's past it's best before date, you could consider using it with a second setup and have two rigs running.
If so, it’d be my third
I might add that the chip is not the only consideration here. In my case when I bought my QSI 8300 chip camera about 12 years ago, I also had to look at the cost of the filters. If I had gone with the larger FLI 16803 chip, I would have had to go with the larger 2" filters which at the time were almost more than the camera. The 8300 chip in the QSI camera body put the filters so close to the chip that I was able to use the smaller 31mm filters at a far less cost. And 12 years later the camera is still going strong.
Well Written Helpful Insightful