Hi all,
Now that the minicam has been available for a couple months, I’m curious to know how everyone’s been finding their minicams so far. I’m interested in your personal review and thoughts about this camera and if its worth it as I’m looking to upgrade to this.
Currently I have a stock Canon 650d.
Thanks!
I can’t speak to the Minicam8 but I can about the ToupTek equivalent. There are a couple of differences that I think are important. First, the filter wheel. Both have 8 positions and come with L,R,G,B, Ha, Oiii and Sii filters. The ToupTek uses standard 1.25” thread in filters, the Zwo uses less common 19mm x 12mm filters. If you already have a collection of 1.25” filters it’s nice to be able to pop them in. The another difference is in the camera it self. Both use the 585 sensor but the ToupTek version has a special HDR mode that gives a final image output of 16 bits with a dynamic range of 15.5 stops.
Bottom line is, if you need this to be absolutely as small and light as possible, the minicam 8 wins. If you think the standard filter size and HDR output mode is useful to you, then go with the ToupTek. Both are a big step forward in the hobby offering the option to get into a full mono rig at under $1000.00.
Tony Gondola · Oct 20, 2025, 12:07 AM
I can’t speak to the Minicam8 but I can about the ToupTek equivalent. There are a couple of differences that I think are important. First, the filter wheel. Both have 8 positions and come with L,R,G,B, Ha, Oiii and Sii filters. The ToupTek uses standard 1.25” thread in filters, the Zwo uses less common 19mm x 12mm filters. If you already have a collection of 1.25” filters it’s nice to be able to pop them in. The another difference is in the camera it self. Both use the 585 sensor but the ToupTek version has a special HDR mode that gives a final image output of 16 bits with a dynamic range of 15.5 stops.
Bottom line is, if you need this to be absolutely as small and light as possible, the minicam 8 wins. If you think the standard filter size and HDR output mode is useful to you, then go with the ToupTek. Both are a big step forward in the hobby offering the option to get into a full mono rig at under $1000.00.
Hi Tony,
I have already looked into the Touptek Deal.
Testar Australia are offering the bundle for more than double the price (w/ Antilas) of the minicam photometric version.
I’ve just wanted to see how people are finding their cameras. When this camera released, there were driver issues and I’m hoping they’ve been resolved or minimized as well as seeing its performance.
Don’t want to be spending a lot of money for a camera which doesn’t perform well or has issues.
Thanks!
The Minicam8 has the HDR mode as well.
I used the Minicam8 for a bit, however I got it at the early bird price so I felt like it was a good deal initially. I’m not sure if the competing cameras have scaled up in price as well, but I would only chose the Minicam8 over a competing offering if the size and weight savings were that important. IMO, being able to select your own 1.25” filters is worth getting something else, as you are stuck with only Ximei filters that interoperate with the Minicam8.
Whether you should consider an IMX585… it would be a fine improvement over your current camera in terms of sensitivity and cooling, however the FOV when paired with your current scopes will take a serious hit.
Joey Conenna · Oct 20, 2025, 12:41 AM
The Minicam8 has the HDR mode as well.
I used the Minicam8 for a bit, however I got it at the early bird price so I felt like it was a good deal initially. I’m not sure if the competing cameras have scaled up in price as well, but I would only chose the Minicam8 over a competing offering if the size and weight savings were that important. IMO, being able to select your own 1.25” filters is worth getting something else, as you are stuck with only Ximei filters that interoperate with the Minicam8.
Whether you should consider an IMX585… it would be a fine improvement over your current camera in terms of sensitivity and cooling, however the FOV when paired with your current scopes will take a serious hit.
That’s good news about ZWO incorporating the HDR mode. It’s the only mode I use these days and it’s working great. It’s true, the 585 is a small sensor so you will loose FOV compared with larger formats. On the other hand it doesn’t require 2” filters and is very forgiving in terms of sensor tilt and other aberrations. I can shot my 6” F/6 Newtonian with it and not use a coma corrector. Not something I could get away with in a larger sensor. At 900mm I get a FOV that’s comparable to much larger scopes and can go after smaller objects and details within larger objects.
I have the minicam, I think I have a couple images here with it, here is one.
https://app.astrobin.com/u/ScottF?i=zekhch#gallery
I quite like it and the build quality is excellent. The special filters are a bit of negative unless they expand the lineup. I just got the argon filter, but I haven’t had a night to try it out. It pairs well with the Carbonstar 150 newt.
Hello,
I’ve been using the minicam 8 for like 2 months, first mono camera for me (I have a 2600MC).
I had no issues since then, everything works really well with NINA.
Of course it’s a small sensor compared to APS C and it lowers your FOV size but that’s exactly why i chosed it! The only downside is the lower resolution compared to 2600 series but drizzle x2 gives good enough resolution for printing :)
You can check my last two pictures https://app.astrobin.com/u/ValeryL#gallery
Actually the potential resolution is higher with the 585 than it is with the 2600 because the 585 has smaller pixels. The 2600 is a much larger chip and might seems sharper because it’s has more pixels but that’s not the same as potential resolution.
I think 600mm focal length is about the limit I feel comfortable with that sensor. That puts it at 1.0 arc second/px. If your mount is well behaved you can probably go longer, but the seeing needs to support it.
I’m running it at 900mm, 0.66” per pixel from central Oklahoma. I have pushed it as far as 1800mm with decent results.
I got mine just for something to toy around with. The camera is really neat, and so tiny. The TEC also is hilariously strong, pushing up to -50 delta. I ran at -40C last night in the desert with only 60% power heh.
But, after finally getting the OAG, putting it on a real scope, I think I’ve decided I’ve had enough playing around. The narrow field of view and overall lack of pixels is just not ideal. Maybe this would be good on something like a 70mm frac, but on my Esprit 100, it’s just not ideal. Not for someone who’s always used APS-C and 3nm filters. Something like a 70mm might make up for the lack of pixels with drizzle, but on the 100 it already feels oversampled and I don’t see any reason to drizzle. I ran it for awhile on my Roki 135mm, it was ‘okay’ and drizzle really became a strong improvement, but alas, using a 135mm focal length and having the small field of view… was like imaging with huge handicap.
Some friends and I discussed it last night, if they had developed the minicam with a 533, it honestly would have been a better design. Still a small form factor, but twice the sensor size on one dimension. I don’t wanna say it’s a bad camera, it’s not, but it falls short on just about every factor. The 12 bit sensor is somewhat overcome by the Linearity mode, but it’s still nothing like a 14 or 16 bit.
📷 image.png
Here’s a short 10×600 Ha stack from last night on the Esprit 100. I suspect (crazy thought) there might actually be some tilt in my sensor. It’s hard to imagine having stars this rough on a tiny sensor.
For someone in a pinch, on a very tight budget and wants to explore, the Minicam really is a pretty awesome deal. All in with the imaging train for around 1K USD. For the experienced user, it just falls short.
Tony Gondola · Oct 20, 2025 at 07:18 PM
I’m running it at 900mm, 0.66” per pixel from central Oklahoma. I have pushed it as far as 1800mm with decent results.
That’s impressive.
Brian Puhl · Oct 20, 2025, 07:45 PM
I got mine just for something to toy around with. The camera is really neat, and so tiny. The TEC also is hilariously strong, pushing up to -50 delta. I ran at -40C last night in the desert with only 60% power heh.
But, after finally getting the OAG, putting it on a real scope, I think I’ve decided I’ve had enough playing around. The narrow field of view and overall lack of pixels is just not ideal. Maybe this would be good on something like a 70mm frac, but on my Esprit 100, it’s just not ideal. Not for someone who’s always used APS-C and 3nm filters. Something like a 70mm might make up for the lack of pixels with drizzle, but on the 100 it already feels oversampled and I don’t see any reason to drizzle. I ran it for awhile on my Roki 135mm, it was ‘okay’ and drizzle really became a strong improvement, but alas, using a 135mm focal length and having the small field of view… was like imaging with huge handicap.
Some friends and I discussed it last night, if they had developed the minicam with a 533, it honestly would have been a better design. Still a small form factor, but twice the sensor size on one dimension. I don’t wanna say it’s a bad camera, it’s not, but it falls short on just about every factor. The 12 bit sensor is somewhat overcome by the Linearity mode, but it’s still nothing like a 14 or 16 bit.
📷 image.png
For someone in a pinch, on a very tight budget and wants to explore, the Minicam really is a pretty awesome deal. All in with the imaging train for around 1K USD. For the experienced user, it just falls short.
This is something that people who don’t have a photographic background might not fully appreciate so I’m glad you brought it up. Aside from actual resolution there is an impression of sharpness that comes from larger sensors with a lot of pixels because they simply do not need to be enlarged as much to fill the screen. This is a well known effect in traditional photography and the reason why many profession photographers work in medium or large format rather than 35mm. Because of it’s low megapixel count, a sensor like the 585 is going to be more demanding to get a good result. Everything has to be right or it’s going to look soft when compared to say a 2600.
Tony Gondola · Oct 20, 2025 at 08:14 PM
Brian Puhl · Oct 20, 2025, 07:45 PM
I got mine just for something to toy around with. The camera is really neat, and so tiny. The TEC also is hilariously strong, pushing up to -50 delta. I ran at -40C last night in the desert with only 60% power heh.
But, after finally getting the OAG, putting it on a real scope, I think I’ve decided I’ve had enough playing around. The narrow field of view and overall lack of pixels is just not ideal. Maybe this would be good on something like a 70mm frac, but on my Esprit 100, it’s just not ideal. Not for someone who’s always used APS-C and 3nm filters. Something like a 70mm might make up for the lack of pixels with drizzle, but on the 100 it already feels oversampled and I don’t see any reason to drizzle. I ran it for awhile on my Roki 135mm, it was ‘okay’ and drizzle really became a strong improvement, but alas, using a 135mm focal length and having the small field of view… was like imaging with huge handicap.
Some friends and I discussed it last night, if they had developed the minicam with a 533, it honestly would have been a better design. Still a small form factor, but twice the sensor size on one dimension. I don’t wanna say it’s a bad camera, it’s not, but it falls short on just about every factor. The 12 bit sensor is somewhat overcome by the Linearity mode, but it’s still nothing like a 14 or 16 bit.
📷 image.png
For someone in a pinch, on a very tight budget and wants to explore, the Minicam really is a pretty awesome deal. All in with the imaging train for around 1K USD. For the experienced user, it just falls short.This is something that people who don’t have a photographic background might not fully appreciate so I’m glad you brought it up. Aside from actual resolution there is an impression of sharpness that comes from larger sensors with a lot of pixels because they simply do not need to be enlarged as much to fill the screen. This is a well known effect in traditional photography and the reason why many profession photographers work in medium or large format rather than 35mm. Because of it’s low megapixel count, a sensor like the 585 is going to be more demanding to get a good result. Everything has to be right or it’s going to look soft when compared to say a 2600.
That depends on how you frame the comparison. If you put the 585 and 2600 on the same scope, same target, the FOV will obviously be much greater on the 2600, but the resolution will be superior on the 585. So if you crop the 2600 to the same FOV, the 585 should be superior.
That’s right because of the smaller pixels in the 585, assuming sampling and the seeing allows it.
If you are thinking about switching over from your DSLR, then I would advise you checking out astronomy.tools FOV calculator if you can live with FoV penalty.
If you’re fine with it you have the chance to buy the cheapest mono camera with the highest absolute quantum efficiency and dynamic range on the market.
The dynamic range of 15,5 stops (linearity HDR mode) beats the IMX571/455 series of cameras by a large margin, because the IMX585 achieves it with a ridiculous read noise of just one electron per readout. If you use this camera you will never have to think about read noise again.
I don’t have to tell you about the quantum efficiency, QHY already did the math: Quantum Efficiency Performance of the IMX585 Sensor in the miniCAM8
Buyer beware, the IMX585 has 2.9 micron pixels which requires a steadier mount and guiding. Optical field quality only has to be good around the center, which allows smaller optics (= less strain on the mount, pun intended). If your sampling is spicy and around the region 0.4”-0.7”/pix or higher I recommend sticking to deep sky lucky imaging. Yes, you can simply do 1-15 seconds exposures and toss out the wobbly ones. Your read noise penalty will be small to negligible depending on your exp. time and target brightness.
I don’t know why people on the internet always come to the conclusion that the FoV of the sensor is too small and that it makes the sensor inferior to the community classics IMX571/455. If you want to do super wide field imaging, better stick to the IMX492/571/455 solutions.
If you want raw performance and achieve a better sampling with smaller optics and don’t mind the smaller FoV then the IMX585 is for you. On top of that, this camera is also usable for planetary because of the smaller pixels and higher fps.
And no, I am not a sales guy from QHY, I just want to extend the discussion about this sensor/camera to more than just the FoV. I use it (Touptek ATR585M) myself for medium to small sized target like nebula details and really small galaxies and it’s fun.
Sincerely,
A guy from the internet with an IMX585, IMX571 and KAF16200
I got mine a couple of months ago (the mono version) and after some learning curve, I am very happy with it. Excellent image quality, outstanding dynamic range and good filters. Nothing to complain.
It even works fine with my RASA11 plus the ZWO CAA because they are similar in size and together are an unbeatable couple for high resolution imaging in a smal FOV.
To cut the long story short, I am a very happy user of this camera.
Someone in the earlier post confused minicam with ZWO - this QHY’s line up.
Mono version here.
Feels well built (but… fw detail below)
“Fan” fact - there is no software On/Off for the cooling fan where it engages only when TEC is activated, like in other brands’ versions. The moment the cam is connected to the PC (and you need to energise is in order to be able to do so) the “fan must goes on”. And it is quite not quiet.
This package is super handy with small frac and small SW mount for extremely light but capable mobile setup to dark site or for air travel. Currently I have it paired with cheapo 60 mm edf doublet but it seems FRA 180 or even 135 would be working nicely with it for well sized FoV.
If your sensor is still super clean (no dust moths) and you paired it with slow scope (f/6) you can probably get away without any calibration frames. Not recommended but you can - nice illumination across the frame, sensor very linear.
I have mixed success with fast optics (f/3.4 - 3.8) -due to pronounced vignetting.
Additionally my specimen has a bit of an issue with the FW. It stops exactly at the same spot for each filter but ends up not completely squared with the sensor. Additionally it seems filters in the roulette are not entirely symmetrical with sensor’s horizontal center-line. This combination of FW misalignment and very small filters, on a fast system results in an angled shadow line at the bottom of each sub. Plus quite pronounced loss of illumination caused by the additional sensor mask (it looks a bit like a petal camera lends hood, but flatten) so your flats need to do heavy lifting here.
TBH I spoke with Astrolumina in Germany (authorised QHY distributor, super customer support, recommend) about returning this altogether. I was thinking of going with the Touptek deal for their set in the regular size of filters etc. But since I went with frac to Tenerife, and none of the issues observed on fast optics showed for me there, I decided to keep this one, just to avoid back and forth shipments.
All in all I am happy with this purchase but if I knew from the get go about potential issues on fast optics I would spend more time considering other vendors, most probably ultimately going with Touptek.
But for fracs I’d recommend this, especially if smal size is a top priority.
I bought the minicam8 to pair with the SQA55. I absolutely love this little camera. For me it was the perfect price point to try out mono imaging and I have zero regrets. In fact it has renewed my love of astrophotography and I can’t wait for clear nights to see what else it can do. I’ve captured some images that have amazed me. I have only captured emission nebulae so far because they are my favorite to image because they're easy. I haven’t tested it on more advanced targets yet. My only gripe is that as soon as you plug it in, the fan is on full speed. I keep hoping they will push a firmware update to fix that, but it’s not a huge issue. Here’s an image of the Heart Nebula I captured this week with this camera.
📷 IC1805_HeartNebula.jpeg
I’m curious about how you guys find the flat calibration in the MiniCAM’s Linearity HDR mode to be. When I tried shooting flats (both with a T-shirt and without, just pointing at the clear sky) in the Linearity HDR mode, I obtained frames that have sort of a finely “mottled” look (see below, these are using the Green filter and it’s more visible with LRGB than SHO) and which calibrates with issues, but it’s not present in the Full Resolution mode. I wonder if it’s something with just my unit or seen elsewhere. The darkened edge on one side is due to an imaging train configuration and not from the camera sensor.
Linearity HDR
Full Resolution
WLR2678 · Oct 23, 2025, 05:27 PM
I’m curious about how you guys find the flat calibration in the MiniCAM’s Linearity HDR mode to be. When I tried shooting flats (both with a T-shirt and without, just pointing at the clear sky) in the Linearity HDR mode, I obtained frames that have sort of a finely “mottled” look (see below) and which calibrates with issues, but it’s not present in the Full Resolution mode. I wonder if it’s something with just my unit or seen elsewhere. The darkened edge on one side is due to an imaging train configuration and not from the camera sensor.
Linearity HDR
Full Resolution
HDR is full resolution. I’ve not seen this pattern or had any problem with HDR mode flats with my ToupTek 585m so it might be a firmware issue. You said “calibrates with issues”. What exactly are you seeing?
Tony Gondola · Oct 23, 2025, 05:40 PM
WLR2678 · Oct 23, 2025, 05:27 PM
I’m curious about how you guys find the flat calibration in the MiniCAM’s Linearity HDR mode to be. When I tried shooting flats (both with a T-shirt and without, just pointing at the clear sky) in the Linearity HDR mode, I obtained frames that have sort of a finely “mottled” look (see below) and which calibrates with issues, but it’s not present in the Full Resolution mode. I wonder if it’s something with just my unit or seen elsewhere. The darkened edge on one side is due to an imaging train configuration and not from the camera sensor.
Linearity HDR
Full Resolution
HDR is full resolution. I’ve not seen this pattern or had any problem with HDR mode flats with my ToupTek 585m so it might be a firmware issue. You said “calibrates with issues”. What exactly are you seeing?
Yes, both are full res., and the “Full Resolution Mode” in MiniCAM is just turning Linearity HDR off. I found that by calibrating with the “mottled” flats, the stack (dithered) will turn out to have walking noise-alike artifacts, and it’s similar in effect to fixed pattern noise. Ultimately I just decided to go ahead to use Full Resolution Mode flats with Linearity HDR lights (set to the same gain and offset fixed in HDR) and the artifacts were not visible anymore.
Odd but great that you have a solution. I am sure others will find that info useful.