G'day Peter. Long time watcher of your channel - just joined. Thanks for this review. It certainly helped me cement what I should get (being a beginner in this field). Thanks again for going through the process as it's still all very new to me! Cheers from Oz. Dan
Peter I’ve subscribed to your channel a long time and seen/ learnt more that I can take in 😊 but this is the best yet mate !!!! I am blown away with the tutorial as I have so much data and my processing is so rubbish that need to go back over it all again _ that I you Simon UK PS I only wanted to see the ASI 533 mm review as. Have the 533 Oscar and Loki g at dual set up with mono as well - it the tutorial that kills it 👍👍👍👏👏
Hi Peter, you have a great channel here and I have picked up quite a few tips from you. But really, you have to stop implying that a smaller sensor give you more focal length. The only thing that gives you more focal length is more focal length. What a smaller sensor does is to limit your field of view, nothing else. To some extent, limited by the telsecope aperture/resolution, a higher resolution of the sensor can provide more details. The ASI533 provides the exact same level of detail as the ASI2600, but the ASI2600 has a wider field of view. Of course, you can crop the image from the 2600 to the 533, and you will have the exact same image with the exact same resolution.
i completely agree , the orion nebula was the 1st nebula i ever tried to image and i end up imaging a few times ever year trying to get it looking better ever time
Square sensor lends itself well to the IG crowd. For me though, it is ultimately what led me to pass on the sensor. I wasnt a fan of the square. Thanks for the upload!
Hi Peter. Beautiful shot of Orion. Thanks for the review. Are you using the tripod that came with the am5?. I'm looking to get an eq and I'm considering the am5, but heard it's to light for an 8se. Thanks
Excellent video as always. One question. Do you not like Pixinsight for staking your images. I like it much more than DSS. Can you elaborate on why you still use DSS ? Thank you.
I have used both. PI is slightly better but time intensive. I can use DSS in 1/2 the time. I like how it "saves' the location of each calibration frame. So when I click on darks it takes me to the dark location, etc. Also, DSS is much faster.
I would just like to point out that 11.31mm x 11.31mm is no where near being 1" square. One inch is approximately 25.4mm and the sides of diagonal of this sensor are 11.31mm. The diagonal therefore is 15.99mm, about 9.5mm short of 1". To achieve a 1" (25.4mm) diagonal the sensor needs to be 18mm x 18mm. So the actual sensor is about 86% smaller than advertised, (someone check the maths for me). Why do they market this in such a way when it is completely misleading? Why has nobody called them out on this? By the way, I have the monochrome version of this camera and it is very good, I just wish manufacturers would be truthful.
Because they’re using what the industry has always called a 1” sensor, which has always had a 16mm diagonal measurement. It’s called 1” sensor because that was the size of older camera glass tubes, which had a sensitive area of about 16mm.
@@dukrous That may well be the case but do most consumers know that? I doubt it. Their marketing material clearly shows the sensor diagonal as 1", which it plainly is not. I don't know about other countries but in the UK that's called false advertising.
G'day Peter. Long time watcher of your channel - just joined. Thanks for this review. It certainly helped me cement what I should get (being a beginner in this field). Thanks again for going through the process as it's still all very new to me! Cheers from Oz. Dan
Peter I’ve subscribed to your channel a long time and seen/ learnt more that I can take in 😊 but this is the best yet mate !!!! I am blown away with the tutorial as I have so much data and my processing is so rubbish that need to go back over it all again _ that I you Simon UK PS I only wanted to see the ASI 533 mm review as. Have the 533 Oscar and Loki g at dual set up with mono as well - it the tutorial that kills it 👍👍👍👏👏
Hi Peter, you have a great channel here and I have picked up quite a few tips from you. But really, you have to stop implying that a smaller sensor give you more focal length. The only thing that gives you more focal length is more focal length. What a smaller sensor does is to limit your field of view, nothing else. To some extent, limited by the telsecope aperture/resolution, a higher resolution of the sensor can provide more details. The ASI533 provides the exact same level of detail as the ASI2600, but the ASI2600 has a wider field of view. Of course, you can crop the image from the 2600 to the 533, and you will have the exact same image with the exact same resolution.
Yeah, I always try to explain the same to people.. 🙂
i completely agree , the orion nebula was the 1st nebula i ever tried to image and i end up imaging a few times ever year trying to get it looking better ever time
Top left in dss you can brighten the image and “stretch” it to see each frame a little bit late but just in case
Square sensor lends itself well to the IG crowd. For me though, it is ultimately what led me to pass on the sensor. I wasnt a fan of the square. Thanks for the upload!
Hi Peter. Beautiful shot of Orion. Thanks for the review. Are you using the tripod that came with the am5?. I'm looking to get an eq and I'm considering the am5, but heard it's to light for an 8se. Thanks
I love this camera paired with the Rasa 8. Are you still using the Rasa 8?
Great video
Excellent video as always. One question. Do you not like Pixinsight for staking your images. I like it much more than DSS. Can you elaborate on why you still use DSS ? Thank you.
I have used both. PI is slightly better but time intensive. I can use DSS in 1/2 the time. I like how it "saves' the location of each calibration frame. So when I click on darks it takes me to the dark location, etc. Also, DSS is much faster.
PS CCD OR CMOS filters ? Consider SHO 7nm from Bartlett 6 skies what is your steer on filters ? Cheers Simon
I would just like to point out that 11.31mm x 11.31mm is no where near being 1" square. One inch is approximately 25.4mm and the sides of diagonal of this sensor are 11.31mm. The diagonal therefore is 15.99mm, about 9.5mm short of 1". To achieve a 1" (25.4mm) diagonal the sensor needs to be 18mm x 18mm. So the actual sensor is about 86% smaller than advertised, (someone check the maths for me). Why do they market this in such a way when it is completely misleading? Why has nobody called them out on this? By the way, I have the monochrome version of this camera and it is very good, I just wish manufacturers would be truthful.
Because they’re using what the industry has always called a 1” sensor, which has always had a 16mm diagonal measurement. It’s called 1” sensor because that was the size of older camera glass tubes, which had a sensitive area of about 16mm.
@@dukrous That may well be the case but do most consumers know that? I doubt it. Their marketing material clearly shows the sensor diagonal as 1", which it plainly is not. I don't know about other countries but in the UK that's called false advertising.
Thanks for pointing out. It really is something important for me.
Monochrome is synonymous with EXPENSIVE. Better be good and honestly, with no test I've felt that it is.
Full frame is also synonymous with VERY expensive....
So that is part of the tutorial, make sure you have a smart girlfriend or wife? 😀
Monochrome is synonymous with EXPENSIVE. Better be good and honestly, with no test I've felt that it is.