Hey Pete , FYI using a smaller sensor does not give you more magnification or sharpness if the pixel size is the same, as the asi2600 and asi533 are. If you were to crop the asi2600 to the same field of view as the asi533 it wouldn't look any different. Both have 3.76 micron pixels which is what determines the resolution, along with seeing conditions. Having wider field of view does give you more options with framing though.
I feel like I've been growing with you as an astrophotographer. I was doing DSLR back when you were, Skyguider Pro, all that fun. You're 10 months ahead of me on this camera though, I just bought it! I'll be conducting first light this Saturday, I look forward to it. I'll be shooting the Rho Ophiuchi cloud complex with my Z73. My EdgeHD is already shooting a galaxy, so I'm not going to interfere with that. Thanks for this review!
use the 533 and shoot a mosaic of 2-3 panels depending on the target and you get close to the FOV of the 2600, similar sensor pixel size and the lack of amp glow makes it a cinch
really matters is not if you fill the frame but the amount of pixels resolving the target. Even increasing the field of view, if pixel density is the same thereis no advantage of small sensors. With larger one you could crop and get the same results or choose large targets.
i have just purchased this camera plus the redcat51 3rd gen and i was just looking at filter wheels, so i dont need a filter wheel? to put that into context, it is my first telescope and dedicated camera so it is all new to me, i thought the filters eradicated the bad light and highlighted colours, i live 100km out bush in Australia so i dont have any city or town lights to worry about, just beautiful dark clear skies
As you might remember after the January astro course in Kanab, I splurged - really splurged - and bought the AM5 Mount and a few months later the the 2600MC Pro. Headed back to Kanab in September for 4 full nites of shooting. Wish me luck !
Thanks for the review Peter. I have the ASI2600MC Pro and I love it. The telescopes I use it on are an ED 127mm x 950mm APO and a Meade 14" ACF LX850 SCT. I love it on both. I do my processing on my gaming computer that I don't do gaming on but it processes them fairly quickly. Anyway, just wanted to say thank you and I always enjoy watching your videos. Thanks again. Sincerely, Rich Williams Astor, Florida 32102 USA!
Hi, professional thing. I entered the channel when I see your surname because it looks like you have European roots. Peter Zelinka something like Piotr Zieliński, Źelińka. I think it's likely. Greetings from Europe.
With all due respect, you’re making a false statement when claiming that a smaller sensor gives you a bigger magnification. With a given focal length, a smaller sensor will give you a smaller field of view, and thus, an apparent bigger size of the object. In order to have bigger magnification you need is a longer focal length, no matter which sensor size you use.
@@TheCynical0ptimist The Field Of View is smaller, but the focal length, and thus magnification, is the same. To achieve higher magnification a longer focal length is needed.
i agree. Crop factors mean nothing. Pixel size does though if the smaller sensor does more fine sampling. Really demanding for the quality of the optics though.
I'm not arguing the physics, I'm commenting on the language. You just said that, "with a given focal length, a smaller sensor will give you a smaller field of view, and thus, an apparent bigger size of the object." Indeed. So if you define "magnification" (as many do in common vernacular) as "an apparent bigger size of the object," then yes, a smaller sensor results in higher "magnification." Using a different definition is fine, and when it comes to physics, more accurate, but that's not how the term was used in the video.
I have the 294MM Pro and as you say amp glow isn’t a problem. I have to admit I am shocked you don’t do dark frames. I also have the 533MC Pro which has no amp glow, but I still find it essential to have a dark frames library.
The 533 has slightly less dark current than the 571 actually. Personally i would not subtract something from the data that does not even raise over the read noise. Imx533 sensor at -5C with a 300s sub exposure, the dark currents contribution to the read noise is insignificant. Cooling to -10C hits the final nail in the coffin. No point going lower and dark library can be deleted :D Its all in the ZWO's spec sheet and can be figured out with some maths.
Enjoyed the video. But using 'dimensions' that have their roots in old video sensor terminology is still highly confusing to us relative newbies - e.g. referring to the the ZWO ASI533 as having a 1" square sensor, when it is in fact only 11.3x11.3mm. ZWO tech folks should address this in their description of this product, and drop the old misleading naming terminology.
So....I'm guessing that you recommend OSC rather than Mono? I'm getting my first dedicated astro camera this month. 533MC or 533MM. Having trouble making up my mind.
Just buy the 533 and mosaic the hell out of the night sky if you need to. A 2 to 4 panel mosaic is easy as a few clicks in Pixinsight and at 3.76 micron pixels and 9mp x 4 plates minus 10-12% of overlap is a nice, high resolution image if you need it.
You’re issue with the Redcat51 focal length being suited to smaller sensors only makes sense if the smaller sensor also has smaller pixels. Many smaller sensors have the same-sized pixels, but just fewer of them. If the pixels are same-sized, then cropping the ASI2600 is the same as having a smaller sensor. Yes, you could save money buying the smaller sensor, but then you lose the flexibility of a wider field when you need/want it. Lots of people use camera lenses for wide field, so this has merit. I haven’t yet bought a Redcat 51 to use with my 26Mp APS Fujifilm camera, but I plan to. It fills a focal length gap in my arsenal. My APO collection of optics are 1) Laowa 65mm/2.8 Macro, 2) Rokinon 135mm/2.0, 3) future Redcat51 250mm/4.9, and 4) Televue NP101 540mm/5.4. When I add these framing lines into my SkySafari Plus planetarium app, it makes perfect sense. The camera/sensor size and pixel density for me would be as large as possible (within the coverage of the optics) and as many pixels as possible. But price is also a limiting factor. And that’s where the ASI2600 fits the balance for size, resolution, and cost. The lack of amplifier glow, high DNR, and pixel well capacity seem good. It is nearly the same sensor as my Fujifilm XT4, but with cooling and more compatibility with the ASI Air ecosystem. So I find it very attractive. I’m still considering color vs mono. But I probably won’t opt for the duo since I already have guide scopes and an ASI120 guide camera. Biggest issue for buying the ASI2600 is how to attach Fuji X-mount lenses to the ASI camera. Maybe I have to get the Rokinon in Canon or Nikon mount? Or I just stick with the Fuji camera when shooting wide? Anyway, thanks for your videos. They are a good resource for me.
Just because you age this effect crop of APS-C vs the 533-size, you can always crop the APS-C FOV down to that of the 533… the pixel size is exactly the same all things being equal, you can have the same FOV images with the 2600 as with the 533
You should by the camera Peter. I have the same camera and I love it. It hurt to put the money out for it at first but since then I have recouped the cost and am glad I have the camera now. You could sell something like that 294 which would not be a bad move.
At that price I'd want full-frame, myself. 😅 What's your favorite DS camera with a smaller sensor like 1" or four thirds? I'm looking for an OSC with 16mm image circle or smaller. (specifically for Starizona Night Owl)
Full frame incorporates a lot of problems on 2" equipment (vignetting, flat field correction, reducers) and with +24MP you need lightning fast I/O and big drives to keep processing times low at pp/stacking. Be careful what you wish for ;)
Hi Peter…I found a design flaw of sorts on the 2600. I saw this video and it confirmed my interest in buying the Askar V with the 2600. It looks like a great minimalist pairing for mobile imaging as I have to drive to darkness from my LP urban home. The camera mounts just as you said to the V. Clean and simple. My complaint about the 2600 has to do with the filter wheel attachment method. Unlike the convenient thread on and off ability of the 533 you have to the filter wheel as you showed in your backfocus video…2600 has no such ability natively. In fact, it requires a major disassembly of the ZWO 2” wheel, using bolts and screws to attach. It defeats the ease and speed of moving the camera without the wheel when just a single LP filter screwed unto the Askar V will do. Heck of a speed bump to hit when it all looked so easy even while staying in the ZWO ecosystem. Now looking and hoping I can find a threadable adapter to mount the 2600 to the wheel. The other scope I’ll be using is a ZWO FF130 with a reducer perhaps some days. If I have to leave the camera and filter wheel together permanently, it’s a pain to find a decent padded case to carry it in. Double Ugh! ❤️ your videos and find them very useful as a newbie. Thanks! 👍
@@toddweiler227 A LP filter would be a cheap thing to just use in the image train when you use your color camera. Setting up a whole filter wheel for one filter just seems like way too much work.
@@XShadowAngel I completely agree. I need the wheel for the mono camera to shoot color on a second scope. I bought a ZWO filter drawer as an alternative that would allow quick changes without a permanent connection to the 2600. I’m might try adapter rings to the 2600, but so far nobody on any of the forums have said it’s a sure secure solution. It will also impact back focus and other spacing issues.
Hey Pete , FYI using a smaller sensor does not give you more magnification or sharpness if the pixel size is the same, as the asi2600 and asi533 are. If you were to crop the asi2600 to the same field of view as the asi533 it wouldn't look any different. Both have 3.76 micron pixels which is what determines the resolution, along with seeing conditions. Having wider field of view does give you more options with framing though.
I feel like I've been growing with you as an astrophotographer. I was doing DSLR back when you were, Skyguider Pro, all that fun. You're 10 months ahead of me on this camera though, I just bought it! I'll be conducting first light this Saturday, I look forward to it. I'll be shooting the Rho Ophiuchi cloud complex with my Z73. My EdgeHD is already shooting a galaxy, so I'm not going to interfere with that. Thanks for this review!
Excellent work Peter. Great explanations - and a great pic. Dan
Thanks for this video Pete. I am about to buy my first color camera and I have been seriously looking at the 2600.
Thanks!
use the 533 and shoot a mosaic of 2-3 panels depending on the target and you get close to the FOV of the 2600, similar sensor pixel size and the lack of amp glow makes it a cinch
I liked the outdoors background rather than this. Anyways, great review as ever!
really matters is not if you fill the frame but the amount of pixels resolving the target. Even increasing the field of view, if pixel density is the same thereis no advantage of small sensors. With larger one you could crop and get the same results or choose large targets.
Hi Peter - thanks for the review - appreciate you sharing your experience. So you never mentioned if you were going to keep the camera ;-)
i have just purchased this camera plus the redcat51 3rd gen and i was just looking at filter wheels, so i dont need a filter wheel? to put that into context, it is my first telescope and dedicated camera so it is all new to me, i thought the filters eradicated the bad light and highlighted colours, i live 100km out bush in Australia so i dont have any city or town lights to worry about, just beautiful dark clear skies
I love your sexy robot voice talking to me about astro!
As you might remember after the January astro course in Kanab, I splurged - really splurged - and bought the AM5 Mount and a few months later the the 2600MC Pro. Headed back to Kanab in September for 4 full nites of shooting. Wish me luck !
Thanks for the review Peter. I have the ASI2600MC Pro and I love it. The telescopes I use it on are an ED 127mm x 950mm APO and a Meade 14" ACF LX850 SCT. I love it on both. I do my processing on my gaming computer that I don't do gaming on but it processes them fairly quickly. Anyway, just wanted to say thank you and I always enjoy watching your videos.
Thanks again.
Sincerely, Rich Williams
Astor, Florida 32102 USA!
Thank you for your reviews and content! I enjoy your perspective.
Hi, professional thing.
I entered the channel when I see your surname because it looks like you have European roots.
Peter Zelinka something like Piotr Zieliński, Źelińka.
I think it's likely.
Greetings from Europe.
With all due respect, you’re making a false statement when claiming that a smaller sensor gives you a bigger magnification. With a given focal length, a smaller sensor will give you a smaller field of view, and thus, an apparent bigger size of the object. In order to have bigger magnification you need is a longer focal length, no matter which sensor size you use.
Really splitting hairs on that one, bud. Crop sensors of all types result in a longer effective focal length.
@@TheCynical0ptimist The Field Of View is smaller, but the focal length, and thus magnification, is the same. To achieve higher magnification a longer focal length is needed.
i agree. Crop factors mean nothing. Pixel size does though if the smaller sensor does more fine sampling. Really demanding for the quality of the optics though.
@@TheCynical0ptimistyou need a book of optics mate
I'm not arguing the physics, I'm commenting on the language. You just said that, "with a given focal length, a smaller sensor will give you a smaller field of view, and thus, an apparent bigger size of the object." Indeed. So if you define "magnification" (as many do in common vernacular) as "an apparent bigger size of the object," then yes, a smaller sensor results in higher "magnification."
Using a different definition is fine, and when it comes to physics, more accurate, but that's not how the term was used in the video.
I have the 294MM Pro and as you say amp glow isn’t a problem. I have to admit I am shocked you don’t do dark frames. I also have the 533MC Pro which has no amp glow, but I still find it essential to have a dark frames library.
The 533 has slightly less dark current than the 571 actually. Personally i would not subtract something from the data that does not even raise over the read noise. Imx533 sensor at -5C with a 300s sub exposure, the dark currents contribution to the read noise is insignificant. Cooling to -10C hits the final nail in the coffin. No point going lower and dark library can be deleted :D Its all in the ZWO's spec sheet and can be figured out with some maths.
@@tomatomaeg what about hot pixels i.e. the pixels with higher than normal dark current?
@@astromatt75 hot pixels are more a problem with uncooled operation.
@@makrospex Agreed but hot pixels still appear on my camera when cooled (-10) - albeit not nearly as many compared to when the camera is uncooled.
Enjoyed the video. But using 'dimensions' that have their roots in old video sensor terminology is still highly confusing to us relative newbies - e.g. referring to the the ZWO ASI533 as having a 1" square sensor, when it is in fact only 11.3x11.3mm. ZWO tech folks should address this in their description of this product, and drop the old misleading naming terminology.
So....I'm guessing that you recommend OSC rather than Mono? I'm getting my first dedicated astro camera this month. 533MC or 533MM. Having trouble making up my mind.
Just buy the 533 and mosaic the hell out of the night sky if you need to. A 2 to 4 panel mosaic is easy as a few clicks in Pixinsight and at 3.76 micron pixels and 9mp x 4 plates minus 10-12% of overlap is a nice, high resolution image if you need it.
Can we use it with duo band filter from Bortle 7 getting good result?
Thanks!
Regarding Sensor size: pairing the 2600 with the RedCat and cropping in, the image should be the same as with the 533
You’re issue with the Redcat51 focal length being suited to smaller sensors only makes sense if the smaller sensor also has smaller pixels. Many smaller sensors have the same-sized pixels, but just fewer of them. If the pixels are same-sized, then cropping the ASI2600 is the same as having a smaller sensor. Yes, you could save money buying the smaller sensor, but then you lose the flexibility of a wider field when you need/want it. Lots of people use camera lenses for wide field, so this has merit. I haven’t yet bought a Redcat 51 to use with my 26Mp APS Fujifilm camera, but I plan to. It fills a focal length gap in my arsenal. My APO collection of optics are 1) Laowa 65mm/2.8 Macro, 2) Rokinon 135mm/2.0, 3) future Redcat51 250mm/4.9, and 4) Televue NP101 540mm/5.4. When I add these framing lines into my SkySafari Plus planetarium app, it makes perfect sense. The camera/sensor size and pixel density for me would be as large as possible (within the coverage of the optics) and as many pixels as possible. But price is also a limiting factor. And that’s where the ASI2600 fits the balance for size, resolution, and cost. The lack of amplifier glow, high DNR, and pixel well capacity seem good. It is nearly the same sensor as my Fujifilm XT4, but with cooling and more compatibility with the ASI Air ecosystem. So I find it very attractive. I’m still considering color vs mono. But I probably won’t opt for the duo since I already have guide scopes and an ASI120 guide camera. Biggest issue for buying the ASI2600 is how to attach Fuji X-mount lenses to the ASI camera. Maybe I have to get the Rokinon in Canon or Nikon mount? Or I just stick with the Fuji camera when shooting wide? Anyway, thanks for your videos. They are a good resource for me.
Just because you age this effect crop of APS-C vs the 533-size, you can always crop the APS-C FOV down to that of the 533… the pixel size is exactly the same all things being equal, you can have the same FOV images with the 2600 as with the 533
Peter, do you have a LP filter you recommend for the Duo? I live in moderately suburban skies. Thanks, love the content!
Great review, Peter, nice to have someone actually talk about all the specs and give pros and cons.
You should by the camera Peter. I have the same camera and I love it. It hurt to put the money out for it at first but since then I have recouped the cost and am glad I have the camera now. You could sell something like that 294 which would not be a bad move.
Can you somehow plug it in a Canon or Nikon lens ? The focus ring must be not precise enough
Continue your channel
294mm or 2600mm?
At that price I'd want full-frame, myself. 😅
What's your favorite DS camera with a smaller sensor like 1" or four thirds?
I'm looking for an OSC with 16mm image circle or smaller. (specifically for Starizona Night Owl)
Full frame incorporates a lot of problems on 2" equipment (vignetting, flat field correction, reducers) and with +24MP you need lightning fast I/O and big drives to keep processing times low at pp/stacking. Be careful what you wish for ;)
Hi Peter…I found a design flaw of sorts on the 2600. I saw this video and it confirmed my interest in buying the Askar V with the 2600. It looks like a great minimalist pairing for mobile imaging as I have to drive to darkness from my LP urban home. The camera mounts just as you said to the V. Clean and simple. My complaint about the 2600 has to do with the filter wheel attachment method. Unlike the convenient thread on and off ability of the 533 you have to the filter wheel as you showed in your backfocus video…2600 has no such ability natively. In fact, it requires a major disassembly of the ZWO 2” wheel, using bolts and screws to attach. It defeats the ease and speed of moving the camera without the wheel when just a single LP filter screwed unto the Askar V will do. Heck of a speed bump to hit when it all looked so easy even while staying in the ZWO ecosystem. Now looking and hoping I can find a threadable adapter to mount the 2600 to the wheel. The other scope I’ll be using is a ZWO FF130 with a reducer perhaps some days. If I have to leave the camera and filter wheel together permanently, it’s a pain to find a decent padded case to carry it in. Double Ugh! ❤️ your videos and find them very useful as a newbie. Thanks! 👍
If you only need one filter, why are you bothering with a filter wheel to begin with?
@@XShadowAngel because I have a mono 174mm and a color 2600 MC camera to use.
@@toddweiler227 A LP filter would be a cheap thing to just use in the image train when you use your color camera. Setting up a whole filter wheel for one filter just seems like way too much work.
@@XShadowAngel I completely agree. I need the wheel for the mono camera to shoot color on a second scope. I bought a ZWO filter drawer as an alternative that would allow quick changes without a permanent connection to the 2600. I’m might try adapter rings to the 2600, but so far nobody on any of the forums have said it’s a sure secure solution. It will also impact back focus and other spacing issues.
Too expensive for me