What to Upgrade to? ZWO Asi 533mc Pro or 2600mc Duo or Pro

I am thinking about upgrading my gear from a modified Canon 600D to a Astro dedicated camera.
I have the zenithstar 61 with 360mm. with my research the Asi 533mc pro and the 2600mc Pro or duo (because the duo is cheaper out of some reason).
I would go for the 533 for the price, the only reason on why I'm not sure about it is the 1x1 format, I'm not sure if it will bother me to much. that's why the 2600 might be another option. It is 1000 bucks more expensive though.
Since I own the Asi air, i have to go with a ZWO camera.

what are your experiences? which one would you go for?

My gear:

Zenithstar 61 – 360mm
skywatcher star adventurer GTI
ZWO mini guidescope and camera
and currently a Canon 600D modified.

subscribing to the topic. same dilema. and one of the reasons I joined astrobin.

Hi,
first I would check if one of this cameras where more or less sell on some platforms. I would also check the specs and not the price. I am not a big fan of QHY but why not a QHY 268?

Best regards,
Raul
[PCPointer.de]

Raul Cantemir:
Hi,
first I would check if one of this cameras where more or less sell on some platforms. I would also check the specs and not the price. I am not a big fan of QHY but why not a QHY 268?

Best regards,
Raul
[PCPointer.de]

Because Jens uses the ASIAIR.

To answer the main question though, they're very similar cameras. If you're willing to spend the extra $1000, I would get the duo. It's easier to crop an image square than to make a mosaic in my opinion. The only thing I wouldn't like about the duo, is if you plan on using a something like L-extreme the guide camera might have a harder time picking up stars.

I love the idea of that Duo! The reality isn't as great though. Almost all of us deal with some level of light pollution regularly and will likely use something the L-Pro at minimum. (been eyeing the Alp-t from antlia myself) I remember seeing someone test out guiding behind various filters to see how difficult getting a proper guide star would be, but I can't seem to find that one. I think the basic jist was that putting the guide cam behind any level of narrowband type filters (L-enhance, extreme, etc) required more significant guide cam exposure times. You probably don't want to handicap yourself with guide cam exposures that need to be in 3s + range to work well.

Of course, if you live in a Bortle 2 or 3, maybe you won't need as much in the way of optical filters? Are you imaging from the backyard or do you head out to dark skies? If it's at home, would actually recommend making the jump over to mono if you have thought about that. (either the 533mm or the 2600mm are great) It's a big change, but I can't think of anyone who has regretted that one.

the practical choice, if probably to just stay with the 533mc and use that L-enhance filter. If you end up with mosaics, AstroPixelProcessor makes them really easy.

The onyl reason i'd go for the duo, is the cheaper price in comparison to the pro. I'm actually not planning on relying on the guidescope of the camera.
I'd sure try it, and if it works, great. if it doesn't I'd still have my guidescope.

It depends on your budget and what you are willing to spend on gear. I use the 533 mono and got away with smaller filters than the 2600 needs. I had my budget at the time and kept it. The camera is brilliant and the square sensor thing people are on about is a non issue as far as I'm concerned. Easy to frame things, easy to get mosaics done with the AA.

If budget isn't an issue then there isn't anything to debate really, go with the bigger sensor. Basically the same camera with a different sensor size. Sooner or later you would perhaps end up like me, wanting more FOV without sacrificing resolution. Which is why I am pretty determined to get either the 2600 or 6200 myself soon. The issue isn't the 533, but the lack of imaging opportunities and getting the most from each session without compromising too much.

TLDR; If not on a budget get the bigger sensor.

I moved from 533mc pro to a 2600mm pro and don't regret it one bit. As I image mostly NB from the city the mono camera comes out far superior.

The only potential issue with the Duo would be if you have an image circle large enough with your scope to illuminate the guide chip.

CS Sean

Tim Eriksen:
I moved from 533mc pro to a 2600mm pro and don't regret it one bit. As I image mostly NB from the city the mono camera comes out far superior.

What I’ve read in other places, is that while traditionally, mono have been preferred for city astrophotography, color may still be a good option for various reasons:
- opportunity to image come less. Mono requires longer time.
- sensors on new cameras is better than in the past. Even for broadband.
- narrowband filters work well for many targets.

From all my readings:
533mc pro:
PROs: good sensor, smaller, lower files size, less processing time and storage, decent resolution and ability to crop on smaller objects. Cheaper.
CONs: none very specific
depends on preference: square sensor, lack of tilt adjustment.

2600mc pro:
PROs: one of best in class sensor, good resolution, anti-due heater, build-in tilt adjustment.
CONs: more expensive, Lange files size and need for more storage, computing and time to process.

common to both: no amp-glow. Overall, good cameras.

What I would recommend, is to also put both cameras in astronomy tools with your scope, and check the field of view for various targets with both cameras.
Ive noticed significant differences with same scope and different cameras. Even if similar.

The duo is interesting and even seem to work with narrowband filters.
I got the 2600MC PRO and regret a little I didn't go with the mono version, even tho it's much more expensive with decent filters.

Anyway, I'm pretty satisfied with my mc so far, using a Optolong L-Ultimate and pics come out decent.
If you want a osc, the 2600 or any of the other brands will be one of the best in class, can't go wrong with it.

Hi there,
between 533 or 2600, it is about what field of view you want to photograph. Pixel size is the same, so the image scale in arcsec/pixel will be identical. 2600 is a bigger sensor, so it gives a wider field.
As others said, the duo version might give you guiding problems when using filters.
I would recommend mono versions in any case. I got first a colour one, then a mono, and I do not see the case I would use the colour one again … even though I change filters by hand (RASA11 scope).
Mono images are much cleaner and give better detail for the same pixel resolution. The time spent with different filters is more than compensated by the shorter exposures thanks to the higher effective light gathering.

There is also a mono variant of the 533 sensor

Tim Eriksen:
There is also a mono variant of the 533 sensor

*** exactly, that is why I said to take a mono in any case. And choose between 533 or 2600 according to the desired field of view ... and budget***

Jup, I second those thoughts.
As I said I kinda regret I didn't go with mono right away.
Now that I know how both compare it's always a little frustrating to see how much cleaner the mono is.

In some cases the osc is fine, but for most, mono is the way to go.

I did not have the budget for 2600 but I would have got the mono if I could.

instead I got the 533MM and 36mm filters so I can drop in the 2600mm later

I'll probably won't have the time nor the money for all the filters to shoot mono. It sure is interesting and probably a thing for later but for now it's going to be osc.

Also since realising that the 533 is literally the same as taking a crop from the 2600 pixel pitch wise, it would feel wrong missing out on all the data that isn't captured.

Time with mono is relative, in fact you capture more signal in a shorter period of time, if you get a EFW you will actually safe time.

Time with mono is relative, in fact you capture more signal in a shorter period of time, if you get a EFW you will actually safe time.

yeap! And I think it is still faster even if you change filters by hand. In a colour camera, only one fourth of the pixels capures red, and one fourth captures blue. The other half of the pixels captures green (all in wide band sense). The gathering capability is lowered down even to one fourth (in comparison with a monochrome camera) depending on the filter you add on top. The blocked pixels add noise and affect the resolution.

I also switched from the 533MC to the 2600MM and was glad to have done so. Nothing wrong with the 533MC, it was a great first dedicated astro camera, I just like the quality on the images better on the 2600MM. Both 533MC and 2600MC (whichever version) would make great cameras, but if my budget was limited to what you can get with the amount you would spend on the 2600MC, I would probably go with 533MM and a set of good S,H,O and L,R,G,B filters.

Only problem I got with my mindset, when I go for something like filters I want really good filters right away.
Really good filters means 2000€ extra which is quite steep.
So I understand if someone looking for a new cam leans towards a osc.

After I've done my testing I'd never go with 7nm filters again, so all in all a 2600MM Pro with the filters I want is like 5200€ or almost double
the expense of a mc pro.

Is it worth it? I think so, but I understand if people don't want to go the extra mile.

That's my problem too, sure the Mono version might be better, but it will add more complexity and cost to everything. First I have to get used to Astro dedicated cameras before I upgrade to mono. I think this is the right way to go for now

I have ASI 533 mm pro, ASI 533 mc pro and ASI 2600 mc pro. I use 533 for little DSO (very good imaging), and 2600 for big DSO, the imaging with 2600 is very very best, to -15 ° C many time they are not necessary the dark frames.

Jens:
I am thinking about upgrading my gear from a modified Canon 600D to a Astro dedicated camera.
I have the zenithstar 61 with 360mm. with my research the Asi 533mc pro and the 2600mc Pro or duo (because the duo is cheaper out of some reason).
I would go for the 533 for the price, the only reason on why I'm not sure about it is the 1x1 format, I'm not sure if it will bother me to much. that's why the 2600 might be another option. It is 1000 bucks more expensive though.
Since I own the Asi air, i have to go with a ZWO camera.

what are your experiences? which one would you go for?

My gear:

Zenithstar 61 -- 360mm
skywatcher star adventurer GTI
ZWO mini guidescope and camera
and currently a Canon 600D modified.

I've owned both cameras, and still own the 2600 Pro, both mc and mm versions. The 533mc is excellent- no issues with it at all and the 1x1 is actually nice. Folks just aren't used to it. However, I decided to sell it and use the 2600 as one of my cameras. It will give you a wider field of view and cropping is very easy. Depending on your scope FL, the 2600 will provide more object options than the 533. Either way, you can't go wrong. So, it is mainly budget that will drive your decision.

Jens:
I'll probably won't have the time nor the money for all the filters to shoot mono. It sure is interesting and probably a thing for later but for now it's going to be osc.

Also since realising that the 533 is literally the same as taking a crop from the 2600 pixel pitch wise, it would feel wrong missing out on all the data that isn't captured.

It is a different sensor (or different electronics ) I think as it's 14-bit not 16 - whether or not that has any practical result on the data, I dont know

Related discussions