Moving on from DSLR to either Mono or OSC

Please forgive what I’m sure is a well-worn topic.

I have been at the hobby for the last year and have got results I am pretty pleased with, with a modded Canon 700D.

I think I am in the hobby for the long haul so am saving now to get a dedicated astro cam.

I am going to stick to APS-C so am looking at the 2600mm or 2600mc.

My gut tells me to go straight to mono, especially after speaking to some more experienced imagers who I respect.

Just wondering what peoples opinion is here. Did many start with mono or did you go to OSC first?

I am interested in both narrowband and broadband targets(mostly reflection and dark nebulae in BB).
I image primarily from Bortle 5 but occasionally from Bortle 3.

I live in Ireland so clear skies are no so frequent but on the other hand I am not in any rush

My setup is 150PDS Newt with TS-Optics GPU corrector on an EQ6R-Pro.

Many thanks in advance.

John,

You are probably going to get a gazillion responses here. Fortunately, there are only 2 choices: mono or OSC. I have both the 2600mm and mc, but I really only use the mono camera at my Bortle 7 site. The mc camera is ok, but at your B3/5 sites, the mono gives way more versatility for both BB and NB targets. So, mono all the way, in my opinion. Get it and a nice set of filters.

Bruce

Bruce Donzanti · Sep 2, 2025, 11:41 AM
John,
You are probably going to get a gazillion responses here. Fortunately, there are only 2 choices: mono or OSC. I have both the 2600mm and mc, but I really only use the mono camera at my Bortle 7 site. The mc camera is ok, but at your B3/5 sites, the mono gives way more versatility for both BB and NB targets. So, mono all the way, in my opinion. Get it and a nice set of filters.
Bruce

Thank you so much Bruce! Much appreciated. The upfront cost is so high that I think I will be only able to afford the ZWO ones but might get a narrower Oiii filter.
I’m sure they will be a big step up from my Canon in any event.
Amazing images on your page by the way!

Thank you very much, John. The ZWO filters might be ok, I never used them. You can also check on Astromart to see if someone is selling a decent filter set at a reduced cost. Good luck!

I went from DSLR to mono. I have both the 2600mm and mc, and the mono gets far more usage in my Bortle 6 skies. I have the ZWO BB and NB filters, and they are ok. I’m not sure how urgent it is to get narrower filters in your skies. IMO, cost(initial cost, plus filters and filter wheel) is the only compelling reason to shoot OCS over mono.

Hi,

after my 600Da I switched to a color IMX533 and later to a color IMX571.
Then I bought the IMX585 Mono kit from ToupTek.
The results where much better than with the color 533.

I sold the 533 and 571 color fast and bought a 571 mono and a second 585 mono.

Cameras, filterwheels and filter (1,25” or 36mm) are from ToupTek.
They offer nice kits with discounts.

The ToupTek LRGBSHO filters are quiet good.
In my opinion they are better then the ZWO ones.

Maybe you should take a look at the ToupTek homepage.

Greetings
Brian

I went from DSLR to Mono. If you don’t mind additional cost go for it.

I would go for the mono (and did so personally in the past). I would presume that the difference between an OSC and your DSLR is only very gradual (ok, the is cooled (not that a big deal unless you are in very hot climates) and the sensor is more modern), while with mono you really open new dimensions. But it also cost you more money. CS Matthias

ScottF · Sep 2, 2025, 12:01 PM
I went from DSLR to mono. I have both the 2600mm and mc, and the mono gets far more usage in my Bortle 6 skies. I have the ZWO BB and NB filters, and they are ok. I’m not sure how urgent it is to get narrower filters in your skies. IMO, cost(initial cost, plus filters and filter wheel) is the only compelling reason to shoot OCS over mono.

Thanks very much Scott! Yes, it is the cost that is the main issue but I’d rather spend once rather than changing my mind in a couple of years time

Brian · Sep 2, 2025, 12:02 PM
Hi,

after my 600Da I switched to a color IMX533 and later to a color IMX571.
Then I bought the IMX585 Mono kit from ToupTek.
The results where much better than with the color 533.

I sold the 533 and 571 color fast and bought a 571 mono and a second 585 mono.

Cameras, filterwheels and filter (1,25” or 36mm) are from ToupTek.
They offer nice kits with discounts.

The ToupTek LRGBSHO filters are quiet good.
In my opinion they are better then the ZWO ones.

Maybe you should take a look at the ToupTek homepage.
Greetings
Brian

Great Brian thanks! Very interesting and a good case study for me. I will check out the Touptek now for sure thanks

My two cents;
Those who haven’t tried both won’t give you the most accurate advice. The same goes for those only having experience from high bortle zones. Your bortle tells me you could do very well with a OSC camera. And make no mistake, a 2600MC would give you miles better data than your old DSLR. IMO it’s not even a comparison.

That being said, your main interest in reflection & dark nebula would also lead me to recommend OSC. If you get a decent dual-band filter then you’re set to go for most emission nebula as well.

I went straight for mono and loved it, then I added OSC and I love that one equally much. I use both simultaneously and OSC does simplify the process a lot. You save A LOT of cost and you don’t have to deal with x amount of flats/darkflats for each filter you decided to use at any given time. Processing wise I don’t think there’s much advantage for one over the other tbh.

I can highly recommend both OSC and Scorpio dual-band filters which seem to be among the absolute best considering what they cost. ZWO filters are not very good at all. Their LRGB filters are ok, but their SHO filters are extremely prone to halos and aberrations - I don’t think that has changed over the years.

For mono I have a full set of Antlia filters which are excellent quality, but again, you’re then talking about probably double-triple the cost for very little advantage.

I say go OSC and don’t look back. Heck, for the price of a mono setup you could probably do two IMX571 OSC cameras.

GalacticRAVE · Sep 2, 2025, 12:24 PM
I would go for the mono (and did so personally in the past). I would presume that the difference between an OSC and your DSLR is only very gradual (ok, the is cooled (not that a big deal unless you are in very hot climates) and the sensor is more modern), while with mono you really open new dimensions. But it also cost you more money. CS Matthias

Thanks very much Matthias.

The options and versatility of mono is very attractive to me.

Still I would hope that a cooled OSC would rid me of some of the issues I have to deal with on my Canon..

1: The dark shadow at the bottom of every frame and stack caused by the mirror box which cannot be fully calibrated out with flats.

2: The banding in every image which has to be dealt with in PI.

3: The dark magenta geometric patch that appears in all my recent stacks at the centre of the image caused by the PDAF pixels in the Canon. I have created a pixel rejection map from the master dark with a high sigma value and i use it as a mask on my image to add back the rejected green pixels before processing. What a total pain!

4: The poor anti-reflective coating on the sensor window…

😭😭😭😭

Jan Erik Vallestad · Sep 2, 2025, 12:43 PM
My two cents;
Those who haven’t tried both won’t give you the most accurate advice. The same goes for those only having experience from high bortle zones. Your bortle tells me you could do very well with a OSC camera. And make no mistake, a 2600MC would give you miles better data than your old DSLR. IMO it’s not even a comparison.

That being said, your main interest in reflection & dark nebula would also lead me to recommend OSC. If you get a decent dual-band filter then you’re set to go for most emission nebula as well.

I went straight for mono and loved it, then I added OSC and I love that one equally much. I use both simultaneously and OSC does simplify the process a lot. You save A LOT of cost and you don’t have to deal with x amount of flats/darkflats for each filter you decided to use at any given time. Processing wise I don’t think there’s much advantage for one over the other tbh.

I can highly recommend both OSC and Scorpio dual-band filters which seem to be among the absolute best considering what they cost. ZWO filters are not very good at all. Their LRGB filters are ok, but their SHO filters are extremely prone to halos and aberrations - I don’t think that has changed over the years.

For mono I have a full set of Antlia filters which are excellent quality, but again, you’re then talking about probably double-triple the cost for very little advantage.

I say go OSC and don’t look back. Heck, for the price of a mono setup you could probably do two IMX571 OSC cameras.

Ohhhhh this is food for thought! Thank you very much Jan

I have both mono and OSC set-ups and of the two I prefer the OSC ones for their easiness of use and quick turn-around time, especially if considering broad-band imagery. For NB it's a toss between depth and resolution potential vs. easiness of use and time-effectiveness which is very important when clear skies are at a premium (as in here the UK). Having used IMX571 and IMX455 monochrome sensor-based cameras I'm NOT convinced they deserve such a high praise.I agree wholeheartedly on what Jan Erik Vallestad wrote above.

While most of the above responses tilt towards Mono, I am inclined to recommend OSC as the setup is less complex and quick to use and process. Beyond doubt the final results from Mono after imaging through all filters will be superior, for my Bortle 5/6 skies I find OSC easier to use and gives quicker results

I am using a ZWO 533 MC for over 2 years now with my Askar SQA 55 and find the performance good

I started with a very good Lumix GH5 DSLR and it gave me good results. The progression after that was 585MC, 585MC cooled and finally a 585MM. In terms of results each step resulted in improved images. I’ve only recently gone from OSC to Mono so I haven’t done a lot of targets but from what I’ve seen so far, the results have improved. Under B8 skies with mono I can go deeper, cleaner and with better control on the processing end. I know you want a APS-C sensor but with a smaller sensor you can get into the mono game at a very low cost. I’m running a Touptek 585 bundle that included the camera, filter wheel and filters for under 1K, so cost doesn’t have to be prohibitive.

John Walsh:
Thanks very much Matthias.

The options and versatility of mono is very attractive to me.

Still I would hope that a cooled OSC would rid me of some of the issues I have to deal with on my Canon..

1: The dark shadow at the bottom of every frame and stack caused by the mirror box which cannot be fully calibrated out with flats.

2: The banding in every image which has to be dealt with in PI.

3: The dark magenta geometric patch that appears in all my recent stacks at the centre of the image caused by the PDAF pixels in the Canon. I have created a pixel rejection map from the master dark with a high sigma value and i use it as a mask on my image to add back the rejected green pixels before processing. What a total pain!

4: The poor anti-reflective coating on the sensor window…

😭😭😭😭

I have used extensively DSLRs, both Nikon and Canon, in the past (and occasionally still do) and there is a vast sea of difference in overall performance between those and a modern, cooled astro-cam, even more so if it is an IMX533 or IMX571 based one.

As expected, many responses, and at the end of the day, you have to make your own choice. A further comment to my previous post. If your clear sky time is limited, and galaxies and reflection nebula are high on your list, then OSC is good. However, if you want to shoot nebulas, I think mono is better. If you are shooting OSC and a dual NB filter, only 1 of 4 pixels are going to record Ha, compared to mono with an Ha filter where every pixel can contribute.

Actually, all pixels will record (some) Ha.

I have Both OSC and Mono Cameras.

andrea tasselli · Sep 2, 2025, 02:18 PM
Actually, all pixels will record (some) Ha.

Which is part of the problem.

With the amount of light pollution in my area, a mono setup would probably produce better results. However, I’m lazy and not very skilled in astrophotography either, so I’ve just stuck with an OSC for its ease of use.

One thing that rarely gets mentioned in these discussion is that a mono camera has superior resolution over a color camera. The issue with color sensors (and NB) is not that only ¼ of the pixels are “seeing“ light and your SNR is changed, but that your Nyquist frequency is reduced by a factor of 2 (along the diagonals) for the blue and red channel. For me, how much that reduction in resolution is affecting the image was quite a surprise when I changed from the 533mc to the 2600mm.

Yes, you can recover some of that with drizzle, but it requires extra time and some extra steps and hoops.

Anyway, it’s a question of money in the end. A color setup is a lot cheaper.

I have and use both the 2600’s… I tend to use the OSC when I know I am not going to have the time on target that a mono camera requires. I would not recommend the ZWO filters. Halo’s… I am a big fan of the Antlia LRGB and 3 or 5 nm NB filters as well as the ALP-T filter for OSC cameras. Other than the regulated cooling of a dedicated astro camera I feel you would spend a lot of money for very little improvement over your DSLR by going with an OSC camera. If you really want that next level improvement with your images I recommend going mono and build a cache of filters as finances allow…

Good Luck and clear skies!

Tim

Tony Gondola:
Which is part of the problem.

Not really.

Mono or OSC from DSLR