TOA-130: Full Frame or APS-C w/ Reducer? - Forums

Topic starter

Mar 5, 2025 · Edited: Mar 5, 2025

What's your opinion about full-frame cameras? They're incredibly expensive, the filters are expensive, the files are huge, the processing time and data storage increase a lot.

Those that have gone that way; Is the extra resolution worth the expense to you? And why?

It doesn't show it in the chart below but the QHY - 600 samples at 0.78"/px compared to the 1.11"/px of the reduced APS-C.

Engaging

Leela.Astro.Imaging

Mar 5, 2025

I have a Tak FSQ106N and moving to a full frame camera was without a doubt the right thing to do. Pick a good camera though (I heartily recommend Moravian CMOS).

Wei-Hao Wang

Mar 5, 2025

I think it's a general phenomena among TAK's correctors that a flattener gives you better angular resolution than a reducer does. If you put a camera with larger pixel scale on a reduced TOA, I believe you will see a difference in resolution compared to the flattener case, unless your seeing is terrible, of course.

So, similar FoV, sharper and less sharp image. Is it worthwhile to spend the extra to get the FF camera? It will depend on the seeing of your site, and how much you value image sharpness at pixel level. I think only you can answer this.

Helpful Insightful Respectful

Himanshu Pandey

Mar 5, 2025 · Edited: Mar 5, 2025

If your scope produces an image circle that works with full frame cameras and you can afford it, I think you should start and end your camera search with one. I started with APS-C because my scopes don't, in my opinion, produce an image circle that's flat enough for a full frame sensor. This hobby is something that we can do for a long time so you'll probably buy one anyway in a few years.

Dark Matters Astrophotography

Mar 5, 2025

I would not skip out on using the Tak 645 field flattener. The images that corrector produces are phenomenal. My vote would be full frame plus the 645.

Well Written

Willem Jan Drijfhout

Mar 5, 2025

+1 For full frame plus 645 flattener.

Most main-stream camera's have 3.8 micron pixels. So the difference in sensor-size only translates into differences in FoV, not in resolution. If you choose the biggest sensor that your telescope can support (and the TOA-130 with 645 generously supports full frame) you have the most versatile system.
A pixel scale of 0.8 will give you better results than 1.1, also in moderately clear/dark skies. But with sufficient dithering and drizzling you can get them very close.
Reducers for some reason almost always deteriorate image quality, flatteners much less so.
So adding a reducer to compensate for a smaller sensor will get you worse image quality than the flattened full frame option.

The bigger question though is what objects you want to image. I use my TOA-130 only with flattener (older 67, very nice, but 645 is better) and find that for many objects (galaxies, PN's, smaller clusters etc) a 533-based camera does a great job and is more than enough FoV. For bigger objects I can switch out for a full frame camera and benefit from the extra FoV.

So if you don't want to spend too much on the camera, an APS-C camera with flattener on the TOA-130 will give you great access to many, many objects. Spending a bit more and going full frame will make you more future-proof. And like others, I can heartily recommend the Moravian cameras.

Helpful Engaging

Daniel Cimbora

Mar 5, 2025 · Edited: Mar 5, 2025

I suspect most folks paying the premium for a TOA130 want to achieve the absolute best image quality. It would seem logical, then, to go with the 645 flattener and FF camera to ensure you are getting the most out of the scope.

That’s the route I went and I have no regrets.

Well Written Concise

Clayton Ostler

Mar 6, 2025

So I'm interested in learning more about full frame. I have 2 scopes that support it but I hear a lot about image tilt, and can't say I'm super comfortable diagnosing or solving that. I also have a lot of 2 inch filters. Will those still work with full frame?

I see the value on light collection and FOV.

I do use a reducer often. What does the required image circle look look like for full frame to avoid vignetting?

Theres a lot to learn in this hobby. How much complexity does this add for a newbie?

Engaging

Dark Matters Astrophotography

Mar 6, 2025

Clayton Ostler:
So I'm interested in learning more about full frame. I have 2 scopes that support it but I hear a lot about image tilt, and can't say I'm super comfortable diagnosing or solving that. I also have a lot of 2 inch filters. Will those still work with full frame?

I see the value on light collection and FOV.

I do use a reducer often. What does the required image circle look look like for full frame to avoid vignetting?

Theres a lot to learn in this hobby. How much complexity does this add for a newbie?

Without going too deep down the rabbit hole, the premium cameras on the market now or that are coming very soon (Moravian and FLI) rarely require any adjustments for tilt that are specific to the camera and filter wheels themselves. We’ve sold and deployed Moravian cameras to a large number of different optical systems and use them on two different Delta Rho rigs on our service and none of those systems needed tilt adjustments. With FLI returning to the market very soon, we’re happy to be able to have another premium option that should be even better in terms of build and craftsmanship.

The old saying of you get what you pay for is useful to consider from time to time, in our experience.

Well Written Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging

Jos Stassen

Mar 6, 2025

+1 for the 645 flattener - this thing is amazing.

Make sure your filters are large enough to support FF. I have a ASI294MM (19x13mm) and my old 1,25" filters were too small. I had to crop a lot because of vignetting, which means that in reality half the sensor is unusable. I'm using 2" filters now and vignetting from the filters is gone.

Helpful Concise

Willem Jan Drijfhout

Mar 6, 2025

Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Clayton Ostler:
So I'm interested in learning more about full frame. I have 2 scopes that support it but I hear a lot about image tilt, and can't say I'm super comfortable diagnosing or solving that. I also have a lot of 2 inch filters. Will those still work with full frame?

I see the value on light collection and FOV.

I do use a reducer often. What does the required image circle look look like for full frame to avoid vignetting?

Theres a lot to learn in this hobby. How much complexity does this add for a newbie?

Without going too deep down the rabbit hole, the premium cameras on the market now or that are coming very soon (Moravian and FLI) rarely require any adjustments for tilt that are specific to the camera and filter wheels themselves. We’ve sold and deployed Moravian cameras to a large number of different optical systems and use them on two different Delta Rho rigs on our service and none of those systems needed tilt adjustments. With FLI returning to the market very soon, we’re happy to be able to have another premium option that should be even better in terms of build and craftsmanship.

The old saying of you get what you pay for is useful to consider from time to time, in our experience.

Agreed, I have two full-frame cameras, a ZWO ASI6200 and a Moravian C3-61000. The ZWO has some serious tilt, and is always used with a CTU (Camera Tilting Unit). The Moravian had no tilt at all and could be used straight out of the box.

Btw, a lot of reports on tilt is actually tilt in the optical train (focuser, rotator, etc). So if you start to correct tilt in the camera, and it turns out that tilt was elsewhere, you can make matters even worse.

Don't let a perceived complexity of tilt issues prevent you from getting a full frame camera. You can correct most of it during processing, when you use the right software. BlurXTerminator is an example of that software, and works like a charm. Of course it is always better to correct tilt optically, but you can do that later when you feel a bit more comfortable with your equipment to experiment with.

Full frame has a sensor size of 36x24mm. This means your telescope need to project a flat field with a diameter of at least 44mm to fully cover this. And it's safer to think of something in the range of 50mm. From these numbers you can also see that your 2 inch filters will well cover a full frame sensor.

Helpful Supportive

Clayton Ostler

Mar 6, 2025

Willem Jan Drijfhout:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Clayton Ostler:
So I'm interested in learning more about full frame. I have 2 scopes that support it but I hear a lot about image tilt, and can't say I'm super comfortable diagnosing or solving that. I also have a lot of 2 inch filters. Will those still work with full frame?

I see the value on light collection and FOV.

I do use a reducer often. What does the required image circle look look like for full frame to avoid vignetting?

Theres a lot to learn in this hobby. How much complexity does this add for a newbie?

Without going too deep down the rabbit hole, the premium cameras on the market now or that are coming very soon (Moravian and FLI) rarely require any adjustments for tilt that are specific to the camera and filter wheels themselves. We’ve sold and deployed Moravian cameras to a large number of different optical systems and use them on two different Delta Rho rigs on our service and none of those systems needed tilt adjustments. With FLI returning to the market very soon, we’re happy to be able to have another premium option that should be even better in terms of build and craftsmanship.

The old saying of you get what you pay for is useful to consider from time to time, in our experience.

Agreed, I have two full-frame cameras, a ZWO ASI6200 and a Moravian C3-61000. The ZWO has some serious tilt, and is always used with a CTU (Camera Tilting Unit). The Moravian had no tilt at all and could be used straight out of the box.

Btw, a lot of reports on tilt is actually tilt in the optical train (focuser, rotator, etc). So if you start to correct tilt in the camera, and it turns out that tilt was elsewhere, you can make matters even worse.

Don't let a perceived complexity of tilt issues prevent you from getting a full frame camera. You can correct most of it during processing, when you use the right software. BlurXTerminator is an example of that software, and works like a charm. Of course it is always better to correct tilt optically, but you can do that later when you feel a bit more comfortable with your equipment to experiment with.

Full frame has a sensor size of 36x24mm. This means your telescope need to project a flat field with a diameter of at least 44mm to fully cover this. And it's safer to think of something in the range of 50mm. From these numbers you can also see that your 2 inch filters will well cover a full frame sensor.

Thanks for the info. It's great to know that the 2-in filters will work with a full frame. I'm also super excited to know the blur exterminator will take care of some of the tilt if I have an issue. I've been using an ASI2600mc crop sensor basically because I've been afraid to deal with tilt. I'll have to take a look at Moravian. That's a new brand name to me, but I'm pretty new to this whole thing so they could be super well known and I'm just out of the loop.

Respectful Supportive

Dark Matters Astrophotography

Mar 6, 2025

Clayton Ostler:
Willem Jan Drijfhout:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Clayton Ostler:
So I'm interested in learning more about full frame. I have 2 scopes that support it but I hear a lot about image tilt, and can't say I'm super comfortable diagnosing or solving that. I also have a lot of 2 inch filters. Will those still work with full frame?

I see the value on light collection and FOV.

I do use a reducer often. What does the required image circle look look like for full frame to avoid vignetting?

Theres a lot to learn in this hobby. How much complexity does this add for a newbie?

Without going too deep down the rabbit hole, the premium cameras on the market now or that are coming very soon (Moravian and FLI) rarely require any adjustments for tilt that are specific to the camera and filter wheels themselves. We’ve sold and deployed Moravian cameras to a large number of different optical systems and use them on two different Delta Rho rigs on our service and none of those systems needed tilt adjustments. With FLI returning to the market very soon, we’re happy to be able to have another premium option that should be even better in terms of build and craftsmanship.

The old saying of you get what you pay for is useful to consider from time to time, in our experience.

Agreed, I have two full-frame cameras, a ZWO ASI6200 and a Moravian C3-61000. The ZWO has some serious tilt, and is always used with a CTU (Camera Tilting Unit). The Moravian had no tilt at all and could be used straight out of the box.

Btw, a lot of reports on tilt is actually tilt in the optical train (focuser, rotator, etc). So if you start to correct tilt in the camera, and it turns out that tilt was elsewhere, you can make matters even worse.

Don't let a perceived complexity of tilt issues prevent you from getting a full frame camera. You can correct most of it during processing, when you use the right software. BlurXTerminator is an example of that software, and works like a charm. Of course it is always better to correct tilt optically, but you can do that later when you feel a bit more comfortable with your equipment to experiment with.

Full frame has a sensor size of 36x24mm. This means your telescope need to project a flat field with a diameter of at least 44mm to fully cover this. And it's safer to think of something in the range of 50mm. From these numbers you can also see that your 2 inch filters will well cover a full frame sensor.

Thanks for the info. It's great to know that the 2-in filters will work with a full frame. I'm also super excited to know the blur exterminator will take care of some of the tilt if I have an issue. I've been using an ASI2600mc crop sensor basically because I've been afraid to deal with tilt. I'll have to take a look at Moravian. That's a new brand name to me, but I'm pretty new to this whole thing so they could be super well known and I'm just out of the loop.

They are a EU brand and produce very good cameras. We are a dealer for them and can answer any questions you may have about them offline from this thread.

FLI is a US brand returning to the market after a brief bit away, under new ownership and leadership we had the opportunity to speak to directly on a call. They are as excited as the community is to get FLI cameras back in the hands of astrophotographers. We are also a dealer for them and happy to discuss more offline.

The point made about tools like BXT is completely valid. It can clean up a lot of stuff that used to be backbreaking to do in the optical system as the only option. While you should dial in the system to not have those issues, it’s something you can approach gradually rather than being a hard requirement to solve or suffer with like it was in the past.

Ashraf AbuSara

Mar 7, 2025 · Edited: Mar 7, 2025

In terms of tilt, I have not needed to make any adjustment to my imaging train at all when using the Player One Zeus-M and the TOA-130 at f/7.6. It comes with a standard 4 point tilt plate that is rear facing that is very usable unlike he Zwo offerings if you need it, although I have not tried using it. But imaging at f/7.6 is forgiving.

PlayerOne uses industrial grade sensor and seems to be a step above ZWO offerings in every way. The drivers have more control over your camera acquisition settings. The cooling on the PO is significantly better than my 6200mm. In fact in the same obs the PO always needs 20-30% less power than the ZWO for the cooler.

It is also priced much better than Moravian so that can be an option. I am sure the Moravian is a high end product but I am left wondering what I would be missing compared to a Moravian for twice the cost when compared to their IMX455 equivalent.

Helpful

Willem Jan Drijfhout

Mar 7, 2025 · Edited: Mar 7, 2025

Never used a PlayerOne, but hear nothing but good news about them.
The Moravians are built like a tank, have integrated filterwheel and some 1/4" connection points that can be used for Z-balancing filterwheel. And super practical: it sets proper offset values itself, without you even knowing/seeing it. The amount of times I ended up with unmatched offset values between darks and lights, because I mixed up offset values between cameras and/or gain settings….
But their main claim to fame is reliability. I guess you won't know the difference until you have one of each operating for 5 years. But for this reason they are often seen in remote observatories. I've run mine now remotely for almost a year without a single glitch.

Oh, and forgot, they have a shutter, besides a bit of extra protection, it is also very practical for doing darks remotely.

Helpful Engaging Supportive

Dark Matters Astrophotography

Mar 7, 2025

At the premium end of the spectrum you’re going to get mostly features and engineering around reliability over the long term. These are features that folks using very expensive systems care about the most. They don’t want to be fussing with camera failures and inconsistencies every year or two. They also do not want to be down for extended periods of time while navigating inconsistent and sometimes shoddy RMA processes. All of what I just mentioned is amplified significantly when deployed internationally to a location like Chile. Similarly it’s not just the cameras. The same things apply to filter wheels as well.

This is the area where FLI returning to the Astro market is huge. They are completely aware of the uptime is king nature of these systems and are built to function and operate in that manner, with excellent engineering practices and in the event there were a hardware related issue they have a very solid process for getting issues solved and systems back online.

We’ve seen similar dedication from Moravian, but servicing a camera that is hosted in the US can be a major logistical nightmare to get it out of the country and into their hands and back. They do a great job once they have it, but again the transit time can be painful.

Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging

Ashraf AbuSara

Mar 7, 2025 · Edited: Mar 7, 2025

I have owned Player One Zeus for just about 5 months. But I have already put on it hundreds of hours since December in a remote setting. No issues so far but I can't comment about long term reliability yet. That being said they do claim they use an Industrial grade sensor like Moravian as opposed to a Consumer grade sensor that ZWO uses. So hopefully it will be more reliable. I will say I have interacted with their customer support regarding their filter wheel a few times (not the camera) and they have been very responsive and helpful.

Only time will tell.

Helpful

John Hayes

Frequent contributor

Mar 7, 2025

I cannot even begin to tell you how many PMs and questions I've received involving problems with reducers. Can they work well? Yes; but, it is quite common to run into problems such as optics aberrations, stray light, and severe vignetting. Save yourself some money and just go for a bigger sensor right from the start. Most folks who start with a reducer waste a bunch of time with it and in the end, eventually give up and buy a bigger sensor. You'll get better image quality and save yourself a lot of trouble by biting the bullet and getting the bigger sensor. And to that end, buy the best camera you can afford. My Moravian has so far been bullet proof; whereas, I struggle to keep my QHY600 running. I've run through 3 QHY600M cameras and they only seem to last about 10-12 months before they begin to develop problems. FLI is also back with a IMX455 based camera. I don't know the cost but my FLI cameras were all super reliable.

John

Helpful Insightful Respectful Concise Engaging Supportive

Dark Matters Astrophotography

Mar 7, 2025

Ashraf AbuSara:
I have owned Player One Zeus for just about 5 months. But I have already put on it hundreds of hours since December in a remote setting. No issues so far but I can't comment about long term reliability yet. That being said they do claim they use an Industrial grade sensor like Moravian as opposed to a Consumer grade sensor that ZWO uses. So hopefully it will be more reliable. I will say I have interacted with their customer support regarding their filter wheel a few times (not the camera) and they have been very responsive and helpful.

Only time will tell.

QHY also uses the industrial grade sensor and that alone isn’t enough for them to hit the reliability bar others have. The Moravian and FLI offerings use the industrial grade sensors and at least in the case of the Moravian have the runtime and deployment numbers that show them to be very reliable. FLI’s history in the CCD era as the Gold Standard should continue to hold up with the Aurora line.

John mentioned the pricing of the FLI AR455 and they are $9k list. If folks are interested in those we are currently accepting preorders for April builds and you can contact us offline to learn more and discuss further.

Bill

Helpful

Clayton Ostler

Mar 7, 2025 · Edited: Mar 7, 2025

I can see the reducer issue

Dark Matters Astrophotography

Mar 7, 2025

Clayton Ostler:
I agree with the reliability, but spending 10k on a camera for me right now, would have to come with an amazing warranty that replaces my wife and family when they leave too.

For people that have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on optical systems, they care far more about the reliability of the camera than its price. They want to set it and forget it and just have it work for years on end with a tremendous support offering in place when it falls short of that goal. That’s what premium makers understand and are geared to build and provide.

There’s many different people in this hobby with different goals. Not all of them want the cheapest possible equipment.

Well Written Insightful Respectful Concise

Clayton Ostler

Mar 7, 2025 · Edited: Mar 7, 2025

Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Clayton Ostler:
I agree with the reliability, but spending 10k on a camera for me right now, would have to come with an amazing warranty that replaces my wife and family when they leave too.

For people that have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on optical systems, they care far more about the reliability of the camera than its price. They want to set it and forget it and just have it work for years on end with a tremendous support offering in place when it falls short of that goal. That’s what premium makers understand and are geared to build and provide.

There’s many different people in this hobby with different goals. Not all of them want the cheapest possible equipment.

Ashraf AbuSara

Mar 7, 2025

Folks, I do not think the OP was interested in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on optics here. Clearly, he was cost conscious in his original post. The main reason Moravian / FLI was being mentioned is due to reported issues with tilt with ZWO sensors, an issue which seems to be easily addressed with other alternatives like PO without having to spend 2-3 times as much in terms of cost, and is likely not going to be an issue in the first place while imaging at f/7.6. We are not talking "cheapest" possible equipment here. That full frame sensor is still nearly $4k and is a state-of-the-art IMX455.

It is clear that Moravian/ FLI from the comments above are very reliable options given their track record for folks running things in Chile or Namibia. But for other folks that are running mid-range setups in the US, like the OP is trying to do, these other options like PO are far more viable, and so far seem to be reliable with good reviews.

Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging Supportive

Clayton Ostler

Mar 7, 2025

Ashraf AbuSara:
Folks, I do not think the OP was interested in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on optics here. Clearly, he was cost conscious in his original post. The main reason Moravian / FLI was being mentioned is due to reported issues with tilt with ZWO sensors, an issue which seems to be easily addressed with other alternatives like PO without having to spend 2-3 times as much in terms of cost, and is likely not going to be an issue in the first place while imaging at f/7.6. We are not talking "cheapest" possible equipment here. That full frame sensor is still nearly $4k and is a state-of-the-art IMX455.

It is clear that Moravian/ FLI from the comments above are very reliable options given their track record for folks running things in Chile or Namibia. But for other folks that are running mid-range setups in the US, like the OP is trying to do, these other options like PO are far more viable, and so far seem to be reliable with good reviews.

Well said my friend

Dark Matters Astrophotography

Mar 7, 2025

Ashraf AbuSara:
Folks, I do not think the OP was interested in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on optics here. Clearly, he was cost conscious in his original post. The main reason Moravian / FLI was being mentioned is due to reported issues with tilt with ZWO sensors, an issue which seems to be easily addressed with other alternatives like PO without having to spend 2-3 times as much in terms of cost, and is likely not going to be an issue in the first place while imaging at f/7.6. We are not talking "cheapest" possible equipment here. That full frame sensor is still nearly $4k and is a state-of-the-art IMX455.

It is clear that Moravian/ FLI from the comments above are very reliable options given their track record for folks running things in Chile or Namibia. But for other folks that are running mid-range setups in the US, like the OP is trying to do, these other options like PO are far more viable, and so far seem to be reliable with good reviews.

There are a number of customers using Moravian cameras on the exact same rig the OP is discussing. In fact I just finished helping a customer setup a new C3 61000 Pro on a TOA130 with the 645 flattener on a telescope in the customers backyard observatory last week. I wouldn’t say Player One is any more viable than Moravian or vice versa. There’s good options on the market for everyone.

Well Written Concise

Related discussions

Diffraction Pattern Question

So I’ve acquired a small Sharpstar 15028hnt F/2.8 newt and been playing with it to see if it’s truly capable of delivering or working across a full frame sensor. It’s been a couple weeks of precise bench collimation, star testing, tilting, backfocus ...

Aug 27, 2025

Both posts discuss the practical considerations and performance aspects of using full-frame sensors for astrophotography equipment.