Man, these videos just keep getting better. The production quality has improved MILES since I started watching in 2019, and it was already great then! Just wanted to say I appreciate how you haven’t gone full “content creator” on us, and it really feels like you’re speaking directly TO us out of a care for how we go about and enjoy this hobby rather than just because you have to. It’s something that’s made your channel my favorite from the beginning, and I really appreciate it. Some great info in this video too, of course. :) Keep inspiring man!!
@@AstroBackyard Will you at anytime soon try out IDAS dualband S2 Hb narrowband filter in combination with OSC camera? It is really tempting with combination of Ha and O3 dualband filters😏
Started on this hobby a couple of years ago. I land up shooting only few times a year with clouds, moon and life getting in the way other than the small amount of visible sky from the backyard with light pollution being the big cherry on top. Given the amount of time I do really land up spending on it, OSC gives me a better shot at actually getting an image without all the extra time with post processing. Missing data from 1 channel while I cannot get back to the target for a year is not a hassle i want to deal with. Also lesser things to carry to a dark site if possible, lesser the stress :) I feel there is so much more i need to learn on post processing the image than moving to mono.
Yes, between clouds, work, family and not living in a house where I can setup my scope all the time, I'm in the same boat. For me, imaging is often an opportunity to grabbed one every couple of months if I'm lucky.
Going to be brutally honest here... my first adventure into astrophotography was back before digital cameras existed... at least for the hobbyist. I was a teen who was getting into the hobby of astronomy and cameras with B/W film were the only way to image. Lacking the funds to get a really good mount and necessary guide scopes and drives etc means my endeavors were not too spectacular... but I did manage to do some imaging. Time passed and I ground and polished 2 telescope mirrors, went to college and acquired a few dependents to my salary. Astronomy took a back seat during this dependency of others on my income but I did have a stage where I tried to get into the 'new' digital astronomy that was coming about. I had some brief success but the learning curve was a bit much for me to invest too much time into it. Jump to today and I'm retired and starting to dabble into astrophotography again. I'm finding my biggest 'hurdles' to be in the post processing arena. I've watched video after video of you and others doing your 'magic' and I'm just lost for the most part. Things you take for granted and are second nature to you are foreign to me especially when using programs like photoshop. That said... anything that SIMPLIFIES the process is to me the only way to go in this hobby and OSC is that way! No need for me to be making the process 4-5 times more complicated by doing mono and having to shoot using so many filters.
Always enjoy your videos, Trevor. Could the "fairness" in this example be improved if instead of comparing the finished LRGB image (150s x4 = 600s total integration) with a single 150=sec OSC sub, you compared the LRGB with an image made with with 4 stacked 150-sec OSC subs, so each result has the same total integration?
I'm on the OSC-camp myself, but that is a personal choice more than anything else. I feel that the "stress" of having to capture data for each filter, along with calibration frames - especially with the limited amount of clear skies - would quickly kill my passion for the hobby. I am however open to change my opinion later, but for now I am really comfortable where I am and I am happy with the results I am getting.
I went from OSC digital camera (Canon 3Ti) to dedicated mono (1600MM) and don't regret it at all. Now when the skies clear up and the moon is high and bright I can shoot narrowband and still get images. No need to waste any precious clear skies. That is a great feature imho. Thanks for a superb video. Cheers!
I was literally searching through your videos just two days ago to see if you had covered this topic, and almost as if you heard my call, you posted this video. Thanks as always Trevor!! This is EXACTLY what I needed to see to help with my decision!
Great video as usual. I started with a color camera on my first scope but have since graduated to mono on both my Esprit 100 and Esprit 120. I like the flexibility to match my filter to the sky conditions (shoot narrowband when the moon is out then broadband) and also like the additional detail and efficiency of shooting through a Luminance filter. I did a similar test last year and found that for less than 4hrs integration time, the color camera had a better SNR and a bit over an hour on each filter. Beyond that point, using a 3:1:1:1 ratio for LRGB data, the mono camera built SNR faster than the color camera shooting for the same time. Since I have decided that quality is more important than quantity for me and that I often shoot double digit hour integration times, the Mono setup is best for me. That being said, I use a color cam on my 135mm setup with both a UV/IR cut filters and IDAS NBZ filter for specific one to two night images. Keep up the great work!
Great video, funny at the end too 😂. The difference in quality between Osc and mono subs is clear to see in this video. I’ve been using the 533mc for a couple years now being my first dedicated camera. This year I’m going mono though but having 2 rigs, one for Osc and one mono. I’m also used to having a ridiculous amount of data to use as I’ve now imaged pretty much everything at native focal length so my last 6 projects have been mosaics (4 I’m yet to complete 🙄) so I think I’m ready to fill the hard drive even more!
Great video as always Trevor. I have the ASI2600MC & ASI2600MM and find the results from the mono version to be better (not that the colour version is bad in any way). I have found the mono data easier to process as well, although I guess that is somewhat subjective. I am currently building a dual apo rig and have 2600MM cameras on both scopes as I'm more into widefield narrowband imaging these days. I still love the colour version but will be reserving that for broadband targets. Edit: something I meant to mention was that I started with osc and gained experience processing the data. I think some people feel the need to jump to mono to improve their images when in truth they have good data but need to improve their processing skills. I have reprocessed old data using what I have learnt over the past couple of years and these versions I create now are massively better compared to when I first started.
OSC OSC OSC. I think you could use a pier in your backyard. Cut down on set up time. No dome or anything but a very good fitting cover with a small heat source so you can uncover when the sky is good and be running in under 5 minutes. Perfect polar alignment and everything at the ready makes winter imaging a game changer for us. Lemme know as I have a pier that bolts to your pad.
Nice videa again Trevor. OSC for me and that's mostly because seeing a clear sky is a rare. I just wouldn't get enough data in the same time with a mono. I may go mono at some point but the money need to go on a better mount and another scope first.
Hi Trevor I think your last remarks epitomizes the major drawback of monochrome: you multiply the potential failure points. It can be clouds creeping in before you had time to shoot blue, it can be a failure of the EFW or as in your case a problem with the flats. For me last Friday it was a bug in SharpCap switching of the tracking in the AM5 mount as soon as I started the sequence planner. However, I was still able to capture a nice image of M1 in HOO in the remaining 2 hours of acquisition time thanks to the excellent SNR of the monochrome sensor, something I would never have been able to achieve with a OSC camera
I think it very much depends on where you’re situated.. If you’re like me and you’re photographing from a big city with no access to a private garden, which means sitting outside all night with your gear in cold temperatures I highly recommend a setup that you can pack up with relative ease and for this mono just adds an extra element that I don’t want to care about at 5am. Additionally, it probably also depends on the area you’re in. Where I am I don’t get many clear nights a year (probably around 20-30) so I don’t want to spend a massive amount of time collecting narrowband data. (until an observatory is a thing in my life) Start with a colour camera and preferably a dslr would be my recommendation. It’s nice to have some low tech know-how to rely on before transitioning into something more challenging. Astrophotography is in itself already a challenging passion to have. 😅 side note: I used a canon eos 700D that was modified from cheapastrophotography which has served me so well. Thoroughly recommend both it and Juan who runs the modification shop.
Thank you Trevor. Very useful video! It would be great if you could show us a comparison between, say, a 4 hour exposure time with the OSC setup with a 1 hour time per channel LRGB setup. That would match the entire exposure time of both projects (i.e, 4 hours in total). My guess is that the LRGB would still outperform the OSC but may not be such a dramatic result as comparing 1 hour per channel. Keep these videos coming!
@@richm1981 not exactly. A mono and color camera both have the same sensor. But the color camera has the Bayer filter in front of it. Means that only 25% of the pixels receive a red signal, while at the mono 100% of the pixels receive a red signal. So signal-wise, the mono camera receives in 1 hour what the color camera needs 4 hours for.
Isn’t it true though, that the efficient gathering of the red from the mono camera is only an advantage if you’re looking at a primarily red emitting target (say, Rosette Nebula)? Suppose we are shooting M81, or M101, which may do well in broadband? I’m a newbie at this, so I really do not know what I’m talking about but I’m prompting these comments and questions in hopes to learn more. Would a mono chrome camera need to take four pictures for every one that a one shot color camera would need to take for that kind of target? 2) also, did Trevor compare a lesser model one shot color camera to a higher end model of mono camera?
G'day Trevor, how you doing mate? Glad that I became 'paid' member of the channel. I'm literally brand spanking new to Astrophotography. Recently got a Redcat 51mm with a Nikon D750 DSLR on a Sky Watcher Adventurer 2i Pro (plus mount). It's a basic setup, but suits for what i want to do for at least 12-18 months, so it was a fairly easy question for me to answer: colour v mono. Having said that, what you do for everyone interested in this hobby from beginner to advanced is appreciated. I see you put a crap load of effort into doing this, and for people like me - I am eternally grateful. Cheers mate, Dann.
Trevor you hit the nail clean on the head.. it’s all about time, having time to process or time to shoot in a clear sky or shooting between clouds. Luckily we can shoot objects in the sky and there is no change from year to year or seasons, unless of course it’s Saturn and its ring system or a comet as these are either fleeting or tilting..
I shot mono for years, but the recent advances in sensor performance and filters for OSC decreased the advantage of mono (IMO). Once I got the RASA, OSC was my go-to.
@@northtexasskies7786 well I’m an ASIAIR user so I kinda have to use ZWO cameras. I’m currently using the ASI294MC pro - it’s a good camera. I recently got an ASI2600MC but I haven’t had first light with it yet. Combined with a good dual-band filter (I have the IDAS NBZ), I don’t really miss mono much.
I have the ASI533 mono and OSC and I honestly haven’t had the mono off the scope since I got it. I was dubious at first but the detail is far more superior imo.
I started astrophotography almost 2 years ago and Trevor has been a big help. I’m realizing now how important light filters are. I want a dedicated Astro camera but that’s something after some filters. I’m sure I’ll watch this again when I want to purchase lol
Hello treavr I am your big fan from Indian Gujarat, Porbandar . You are my inspiration and my favorite astrophotographer loved your videos I watched your all videos thank you for Learning new new things about astrophotography ❤️🔭🥰much love keep going man I loved your deep sky 🌌 objects photos 😍😍😍😍😍❤️
Is it worth comparing the same integration time of your one shot color image to the total integration from all the filters? Example: 4 hrs of one shot color vs 4x1 hour exposures (LRGB) from the monochrome camera?
I started with film in the early 1960s and moved to digital soon as it came available. I than moved to mono cameras with RGBL filters as well as Ham, SII, and OIII. This was with a 6' Officina Stellare APO refractor, I get wonderful images but also have a travel setup with OSC and narrow 2 and 3 band filters on a AM5 and a smaller refractor or 8" SCT and Hyperstar. While the mono setup is very versatile, it can be time intensive and often the OSC setup will yield excellent image also. The real trick is to learn all the processing tricks and technics. Frankly I rate the most important step in my work process is the image processing...especially the final tweaking with Photo Shop. While I am retired now and have more time.... having a clear night or nights is still the biggest issue. That is where OSC shines. When your imaging time is limited for any reason..... OSC can deliver.
Another thought provoking video Trevor. I’ve been using an OSC camera for a couple of years now. While I love the creative palettes that result in the beautiful narrowband images, I’d rather spend more time imaging than playing jiggery-pokery with a mass of monochrome data. The advent of the variety of filters available for OSC cameras is expanding the range of creative control possible. I’ll be staying with OSC cameras for a while to come yet. Cheers!
Haha, when I saw the transition image at the end I was thinking in real time that the second one just looked like a OSC processed “better”. Good stuff.
Fantastic tutorial, but I believe I'm several years away from this level of photography. I'm in line to purchase my first star tracker, and working on getting correct focus. Honestly, this hobby is not easy, but it is so much fun. Thank you for showing us how you do what you do
I started with an OSC and was eventually convinced by others to switch to monochrome. I was amazed at the difference in quality and the easier processing (albeit with more steps/frame sets). I still believe that OSC is the way anyone should start. It is simpler, closer to instant gratification. Also a person new to the hobby is going to make some missteps in equipment selection or find that something needs to be changed to 'fit' their use better. An OSC setup is simpler so it is easier to get over this learning step than with monochrome and less expensive. It lets you determine your enthusiasm/dedication to the art. It took me almost two years and several significant modifications of my setup before I felt that I both knew enough and my setup settled enough to allow me to work through the requirements for a monochrome setup. For the person who is a dedicated 'casual' imager, then they may never feel the need to make the transition to monochrome. I also think that most people that focus on lunar and planetary imaging will not have any real reason to go monochrome. However, if over time you determine your enthusiasm and drive for better images is there, then the transition to monochrome is the payoff you've been looking for.
Awesome video. I love my OSC camera, and L-Ultimate. Yes Mono has some cracked signal, but it also takes lots of time, and clear skies! oh and money. I like shooting all night, then waking up to stack my OSC data and process! I'll move to mono some day!
I'm in this boat right now. I've been shooting with a Canon M50 Mark II and am ready to jump to a dedicated astronomy camera. Kept going back and forth about going mono or sticking with color. Think I'm staying with OSC right now, but I know I'll move to mono eventually.
Extremely informative video Trevor , one of the most weighed decisions facing the growing astrophotographer community today is color or mono. Thank you for the in depth discussion. Still hoping for an ASHtrobackyard you tube channel !
Thanks, Trevor. I'd add (for others considering what to choose) that mono with Narrow Band filters means that one can still be in the backyard and have a very satisfying night in Bortle 6 skies when OSC, even with pollution filters, can't really cut it. Cheers.
EAA and OSC for me but much respect and admiration to those who do the Mono thing. Great content as always, may it long continue. PS, it is "colour" though!!!
You almost had me. When I saw the comparison photos I paused the video and started looking through the comments defending OSC. If the results of OSC vs Mono were that great I was jumping over from OSC today. 😂 Then I came back to the video and finished it only to find it was a OSC image processed. 😮Almost had the wallet open. Lol. Great video.
Well, when you do provide a direct comperison full color vs mono, remember to give the colorpicture 4 times the amount of time... :-) As allways, great video 👍😎 Clear skyes.
Great video. I like mono as I am able to take Ha data during a moonlit sky. I also find mono gives me a lot more options during post processing and I can also use SHO filters. I use focus offsets between filter changes so no time added there. I do refocus on temperature change etc but that’s no different to OSC. Flats takes about 5 minutes of my time using NINA flat wizard. The most time consuming part of flats is getting the panel setup but that’s no different to OSC. All of that said, OSC is convenient and I would always recommend that to start with.
Here’s an idea I tossed around. What if you have 2 astro cams of the same model, but one is osc and the other is mono. You get a few hours with the osc for color and then go shoot in Luminance with the mono for several hours? This would obviously be something you could consider when you’ve already had an osc for quite some time.
What I would love to see is comparing a monochrome camera with LRGB vs a OSC after taking the same combined total integration time. I don't want to see a monochrome image that is getting 4 times the integration time compared to an OSC. I mean we know an OSC will still do better with more integration.
Thank you so much for doing this comparison Trevor. It was nice to see the comparative view using the same capture times. The improvement with mono is more than I had thought. I also originally thought that with an OSC, if I shot for 2 hrs, that I would have to shoot for 5-6 hrs to get the same results, but that is not the case. A nice add on to this video would be to see a 2 - 3hrs capture of OSC vs 2 - 3 hrs RGB or even LRGB. I think this is what you were shooting for at the end, too bad about the missing flats. Would be great to see on your FB page of short video clip.
Because of the lower time commitment (and cost) I went for a 2600MC Pro for my first camera. Still a big financial investment though. Very pleased with the quality of images from my Bortle 2 skies. Throw in an L-Extreme in the filter drawer and holy smokes!! I don’t regret going OSC. Dr B from Manitoba, Canada 🇨🇦
In Bortle 2 does a L-Extreme really make any difference. I get in can make a huge difference to those in above Bortle 4 but in Bortle 2 surely the standard UV IR cut would win out over longer exposure time you would need with the Optolong.
2400MC Pro owner here. It's an excellent OSC camera. Full Frame, high full well, and great for longer focal lengths with those 5.94m pixels. It's a beast of a camera for galaxies on my Edge 9.25, and soon to be paired with my new SVX130T refractor. I image broadband exclusively at a dark site, which is why I chose OSC.
I've learned alot from you, since I started watching your videos about astrophotography and I really need to know that which type of camera should I buy and now my doubt is clear. Thanks alot 😊
Good video as usual Trevor. For me, I find the much reduced faff of OSC more gratifiying, as you allude to near the end. Perhaps also because I live under bortle 4 skies and have access to 2-3 with a few hours drive it doesn't push me to Mono. Clouds, moon, family life - juggling the actual time I can get out I do not want to be playing with filter wheels. I want an image. Give me a few hours on a target and often I can do something. That and all the wonderful software - and frankly newest sensors which are amazing. No doubt that under poorer skies - mono is definitely a good idea. I think you give lots of great advice here - so kudos to you on that.
Something else to consider is weather where you live. If you live in a place where there are very few clear nights a OSC will benefit by completing a target before it rotates out of view and allow you to look for other targets on next clear night..... With Mono you take 4x more frames which can mean multiple nights and weather may not support that for weeks...
Great video Trevor. The “debate” between OSC or mono on the surface seems like a big deal when you’re starting out, but ultimately comes down to $$$. Most people that I personally know (as opposed to randos on cloudy nights) start shooting color with the idea that if they stick it out long enough and save, they’ll probably go mono.
Diehard mono people: do you think there is value in beginning with OSC? As a true beginner, learning hardware ,software, processing, fine tuning things and working out bugs, isn’t the plate pretty full already? Then when you’re dialed, add a mono camera to the quiver to up your game. There will be projects where an OSC will still be useful, no??
Great video, good explaining as always Trevor. As a point of small critique... please tone down the overuse of jump cuts. It has gotten to a level now which is just irritating to say the least.
The biggest reason to use Mono over color is with Narrowband filters, HA, SII,OIII... if you just want to use color filters you will have a much better time with one shot color. If you do not already have a strong foundation and understanding of how sensors take in light, the differences in binning, and processing already... you will have a better time learning with color until you get to a point where you are able to use MONO to its full potential. You could always try starting off with mono, just be prepared to do a lot of research and spending a lot more money vs color. If this is something you want, take the time to learn processing before buying the system... you can do it for free and most people will post their raw image files on astrobin / telescopious. The hardest part of astrophotography is the processing, start learning now.
Thanks for the Video/Comparison! Twice the work, four times the exposure time, more hardware, and more expense, for an 11% better image... I just want good shots of interesting subjects that I can keep, and the additional sensitivity of EAA making my 6" scope act more like a 16" scope as compared to optical views. So I'll stick to a One Shot Color setup. Different Strokes!
Ha Ha, I love the ending Trevor. Good advice on the cameras. I started on the DSLR then mono ASI1600 and still use it on a dedicated permanent setup in the shed. However, I purchased the ASI294MC to use with my Edge800 for galaxies and did not want to bother with extra stuff with mono since I have a crappy FOV and terrible weather. I also purchased a ASI2600MC to use on a portable setup for the same reason and it is easier if I go offsite - Similar to Jeffery Horne' setup although he is going mono soon. Cheers Kurt
Great video insightful learnings to pick up. I have but one comment or question,. Since everything within astrophotography is developing very fast, I should think, from what I read in general, that the comparison between the 2, could have been more equal, ie. using a filter for the colour cam too. I am thinking specifically on a filter like the Optolong L-Ultimate filter. I am a new starter too within astrophotography, so I'd like to hear your views ( or anybody else's) on this, and the effect a 3 micron filter like this has when using a colour cam. ?
Hi Trevor! Great video with lots of information. I think the aspect of time is the main reason for me to stay with color cameras for the moment. In central Germany I have in a good year not more than 20 nights of clear skies. Last year there has been a time of 6 months of no clear sky. Under those circumstances using a monochrome camera will result in a lot of unfinished business. It could easily happen with targets in the south that you need to wait for the next year to complete just a single target. Sure in my bortle 6 area, shooting over BC 7 - 9, a monochrome camera would work by far better but I don't want to wait in worst case for a year or so to complete a single target. This then sums up to many years just to have the standard objects captured. Maybe as a third rig I will afford a mono cam with a filter wheel. My ASI2600MC Pro and my rebranded Touptek 26000C are doing a good job when I do mine good too.
Would have been interesting to see the stack of 4 Color images compared to the Stack of single Mono shots. The red channel of a single color camera image contains about 1/4 of the photons that the Mono camera takes with the red filter in a single exposure. Green looks better, because RGGB means the Green channel actually contains 1/2 of the amount of light. Blue is 1/4 again. So 1 hour of observation time with a Mono cam actually means 15 minutes per channel + 15 minutes Luminance, while with a color camera you get 1 full hour of exposures, with lower efficiency per channel per shot. Equaling about 15 minutes in Red and Blue and 30 minutes of green.
If you have an observatory or backyard or more time to capture it's better mono, but if you only have weekends with no moon and clear skies for astrophotography, it's better color. Today with color cameras we can find great images with very signal, New BSI sensors are perfect!. I use ATIK APX60m and QHY268M in my observatory and SV405COLOR for travel. Simple!
I've been imaging with a DSLR for a year and half now and I've been wanting to step up to a dedicated camera. Money is the issue at the moment, but when tax season comes back around, I've been looking at the ASI294MC Pro (I bought a Zenithstar 61mm this year). I've weighed the pros and cons on going full mono and it would just take longer for me to get that rig set up, between getting the camera, filter wheel and filters required to even take an image. So I decided to start with a dedicated color camera and build my filters up with that first, then upgrade to mono down the road.
Great video you are right to advice beginners to start with colour camera dslr or dedicated otherwise the steep learning curve might well put off imaging. Always like your videos .
I started with a DSLR, then skipped the OSC step entirely and went straight to mono. My data was really good, even though everything's at entry level. But cost is another factor you didn't mention. My absolute entry-level mono rig (ZenithStar 61, QHY183M, 1.25" filters, CEM26, FocusCube v2 + guidescope and cam and dew heater) cost me $US5k. You could get the colour version of the cam which is less expensive, then skip the filters and the focuser and save a ton of cash...
Another great video. I am leery on making the switch to mono. Just don't have the time, whether it be on the processing side or the low number of clear nights. BTW, your cable management looks similar to mine.
The choice is what has kept me from taking the plunge into a dedicated astro camera. I have been using a Canon 60d for awhile, but I really need a cooled camera where I live. I like the ease of use for OSC, but know the "wow" shot are going to come from mono. I think I might have already bought one if not for the oil leaking issue on some of the models I was in the market for.
i think regardless of whether or not you want to to osc or mono, having a cooled astro camera would be a nice step up in quality compared to a dslr or mirrorless camera. not only will running the camera at a lower temp be great noise wise, having a consistent temperature would allow you to create a master library of darks for various exposure lengths that you can use for a year, maybe 2? it'll save a bunch of time having to take those darks, plus you could probably do that during the day instead of after/during each session as well. maybe you can do a follow up and show a 4 image osc stack compared to the single lrgb stack to compare the noise and detail. another comparison could be showing the detail between and osc and lrgb image having similar integration times. i'm assuming you would be shooting more lum than rgb, so it would be cool to see the differences in detail and colors if any before any real processing. for the beginner, there's no reason you can't have both (well, besides money). it's unfortunate how much more expensive it is to go mono though. not only are the cameras more expensive, but you have to get the filter wheel and filters too. i think if you have the budget for either, it comes down to how much you want to spend (money and time) to have the flexibility to shoot what you want, how you want. the mono cam gives you options. it's more complicated, but it gives you more options. if you want to keep things simple, go osc. you can do narrowband with dual and triband filters now, and although you might not be able to separate certain signals, i believe you can get decent narrowband data and images from osc now. if you're looking to spread out those purchases over time, consider osc. you can buy things like a filter wheel and narrowband/light pollution filters for your osc, making it a little easier for you to pick up a mono cam later. you can always use that data you got from the osc even if you "upgrade" to mono later.
The main advantage of mono is the ability to image in selective single-band narrowband. Other than that, assuming you've got a good light pollution filter to help if/when required, colour camera works wonders.
The main thing that I’m seeing with the color camera that I don’t like is the rainbow noise. Definitely want to get a monochrome camera, but like you said, not having a color camera to use alongside it doesn’t sound like a good idea
Exactly what happened at the very end, had me switching back from Mono to OSC. In a Bortle 9 zone, mono seemed the way to go. But I found it too much hassle. And had too many incomplete image sets (80R, 10B,35G) because of changing weather and/or target obstruction by houses or trees. So switched back to a very sensitive 533MC pro. And what a relief! 3 hours of data is 3 hours of complete data now. So for me, the benefits of mono just didn’t weigh out
I don't understand this comparison. The ASI2400MC is 14-bit and has 5.94um pixels whereas the ASI6200MM is a 16-bit and 3.76um pixel camera. Each pixel in the ASI2400 collects more photos just because of the size but it has higher read noise than the 6200. The lower read noise and the resulting 16 bits means that the 6200 is able to record more subtle details in nebulae and at the same time that gives more resolution. So, really: I don't know understand the comparison, given the same conditions is not possible to have a noisier background with the ASI6200MM than with the ASI2400MC. My question is: Are the two images (LRGB/mono ~5:55) uncalibrated? And, did you use an anti-pollution filter in any camera? Anyway, a fair comparison would be to compare the color and mono version of the same camera model in well controlled conditions.
I still work for a living, so I don't have an infinite amount of time to shoot a "perfect shot," even if it takes months of new moon intervals to get multiple clear nights for each channel (LRGB) for a single target. So with my new Celestron Origin, I can glimpse several dozen targets of opportunity in a couple of hours in a single night that I can use as previews of targets that I may want to spend months on each when I'm retired and have nothing else to do using a mono camera, filters, expensive mounts, heavy counter-weights, ....Hey, wait a minute! I'm having more enjoyment now than when I'll be retired and have to work hard for satisfying photos!
In my opinion , i think when you put a RGB filter in front of a mono camera, each pixel site is still getting only 1/3 of the light flux, similar to what happens on a OSC camera. it seems to me the main advantage of mono would be resolution, since the pixels dont have to be debayered. But i am not able to explain why your red channel looks so much better than the OSC one. The other advantage i think is if you are shooting with specialized filters , like H-alpha/O-III/S-II narrowband filters which might be an advantage if you want to shoot from a light polluted sky , since these narrowband filters will reject most of the light polution.
Thanks Trevor. Great video. Presumably tho, most of us don’t have the seeing to make the extra resolution of a mono camera worthwhile in any case, right? I doubt my seeing is ever much better than 2”
Trevor: Maybe compare a luminance image from the Bayer image vs. any particular channel. I think the comparison should be made when the images being compared were made using similar quantities of photons (similar exposure). Even still, when I went from D850 to ASI6200MM, I was shocked. But that leap is more than just color to mono. One more thing, why do believe one needs to have the focus for flats to be the exact same as when doing the lights? I question that? Nice to meet you at CSSP.
A popular middle-way I've seen is to shoot luminance with a mono camera and then use a colour camera to just get the colours. The cost of 3 RGB filters and a filter wheel isn't much different to a second astro camera
3 x 150 +luminance so 4X150 sec makes 600 secs which is what I use for colour images, so it's a better comparison to use 600 seconds in OSC or equivalent to the TOTAL images from mono so the times are identical
This debate will go on forever… I shoot both OSC and mono with 2600MC and 2600MM, the mono I don’t find to be huge amount better for image quality, at least not with these cameras, but it’s infinitely more flexible in choosing how to capture data. I use the OSC mostly on wider angle shots (135mm to 300mm) with camera lenses and the mono on the bigger scopes. To me its simplicity vs flexibility, both are nice tools to have and of equal value…
I love imaging in mono. But for sure, it's more complex both during imaging and after. You want to make sure you have a reliable autofocuser to account for the differences between filters and that you are using filter offsets in software like NINA. But where mono really shines is in narrowband (even compared to dual band filters in many targets), which gets expensive quickly, and cheap filters generally aren't worth even the cheap price. You mention narrowband at the end. When shooting nebula and galaxies with bright nebula, I shoot LRGB for stars and then Ha, SII, and OIII for the nebula. But 100% on starting with a color camera. The other thing many don't realize is how the bayer pattern really works and how debayering or OSC images happens. There's a real loss of information in that process (data on the table, as you put it), which is partially why the single mono frames look better. I keep a mix of cameras. Color for solar system objects and comets, and mono for the rest. My first was an ASI522MC Pro, which was great, and I still have it, but it doesn't like my light polluted skies very much :) I don't think color and mono should be "camps" though. People should feel comfortable working with what they like to work with, but everyone should have objective information on the differences in each, pros, cons, etc. so they can have appropriate expectations. Mono is not "more pro", and OSC "more amateur", they're just different approaches.
Thanks for the video Trevor! Nice comparison and wow the mono image was amazing clean! But at the end when you realized you didn't get flats for your mono images is one of the reasons I having gone mono. The other reason is I now use a RASA and I like to sleep at night instead of changing filters 🙂 Then again having a RASA, why not just take more pictures since it is so fast! Still got me wondering of if should get a mono camera now, thanks a lot 😕 Clear Skies!
My only criticism is the fact that a narrowband target was chosen. I would love to see the difference in shots on the target using narrowband filter. I agree that it would be terrible to start with mono though.
Were I live in the UK there aren't that many clear nights ( fifty a year if I'm lucky) so after a frustrating two and a half years trying to capture enough data to produce an image while the target is favourably place I've gone back to using a OSC camera. I still use my mono cam, mostly to capture Ha data which can be applied as a luminance layer to colour images I take at the same time. I have to say that as far as nebulae are concerned I do actually prefer the look of narrow band images, If I lived in an area were I could guarantee at least five or six clear nights a month I would be using mono all the time.
Man, these videos just keep getting better. The production quality has improved MILES since I started watching in 2019, and it was already great then! Just wanted to say I appreciate how you haven’t gone full “content creator” on us, and it really feels like you’re speaking directly TO us out of a care for how we go about and enjoy this hobby rather than just because you have to. It’s something that’s made your channel my favorite from the beginning, and I really appreciate it. Some great info in this video too, of course. :) Keep inspiring man!!
I see you ORyan - keep it up brother.
@@AstroBackyard Will you at anytime soon try out IDAS dualband S2 Hb narrowband filter in combination with OSC camera? It is really tempting with combination of Ha and O3 dualband filters😏
I'll be honest... the last 30 seconds of this video made me feel a lot better. A LOT better. Thank you for including that.
Started on this hobby a couple of years ago. I land up shooting only few times a year with clouds, moon and life getting in the way other than the small amount of visible sky from the backyard with light pollution being the big cherry on top. Given the amount of time I do really land up spending on it, OSC gives me a better shot at actually getting an image without all the extra time with post processing. Missing data from 1 channel while I cannot get back to the target for a year is not a hassle i want to deal with. Also lesser things to carry to a dark site if possible, lesser the stress :)
I feel there is so much more i need to learn on post processing the image than moving to mono.
Yes, between clouds, work, family and not living in a house where I can setup my scope all the time, I'm in the same boat. For me, imaging is often an opportunity to grabbed one every couple of months if I'm lucky.
Exactly same thoughts here.
What’s your bortle level?
Going to be brutally honest here... my first adventure into astrophotography was back before digital cameras existed... at least for the hobbyist. I was a teen who was getting into the hobby of astronomy and cameras with B/W film were the only way to image. Lacking the funds to get a really good mount and necessary guide scopes and drives etc means my endeavors were not too spectacular... but I did manage to do some imaging. Time passed and I ground and polished 2 telescope mirrors, went to college and acquired a few dependents to my salary. Astronomy took a back seat during this dependency of others on my income but I did have a stage where I tried to get into the 'new' digital astronomy that was coming about. I had some brief success but the learning curve was a bit much for me to invest too much time into it. Jump to today and I'm retired and starting to dabble into astrophotography again. I'm finding my biggest 'hurdles' to be in the post processing arena. I've watched video after video of you and others doing your 'magic' and I'm just lost for the most part. Things you take for granted and are second nature to you are foreign to me especially when using programs like photoshop. That said... anything that SIMPLIFIES the process is to me the only way to go in this hobby and OSC is that way! No need for me to be making the process 4-5 times more complicated by doing mono and having to shoot using so many filters.
Always enjoy your videos, Trevor. Could the "fairness" in this example be improved if instead of comparing the finished LRGB image (150s x4 = 600s total integration) with a single 150=sec OSC sub, you compared the LRGB with an image made with with 4 stacked 150-sec OSC subs, so each result has the same total integration?
Yes indeed! If you don't equalize the integration time, it's really no comparison at all...
I'm on the OSC-camp myself, but that is a personal choice more than anything else. I feel that the "stress" of having to capture data for each filter, along with calibration frames - especially with the limited amount of clear skies - would quickly kill my passion for the hobby.
I am however open to change my opinion later, but for now I am really comfortable where I am and I am happy with the results I am getting.
As someone who works with dslr's what choice do o have 😂
I went from OSC digital camera (Canon 3Ti) to dedicated mono (1600MM) and don't regret it at all. Now when the skies clear up and the moon is high and bright I can shoot narrowband and still get images. No need to waste any precious clear skies. That is a great feature imho. Thanks for a superb video. Cheers!
I was literally searching through your videos just two days ago to see if you had covered this topic, and almost as if you heard my call, you posted this video. Thanks as always Trevor!! This is EXACTLY what I needed to see to help with my decision!
Great video as usual. I started with a color camera on my first scope but have since graduated to mono on both my Esprit 100 and Esprit 120. I like the flexibility to match my filter to the sky conditions (shoot narrowband when the moon is out then broadband) and also like the additional detail and efficiency of shooting through a Luminance filter. I did a similar test last year and found that for less than 4hrs integration time, the color camera had a better SNR and a bit over an hour on each filter. Beyond that point, using a 3:1:1:1 ratio for LRGB data, the mono camera built SNR faster than the color camera shooting for the same time. Since I have decided that quality is more important than quantity for me and that I often shoot double digit hour integration times, the Mono setup is best for me. That being said, I use a color cam on my 135mm setup with both a UV/IR cut filters and IDAS NBZ filter for specific one to two night images. Keep up the great work!
Great video, funny at the end too 😂. The difference in quality between Osc and mono subs is clear to see in this video. I’ve been using the 533mc for a couple years now being my first dedicated camera. This year I’m going mono though but having 2 rigs, one for Osc and one mono. I’m also used to having a ridiculous amount of data to use as I’ve now imaged pretty much everything at native focal length so my last 6 projects have been mosaics (4 I’m yet to complete 🙄) so I think I’m ready to fill the hard drive even more!
Great video as always Trevor. I have the ASI2600MC & ASI2600MM and find the results from the mono version to be better (not that the colour version is bad in any way). I have found the mono data easier to process as well, although I guess that is somewhat subjective. I am currently building a dual apo rig and have 2600MM cameras on both scopes as I'm more into widefield narrowband imaging these days. I still love the colour version but will be reserving that for broadband targets. Edit: something I meant to mention was that I started with osc and gained experience processing the data. I think some people feel the need to jump to mono to improve their images when in truth they have good data but need to improve their processing skills. I have reprocessed old data using what I have learnt over the past couple of years and these versions I create now are massively better compared to when I first started.
Any leak problems? I really would like to get this particular one in colour, but people say it has leaking oil problem....
@@luboinchina3013 I have 2600mc and mine does not have this specific issue. If you buy new it’s very unlikely to have the leak from the pad.
@@luboinchina3013 So far so good. I have heard some horror stories regarding the oil leak issue, but I haven't had any issues so far.
OSC OSC OSC. I think you could use a pier in your backyard. Cut down on set up time. No dome or anything but a very good fitting cover with a small heat source so you can uncover when the sky is good and be running in under 5 minutes. Perfect polar alignment and everything at the ready makes winter imaging a game changer for us. Lemme know as I have a pier that bolts to your pad.
Nice videa again Trevor. OSC for me and that's mostly because seeing a clear sky is a rare. I just wouldn't get enough data in the same time with a mono. I may go mono at some point but the money need to go on a better mount and another scope first.
Hi Trevor
I think your last remarks epitomizes the major drawback of monochrome: you multiply the potential failure points. It can be clouds creeping in before you had time to shoot blue, it can be a failure of the EFW or as in your case a problem with the flats. For me last Friday it was a bug in SharpCap switching of the tracking in the AM5 mount as soon as I started the sequence planner. However, I was still able to capture a nice image of M1 in HOO in the remaining 2 hours of acquisition time thanks to the excellent SNR of the monochrome sensor, something I would never have been able to achieve with a OSC camera
Well - what do you think? Give the beginners some insight on your personal experience:
I think it very much depends on where you’re situated.. If you’re like me and you’re photographing from a big city with no access to a private garden, which means sitting outside all night with your gear in cold temperatures I highly recommend a setup that you can pack up with relative ease and for this mono just adds an extra element that I don’t want to care about at 5am. Additionally, it probably also depends on the area you’re in. Where I am I don’t get many clear nights a year (probably around 20-30) so I don’t want to spend a massive amount of time collecting narrowband data. (until an observatory is a thing in my life)
Start with a colour camera and preferably a dslr would be my recommendation. It’s nice to have some low tech know-how to rely on before transitioning into something more challenging. Astrophotography is in itself already a challenging passion to have. 😅
side note: I used a canon eos 700D that was modified from cheapastrophotography which has served me so well. Thoroughly recommend both it and Juan who runs the modification shop.
Can you make a video of the equipment needed to start in astrophotography?
Dude, colour cameras are for the daytime 🤙
Color camera are good for beginners. Less money being spent.
Thank you Trevor. Very useful video! It would be great if you could show us a comparison between, say, a 4 hour exposure time with the OSC setup with a 1 hour time per channel LRGB setup. That would match the entire exposure time of both projects (i.e, 4 hours in total). My guess is that the LRGB would still outperform the OSC but may not be such a dramatic result as comparing 1 hour per channel. Keep these videos coming!
As long as you Dither properly with the OSC i don't see how there is any difference in photon gathering ?
@@richm1981 the bayer matrix on front of OSC cameras will waste some precious signal at each shot.
@@sorcio46 if you'r doing 1hour in red then green than blue, you are wasting two hours of precious signal with each shot
@@richm1981 not exactly. A mono and color camera both have the same sensor. But the color camera has the Bayer filter in front of it. Means that only 25% of the pixels receive a red signal, while at the mono 100% of the pixels receive a red signal. So signal-wise, the mono camera receives in 1 hour what the color camera needs 4 hours for.
Isn’t it true though, that the efficient gathering of the red from the mono camera is only an advantage if you’re looking at a primarily red emitting target (say, Rosette Nebula)? Suppose we are shooting M81, or M101, which may do well in broadband? I’m a newbie at this, so I really do not know what I’m talking about but I’m prompting these comments and questions in hopes to learn more. Would a mono chrome camera need to take four pictures for every one that a one shot color camera would need to take for that kind of target?
2) also, did Trevor compare a lesser model one shot color camera to a higher end model of mono camera?
G'day Trevor, how you doing mate? Glad that I became 'paid' member of the channel. I'm literally brand spanking new to Astrophotography. Recently got a Redcat 51mm with a Nikon D750 DSLR on a Sky Watcher Adventurer 2i Pro (plus mount). It's a basic setup, but suits for what i want to do for at least 12-18 months, so it was a fairly easy question for me to answer: colour v mono. Having said that, what you do for everyone interested in this hobby from beginner to advanced is appreciated. I see you put a crap load of effort into doing this, and for people like me - I am eternally grateful. Cheers mate, Dann.
Trevor you hit the nail clean on the head.. it’s all about time, having time to process or time to shoot in a clear sky or shooting between clouds. Luckily we can shoot objects in the sky and there is no change from year to year or seasons, unless of course it’s Saturn and its ring system or a comet as these are either fleeting or tilting..
I shot mono for years, but the recent advances in sensor performance and filters for OSC decreased the advantage of mono (IMO). Once I got the RASA, OSC was my go-to.
That's interesting. Im currently searching for my first dedicated astro camera. I may get an OSC because of the simplicity. What OSC do you use?
@@northtexasskies7786 well I’m an ASIAIR user so I kinda have to use ZWO cameras. I’m currently using the ASI294MC pro - it’s a good camera. I recently got an ASI2600MC but I haven’t had first light with it yet. Combined with a good dual-band filter (I have the IDAS NBZ), I don’t really miss mono much.
“OSC For Life” would make a great tattoo.
Great video and info Trevor!
2:55 bro the pop while removing light pollution filter was just so satisfying
Excellent description & reasoning. Both are valid, but your overall explanation is, in my point of view, "spot on". Great video, keep it up!
I have the ASI533 mono and OSC and I honestly haven’t had the mono off the scope since I got it. I was dubious at first but the detail is far more superior imo.
I started astrophotography almost 2 years ago and Trevor has been a big help. I’m realizing now how important light filters are. I want a dedicated Astro camera but that’s something after some filters. I’m sure I’ll watch this again when I want to purchase lol
Man I just love your channel.
Hello treavr I am your big fan from Indian Gujarat, Porbandar . You are my inspiration and my favorite astrophotographer loved your videos I watched your all videos thank you for Learning new new things about astrophotography ❤️🔭🥰much love keep going man I loved your deep sky 🌌 objects photos 😍😍😍😍😍❤️
Is it worth comparing the same integration time of your one shot color image to the total integration from all the filters? Example: 4 hrs of one shot color vs 4x1 hour exposures (LRGB) from the monochrome camera?
I started with film in the early 1960s and moved to digital soon as it came available. I than moved to mono cameras with RGBL filters as well as Ham, SII, and OIII. This was with a 6' Officina Stellare APO refractor, I get wonderful images but also have a travel setup with OSC and narrow 2 and 3 band filters on a AM5 and a smaller refractor or 8" SCT and Hyperstar. While the mono setup is very versatile, it can be time intensive and often the OSC setup will yield excellent image also. The real trick is to learn all the processing tricks and technics. Frankly I rate the most important step in my work process is the image processing...especially the final tweaking with Photo Shop. While I am retired now and have more time.... having a clear night or nights is still the biggest issue. That is where OSC shines. When your imaging time is limited for any reason..... OSC can deliver.
Another thought provoking video Trevor. I’ve been using an OSC camera for a couple of years now. While I love the creative palettes that result in the beautiful narrowband images, I’d rather spend more time imaging than playing jiggery-pokery with a mass of monochrome data. The advent of the variety of filters available for OSC cameras is expanding the range of creative control possible. I’ll be staying with OSC cameras for a while to come yet. Cheers!
Haha, when I saw the transition image at the end I was thinking in real time that the second one just looked like a OSC processed “better”. Good stuff.
This is a fantastic and very fare comparison. Exactly the kind of comparison I've been wanting to see. Thanks for your efforts!
The ending was awesome 😂 osc for life haha
Fantastic tutorial, but I believe I'm several years away from this level of photography.
I'm in line to purchase my first star tracker, and working on getting correct focus.
Honestly, this hobby is not easy, but it is so much fun.
Thank you for showing us how you do what you do
Love the fact you came clean about forgetting to shoot flats. I might’ve reshot everything. Love the OSC for life 😅
I started with an OSC and was eventually convinced by others to switch to monochrome. I was amazed at the difference in quality and the easier processing (albeit with more steps/frame sets).
I still believe that OSC is the way anyone should start. It is simpler, closer to instant gratification. Also a person new to the hobby is going to make some missteps in equipment selection or find that something needs to be changed to 'fit' their use better. An OSC setup is simpler so it is easier to get over this learning step than with monochrome and less expensive.
It lets you determine your enthusiasm/dedication to the art. It took me almost two years and several significant modifications of my setup before I felt that I both knew enough and my setup settled enough to allow me to work through the requirements for a monochrome setup.
For the person who is a dedicated 'casual' imager, then they may never feel the need to make the transition to monochrome. I also think that most people that focus on lunar and planetary imaging will not have any real reason to go monochrome.
However, if over time you determine your enthusiasm and drive for better images is there, then the transition to monochrome is the payoff you've been looking for.
Good to know, because I'm still with a DSLR. Thanks Trevor!
Awesome video. I love my OSC camera, and L-Ultimate. Yes Mono has some cracked signal, but it also takes lots of time, and clear skies! oh and money. I like shooting all night, then waking up to stack my OSC data and process! I'll move to mono some day!
Great overview of a rather greatly complex subject!
Excellent video. Just the comparison I wanted to see to help me with a camera purchase!
I'm in this boat right now. I've been shooting with a Canon M50 Mark II and am ready to jump to a dedicated astronomy camera. Kept going back and forth about going mono or sticking with color. Think I'm staying with OSC right now, but I know I'll move to mono eventually.
Extremely informative video Trevor , one of the most weighed decisions facing the growing astrophotographer community today is color or mono. Thank you for the in depth discussion.
Still hoping for an ASHtrobackyard you tube channel !
Thanks, Trevor. I'd add (for others considering what to choose) that mono with Narrow Band filters means that one can still be in the backyard and have a very satisfying night in Bortle 6 skies when OSC, even with pollution filters, can't really cut it. Cheers.
EAA and OSC for me but much respect and admiration to those who do the Mono thing. Great content as always, may it long continue. PS, it is "colour" though!!!
You almost had me. When I saw the comparison photos I paused the video and started looking through the comments defending OSC. If the results of OSC vs Mono were that great I was jumping over from OSC today. 😂 Then I came back to the video and finished it only to find it was a OSC image processed. 😮Almost had the wallet open. Lol. Great video.
Nice overview. I’d like to know the difference in final image quality between eg. 1 hour per LRGB compared to 4 hours OSC.
That is the right comparison!
That solidified my opinion that I'll start with color imaging. I love the idea and concept for mono, I'm just not in a position to jump into it yet.
Well, when you do provide a direct comperison full color vs mono, remember to give the colorpicture 4 times the amount of time... :-)
As allways, great video 👍😎
Clear skyes.
Great video. I like mono as I am able to take Ha data during a moonlit sky. I also find mono gives me a lot more options during post processing and I can also use SHO filters. I use focus offsets between filter changes so no time added there. I do refocus on temperature change etc but that’s no different to OSC. Flats takes about 5 minutes of my time using NINA flat wizard. The most time consuming part of flats is getting the panel setup but that’s no different to OSC. All of that said, OSC is convenient and I would always recommend that to start with.
Here’s an idea I tossed around. What if you have 2 astro cams of the same model, but one is osc and the other is mono. You get a few hours with the osc for color and then go shoot in Luminance with the mono for several hours? This would obviously be something you could consider when you’ve already had an osc for quite some time.
What I would love to see is comparing a monochrome camera with LRGB vs a OSC after taking the same combined total integration time. I don't want to see a monochrome image that is getting 4 times the integration time compared to an OSC. I mean we know an OSC will still do better with more integration.
Great comparison video. Thanks for sharing.
Thank you so much for doing this comparison Trevor. It was nice to see the comparative view using the same capture times. The improvement with mono is more than I had thought. I also originally thought that with an OSC, if I shot for 2 hrs, that I would have to shoot for 5-6 hrs to get the same results, but that is not the case. A nice add on to this video would be to see a 2 - 3hrs capture of OSC vs 2 - 3 hrs RGB or even LRGB. I think this is what you were shooting for at the end, too bad about the missing flats. Would be great to see on your FB page of short video clip.
Because of the lower time commitment (and cost) I went for a 2600MC Pro for my first camera. Still a big financial investment though. Very pleased with the quality of images from my Bortle 2 skies. Throw in an L-Extreme in the filter drawer and holy smokes!! I don’t regret going OSC. Dr B from Manitoba, Canada 🇨🇦
In Bortle 2 does a L-Extreme really make any difference. I get in can make a huge difference to those in above Bortle 4 but in Bortle 2 surely the standard UV IR cut would win out over longer exposure time you would need with the Optolong.
2400MC Pro owner here. It's an excellent OSC camera. Full Frame, high full well, and great for longer focal lengths with those 5.94m pixels. It's a beast of a camera for galaxies on my Edge 9.25, and soon to be paired with my new SVX130T refractor. I image broadband exclusively at a dark site, which is why I chose OSC.
Can you make a video of the equipment needed to start in astrophotography?
I've learned alot from you, since I started watching your videos about astrophotography and I really need to know that which type of camera should I buy and now my doubt is clear. Thanks alot 😊
Good video as usual Trevor. For me, I find the much reduced faff of OSC more gratifiying, as you allude to near the end. Perhaps also because I live under bortle 4 skies and have access to 2-3 with a few hours drive it doesn't push me to Mono. Clouds, moon, family life - juggling the actual time I can get out I do not want to be playing with filter wheels. I want an image. Give me a few hours on a target and often I can do something. That and all the wonderful software - and frankly newest sensors which are amazing. No doubt that under poorer skies - mono is definitely a good idea. I think you give lots of great advice here - so kudos to you on that.
Something else to consider is weather where you live. If you live in a place where there are very few clear nights a OSC will benefit by completing a target before it rotates out of view and allow you to look for other targets on next clear night..... With Mono you take 4x more frames which can mean multiple nights and weather may not support that for weeks...
Lol the ending was priceless
Still remember my first 2min sub through my rasa 11 with the ha baader f2 filter. But first 60 sec sub with rasa 8 and 2600 was dreamy
Great video Trevor. The “debate” between OSC or mono on the surface seems like a big deal when you’re starting out, but ultimately comes down to $$$. Most people that I personally know (as opposed to randos on cloudy nights) start shooting color with the idea that if they stick it out long enough and save, they’ll probably go mono.
Diehard mono people: do you think there is value in beginning with OSC?
As a true beginner, learning hardware ,software, processing, fine tuning things and working out bugs, isn’t the plate pretty full already? Then when you’re dialed, add a mono camera to the quiver to up your game. There will be projects where an OSC will still be useful, no??
Great video, good explaining as always Trevor. As a point of small critique... please tone down the overuse of jump cuts. It has gotten to a level now which is just irritating to say the least.
mono with filter wheel if you want filters, color camera gives you nothing but limits resolution and wavelength
Yes
The biggest reason to use Mono over color is with Narrowband filters, HA, SII,OIII... if you just want to use color filters you will have a much better time with one shot color. If you do not already have a strong foundation and understanding of how sensors take in light, the differences in binning, and processing already... you will have a better time learning with color until you get to a point where you are able to use MONO to its full potential. You could always try starting off with mono, just be prepared to do a lot of research and spending a lot more money vs color. If this is something you want, take the time to learn processing before buying the system... you can do it for free and most people will post their raw image files on astrobin / telescopious. The hardest part of astrophotography is the processing, start learning now.
Thanks for the Video/Comparison!
Twice the work, four times the exposure time, more hardware, and more expense, for an 11% better image...
I just want good shots of interesting subjects that I can keep, and the additional sensitivity of EAA making my 6" scope act more like a 16" scope as compared to optical views. So I'll stick to a One Shot Color setup. Different Strokes!
Ha Ha, I love the ending Trevor. Good advice on the cameras. I started on the DSLR then mono ASI1600 and still use it on a dedicated permanent setup in the shed. However, I purchased the ASI294MC to use with my Edge800 for galaxies and did not want to bother with extra stuff with mono since I have a crappy FOV and terrible weather. I also purchased a ASI2600MC to use on a portable setup for the same reason and it is easier if I go offsite - Similar to Jeffery Horne' setup although he is going mono soon. Cheers Kurt
Great video insightful learnings to pick up. I have but one comment or question,. Since everything within astrophotography is developing very fast, I should think, from what I read in general, that the comparison between the 2, could have been more equal, ie. using a filter for the colour cam too. I am thinking specifically on a filter like the Optolong L-Ultimate filter. I am a new starter too within astrophotography, so I'd like to hear your views ( or anybody else's) on this, and the effect a 3 micron filter like this has when using a colour cam. ?
Hi Trevor! Great video with lots of information. I think the aspect of time is the main reason for me to stay with color cameras for the moment. In central Germany I have in a good year not more than 20 nights of clear skies. Last year there has been a time of 6 months of no clear sky. Under those circumstances using a monochrome camera will result in a lot of unfinished business. It could easily happen with targets in the south that you need to wait for the next year to complete just a single target.
Sure in my bortle 6 area, shooting over BC 7 - 9, a monochrome camera would work by far better but I don't want to wait in worst case for a year or so to complete a single target. This then sums up to many years just to have the standard objects captured.
Maybe as a third rig I will afford a mono cam with a filter wheel. My ASI2600MC Pro and my rebranded Touptek 26000C are doing a good job when I do mine good too.
Would have been interesting to see the stack of 4 Color images compared to the Stack of single Mono shots.
The red channel of a single color camera image contains about 1/4 of the photons that the Mono camera takes with the red filter in a single exposure. Green looks better, because RGGB means the Green channel actually contains 1/2 of the amount of light. Blue is 1/4 again. So 1 hour of observation time with a Mono cam actually means 15 minutes per channel + 15 minutes Luminance, while with a color camera you get 1 full hour of exposures, with lower efficiency per channel per shot. Equaling about 15 minutes in Red and Blue and 30 minutes of green.
If you have an observatory or backyard or more time to capture it's better mono, but if you only have weekends with no moon and clear skies for astrophotography, it's better color. Today with color cameras we can find great images with very signal, New BSI sensors are perfect!. I use ATIK APX60m and QHY268M in my observatory and SV405COLOR for travel. Simple!
I've been imaging with a DSLR for a year and half now and I've been wanting to step up to a dedicated camera. Money is the issue at the moment, but when tax season comes back around, I've been looking at the ASI294MC Pro (I bought a Zenithstar 61mm this year). I've weighed the pros and cons on going full mono and it would just take longer for me to get that rig set up, between getting the camera, filter wheel and filters required to even take an image. So I decided to start with a dedicated color camera and build my filters up with that first, then upgrade to mono down the road.
Really helpful, thanks.
Great video you are right to advice beginners to start with colour camera dslr or dedicated otherwise the steep learning curve might well put off imaging. Always like your videos .
I started with a DSLR, then skipped the OSC step entirely and went straight to mono. My data was really good, even though everything's at entry level. But cost is another factor you didn't mention. My absolute entry-level mono rig (ZenithStar 61, QHY183M, 1.25" filters, CEM26, FocusCube v2 + guidescope and cam and dew heater) cost me $US5k. You could get the colour version of the cam which is less expensive, then skip the filters and the focuser and save a ton of cash...
Another great video. I am leery on making the switch to mono. Just don't have the time, whether it be on the processing side or the low number of clear nights. BTW, your cable management looks similar to mine.
The choice is what has kept me from taking the plunge into a dedicated astro camera. I have been using a Canon 60d for awhile, but I really need a cooled camera where I live. I like the ease of use for OSC, but know the "wow" shot are going to come from mono. I think I might have already bought one if not for the oil leaking issue on some of the models I was in the market for.
i think regardless of whether or not you want to to osc or mono, having a cooled astro camera would be a nice step up in quality compared to a dslr or mirrorless camera. not only will running the camera at a lower temp be great noise wise, having a consistent temperature would allow you to create a master library of darks for various exposure lengths that you can use for a year, maybe 2? it'll save a bunch of time having to take those darks, plus you could probably do that during the day instead of after/during each session as well.
maybe you can do a follow up and show a 4 image osc stack compared to the single lrgb stack to compare the noise and detail. another comparison could be showing the detail between and osc and lrgb image having similar integration times. i'm assuming you would be shooting more lum than rgb, so it would be cool to see the differences in detail and colors if any before any real processing.
for the beginner, there's no reason you can't have both (well, besides money). it's unfortunate how much more expensive it is to go mono though. not only are the cameras more expensive, but you have to get the filter wheel and filters too.
i think if you have the budget for either, it comes down to how much you want to spend (money and time) to have the flexibility to shoot what you want, how you want. the mono cam gives you options. it's more complicated, but it gives you more options.
if you want to keep things simple, go osc. you can do narrowband with dual and triband filters now, and although you might not be able to separate certain signals, i believe you can get decent narrowband data and images from osc now.
if you're looking to spread out those purchases over time, consider osc. you can buy things like a filter wheel and narrowband/light pollution filters for your osc, making it a little easier for you to pick up a mono cam later. you can always use that data you got from the osc even if you "upgrade" to mono later.
The main advantage of mono is the ability to image in selective single-band narrowband.
Other than that, assuming you've got a good light pollution filter to help if/when required, colour camera works wonders.
The main thing that I’m seeing with the color camera that I don’t like is the rainbow noise.
Definitely want to get a monochrome camera, but like you said, not having a color camera to use alongside it doesn’t sound like a good idea
Another great video, thank you my friend :)
Thank you! Cheers!
Exactly what happened at the very end, had me switching back from Mono to OSC. In a Bortle 9 zone, mono seemed the way to go. But I found it too much hassle. And had too many incomplete image sets (80R, 10B,35G) because of changing weather and/or target obstruction by houses or trees. So switched back to a very sensitive 533MC pro. And what a relief! 3 hours of data is 3 hours of complete data now. So for me, the benefits of mono just didn’t weigh out
I enjoy watching astro photography as from what i see its way to hard to even try
I don't understand this comparison. The ASI2400MC is 14-bit and has 5.94um pixels whereas the ASI6200MM is a 16-bit and 3.76um pixel camera. Each pixel in the ASI2400 collects more photos just because of the size but it has higher read noise than the 6200. The lower read noise and the resulting 16 bits means that the 6200 is able to record more subtle details in nebulae and at the same time that gives more resolution. So, really: I don't know understand the comparison, given the same conditions is not possible to have a noisier background with the ASI6200MM than with the ASI2400MC. My question is: Are the two images (LRGB/mono ~5:55) uncalibrated? And, did you use an anti-pollution filter in any camera? Anyway, a fair comparison would be to compare the color and mono version of the same camera model in well controlled conditions.
I still work for a living, so I don't have an infinite amount of time to shoot a "perfect shot," even if it takes months of new moon intervals to get multiple clear nights for each channel (LRGB) for a single target. So with my new Celestron Origin, I can glimpse several dozen targets of opportunity in a couple of hours in a single night that I can use as previews of targets that I may want to spend months on each when I'm retired and have nothing else to do using a mono camera, filters, expensive mounts, heavy counter-weights, ....Hey, wait a minute! I'm having more enjoyment now than when I'll be retired and have to work hard for satisfying photos!
OSC for life indeed! 😊
In my opinion , i think when you put a RGB filter in front of a mono camera, each pixel site is still getting only 1/3 of the light flux, similar to what happens on a OSC camera. it seems to me the main advantage of mono would be resolution, since the pixels dont have to be debayered. But i am not able to explain why your red channel looks so much better than the OSC one. The other advantage i think is if you are shooting with specialized filters , like H-alpha/O-III/S-II narrowband filters which might be an advantage if you want to shoot from a light polluted sky , since these narrowband filters will reject most of the light polution.
Thanks Trevor. Great video. Presumably tho, most of us don’t have the seeing to make the extra resolution of a mono camera worthwhile in any case, right? I doubt my seeing is ever much better than 2”
Excelent presentation
Man was i trying to figure out what i wanted to buy, and boom here it is!
Trevor:
Maybe compare a luminance image from the Bayer image vs. any particular channel.
I think the comparison should be made when the images being compared were made using similar quantities of photons (similar exposure).
Even still, when I went from D850 to ASI6200MM, I was shocked. But that leap is more than just color to mono.
One more thing, why do believe one needs to have the focus for flats to be the exact same as when doing the lights?
I question that?
Nice to meet you at CSSP.
A popular middle-way I've seen is to shoot luminance with a mono camera and then use a colour camera to just get the colours. The cost of 3 RGB filters and a filter wheel isn't much different to a second astro camera
3 x 150 +luminance so 4X150 sec makes 600 secs which is what I use for colour images, so it's a better comparison to use 600 seconds in OSC or equivalent to the TOTAL images from mono so the times are identical
You really love that saturation slider holly HOT PINK.
This debate will go on forever… I shoot both OSC and mono with 2600MC and 2600MM, the mono I don’t find to be huge amount better for image quality, at least not with these cameras, but it’s infinitely more flexible in choosing how to capture data. I use the OSC mostly on wider angle shots (135mm to 300mm) with camera lenses and the mono on the bigger scopes. To me its simplicity vs flexibility, both are nice tools to have and of equal value…
I love imaging in mono. But for sure, it's more complex both during imaging and after. You want to make sure you have a reliable autofocuser to account for the differences between filters and that you are using filter offsets in software like NINA. But where mono really shines is in narrowband (even compared to dual band filters in many targets), which gets expensive quickly, and cheap filters generally aren't worth even the cheap price. You mention narrowband at the end.
When shooting nebula and galaxies with bright nebula, I shoot LRGB for stars and then Ha, SII, and OIII for the nebula.
But 100% on starting with a color camera.
The other thing many don't realize is how the bayer pattern really works and how debayering or OSC images happens. There's a real loss of information in that process (data on the table, as you put it), which is partially why the single mono frames look better.
I keep a mix of cameras. Color for solar system objects and comets, and mono for the rest. My first was an ASI522MC Pro, which was great, and I still have it, but it doesn't like my light polluted skies very much :)
I don't think color and mono should be "camps" though. People should feel comfortable working with what they like to work with, but everyone should have objective information on the differences in each, pros, cons, etc. so they can have appropriate expectations. Mono is not "more pro", and OSC "more amateur", they're just different approaches.
Love the end :)
Lol the ending, "...those were both color images"
Thanks for the video Trevor! Nice comparison and wow the mono image was amazing clean! But at the end when you realized you didn't get flats for your mono images is one of the reasons I having gone mono. The other reason is I now use a RASA and I like to sleep at night instead of changing filters 🙂 Then again having a RASA, why not just take more pictures since it is so fast! Still got me wondering of if should get a mono camera now, thanks a lot 😕 Clear Skies!
Update bought a Mono camera 🙂
My only criticism is the fact that a narrowband target was chosen. I would love to see the difference in shots on the target using narrowband filter. I agree that it would be terrible to start with mono though.
Were I live in the UK there aren't that many clear nights ( fifty a year if I'm lucky) so after a frustrating two and a half years trying to capture enough data to produce an image while the target is favourably place I've gone back to using a OSC camera. I still use my mono cam, mostly to capture Ha data which can be applied as a luminance layer to colour images I take at the same time. I have to say that as far as nebulae are concerned I do actually prefer the look of narrow band images, If I lived in an area were I could guarantee at least five or six clear nights a month I would be using mono all the time.