Im starting this as a question im still asking myself, I have both experience with OSC and Mono cameras (all high end) and I am fully aware that going mono will always yield the better results but I am also aware of how good OSC cameras are especially in dark skies, I want to hear your opinion on this, my goal is to do mainly broadband so either LRGB or pure OSC from bortle 4 or darker skies, on both dark and bright ( mostly bright) nebulae/galaxies, currently shooting either at 510mm with my APO or 200mm with my lens, and I would switch those optics depending on the season/object/idea etc. What do you think would be the best option ? In mono im looking at LRGB and possibly Ha(for those moon nights and some nebulae), and if I go the MC route, well broadband only. The thing is im very weather and time restricted (most "active" nights are during summer) and the other time of year around 30ish days of actually imaging stuff (this year was extremely bad = less than 60h of actual imaging integration from September to March). What are your opinions on this topic ?
ASI 533MC vs ASI 533MM, what compromises for broadband ?
Engaging
If broadband is your primary interest, consider the option of buying the MC and the MM with just a luminance filter. You can use the MC for color data for which it will be superior to using filters. Given weather constraints, you will have the option of getting a complete dataset that you can process at all times using the MC and then adding luminance data on selected images as time permits. Some of my best broadband results have come from adding luminance taken using a mono to color taken using an OSC. You can add mono narrow band filters to the MM as budget permits later.
Helpful Insightful
Well buying 2 cameras is not an option, its either one or the other 
I moved from a Bortle 4 location with a more continental climate to a Bortle 3 location with much more variable and unpredictable weather. In my former location I imaged exclusive in mono because a clear night usually meant I had a full night of imaging and more often than not I would have another 2 or 3 nights like that before the weather changed. It was no problem getting data for all my separate filters.
Since moving my imaging windows are shorter and less predictable and the probability of multiple successive nights of imaging is low. I image mostly now with an OSC camera and I have dark enough skies that I can get great results with it. I have a dual band filter (Antlia ALP-T Ha & OIII) that gives me decent bicolour NB images (don’t write off an OSC for NB imaging). I still have a mono camera but it’s used exclusively for NB imaging when I want high quality Ha, OIII & SII. In my new location the OSC (and a fast scope) allows me to get maximal efficiency out of my unpredictable imaging windows.
Since moving my imaging windows are shorter and less predictable and the probability of multiple successive nights of imaging is low. I image mostly now with an OSC camera and I have dark enough skies that I can get great results with it. I have a dual band filter (Antlia ALP-T Ha & OIII) that gives me decent bicolour NB images (don’t write off an OSC for NB imaging). I still have a mono camera but it’s used exclusively for NB imaging when I want high quality Ha, OIII & SII. In my new location the OSC (and a fast scope) allows me to get maximal efficiency out of my unpredictable imaging windows.
Well Written Helpful Insightful Engaging
Arun H:
If broadband is your primary interest, consider the option of buying the MC and the MM with just a luminance filter. You can use the MC for color data for which it will be superior to using filters. Given weather constraints, you will have the option of getting a complete dataset that you can process at all times using the MC and then adding luminance data on selected images as time permits. Some of my best broadband results have come from adding luminance taken using a mono to color taken using an OSC. You can add mono narrow band filters to the MM as budget permits later.
Why do you think a color camera is superior to using RGB filters?
Luka Poropat:
Im starting this as a question im still asking myself, I have both experience with OSC and Mono cameras (all high end) and I am fully aware that going mono will always yield the better results but I am also aware of how good OSC cameras are especially in dark skies, I want to hear your opinion on this, my goal is to do mainly broadband so either LRGB or pure OSC from bortle 4 or darker skies, on both dark and bright ( mostly bright) nebulae/galaxies, currently shooting either at 510mm with my APO or 200mm with my lens, and I would switch those optics depending on the season/object/idea etc. What do you think would be the best option ? In mono im looking at LRGB and possibly Ha(for those moon nights and some nebulae), and if I go the MC route, well broadband only. The thing is im very weather and time restricted (most "active" nights are during summer) and the other time of year around 30ish days of actually imaging stuff (this year was extremely bad = less than 60h of actual imaging integration from September to March). What are your opinions on this topic ?
It's not possible to make 1:1 comparison between OSC and mono cameras given the interpolation and CFA filter pollution - but you seem to have already answered your own question in the very first sentence.
Why do you think a color camera is superior to using RGB filters?
I don't simply "think" it - it is based on quantitative calculations. For pure RGB data, the OSC is a bit better:
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/682340-monochrome-vs-one-shot-color-–-by-the-numbers-please/
Plus the advantage of having a processable image set if the session is cut short.
But add luminance and the mono wins.
Note that the analysis does not account for light pollution. In significantly light polluted sites, the mono with filters will be less affected in each channel by LP due to the narrower bandwidth of the mono filters. The OP is imaging from Bortle 4 so this is a smaller consideration. I personally always use the mono if imaging from Bortle 6 and the OSC from 4 or better (for RGB).
Well Written Helpful Insightful Concise
The other comment I briefly made in the prior post basically matches to the key assumptions of that post.
I'm not necessarily sure I agree that counting photons collected under a theoretical CFA curve integration is a conclusive.
I'm not necessarily sure I agree that counting photons collected under a theoretical CFA curve integration is a conclusive.
Luka,
Here is another Cloudy Nights thread I just read a few hours ago that you may find interesting when comparing the 533MM to 533MC cameras:
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/863049-lrgb-vs-osc-lpro-experiment/
Here is another Cloudy Nights thread I just read a few hours ago that you may find interesting when comparing the 533MM to 533MC cameras:
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/863049-lrgb-vs-osc-lpro-experiment/
Well Written Concise
That we can debate OSC versus monochrome shows how much the gap has closed in recent years. Based on the posted threads, which one is "more efficient" seems to be a coin flip.
I have used both OSC and monochrome. If I am being frank, for broadband the difference is not that crazy in terms of soaking up photons. For amateurs like us an OSC will do just fine and right now the 533MC or 2600MC are as good as they get.
However, there are two major benefits to monochrome:
Since you don't care much for narrowband, the 2nd point is not really that relevant for you. It is also the biggest benefit of spending the extra money on monochrome.
Having played the musical chairs of equipment myself, I would buy the OSC if I knew I was only ever going to do broadband from dark skies with limited time.
I have used both OSC and monochrome. If I am being frank, for broadband the difference is not that crazy in terms of soaking up photons. For amateurs like us an OSC will do just fine and right now the 533MC or 2600MC are as good as they get.
However, there are two major benefits to monochrome:
- Luminance and no debayering means you can get finer details at a faster rate. One of the things that bugged me with a OSC is that I could never seem to approach the level of detail that the folks with monochrome could.
- Narrowband. While the jury is definitely out on broadband, there is no contest when it comes to narrowband. Monochrome wins, and its not even close. Narrowband is incredibly inefficient on an OSC. It's a pain in the butt to process and you have to really struggle to approach anything close to what a monochrome running SHO can do. You could not pay me to go back to duo-band filters. Ever.
Since you don't care much for narrowband, the 2nd point is not really that relevant for you. It is also the biggest benefit of spending the extra money on monochrome.
Having played the musical chairs of equipment myself, I would buy the OSC if I knew I was only ever going to do broadband from dark skies with limited time.
Helpful Respectful Engaging Supportive
I'm not necessarily sure I agree that counting photons collected under a theoretical CFA curve integration is a conclusive.
Collecting photons is pretty much everything in this hobby. We go to great lengths to collect more useful photons - larger aperture, more quantum efficiency, darker skies. You are free to agree for disagree with anything as a matter of personal faith, but debating a mathematical argument is done with mathematics!
I also agree with both SemiPro and Keith that if all I needed to do was broadband, I had regular access to dark sky, and I could afford only one camera, it would be an OSC. Given unlimited time, the physics and math favors a mono, but we never have unlimited time, clouds always have the final say, and convenience is a big non mathematical equalizer. Besides, the skies will outlive us. I can always decide to go back at some future point with a mono camera and collect luminance.
Well Written Helpful Insightful Engaging
Mono is sooo boring.
And i am in the same situation now but in the funny way, i mean i already have mono cameras and only one OSC cameras as cooled for DSO, now i keep thinking between OSC or mono for only RGB stars colors, Lum will be done with mono no doubt, and if i can buy a dual band filter then i can do Ha and OIII with OSC too, and that will leave SII which will be done with a mono, i can try doing Ha and OIII with mono but i have Ha only for larger size and not OIII, so that leaving me with RGB, should i go with OSC or RGB filters?
I live under Bortle 8/9, i have clear skies a lot, but my own life is so limited and busy, so i can't make it every night even if it is super clear, and most targets don't last in the sky per night longer than 4-5 hours anyway, there is always like 30min-1hour wasted for setup, or issues.
I live under Bortle 8/9, i have clear skies a lot, but my own life is so limited and busy, so i can't make it every night even if it is super clear, and most targets don't last in the sky per night longer than 4-5 hours anyway, there is always like 30min-1hour wasted for setup, or issues.
Here is a comparison between OSC with Dualband Filter and Mono with NB Filter. Decide yourself.
Werner Stumpferl:
Here is a comparison between OSC with Dualband Filter and Mono with NB Filter. Decide yourself.
You can't compare the output of a 7nm filter with that of a 4.5nm one. For the comparison to be fair you should have used the Antlia ALP-T.
Well Written
andrea tasselli:Werner Stumpferl:
Here is a comparison between OSC with Dualband Filter and Mono with NB Filter. Decide yourself.
You can't compare the output of a 7nm filter with that of a 4.5nm one. For the comparison to be fair you should have used the Antlia ALP-T.
I have a second "unfair" test between a qhy268c with ALP-T and qhy294m with Antlia Ha 4.5nm. All in all the same result. The unfair condition is that the IMX571 sensor is with it's pixelsize and sensitivity in Ha much more less sensitive then the imx492 sensor.
I just want to add that currently from my (local) calculations going mono (LRGB Ha) is 563€/617$ more expensive than going the color route. And even more expensive if ofcourse if you include more expensive OIII + SII filters.
Werner Stumpferl:
Here is a comparison between OSC with Dualband Filter and Mono with NB Filter. Decide yourself.
*** Yes and I do believe that although different bandpasses were used, however im more interested in the same but broadand mostly, like from the CN thread posted above, LRGB in the 3:1:1:1 is not that huge of a difference than OSC as I thought. ***