Hi, I have been considering whether to buy a new CCD camera or possibly a DSLR instead. Snooping around on several webpages for DSLR's gives me the idea that this might be the better way to go. I can use CERTAIN DSLR's to take long-exposure, beautifully detailed images of (it seems) any celestial object, as well as great images of terrestrial objects.

 I read an article a few years ago that recommended buying a Canon camera with "D20a" in the model name. I began my quest by looking for these characters in many different camera sites and even the Canon USA site....no luck. "Must be outta date", thought I. "Wonder what today's recommended cameras are?

 That's my question. I like Canon cameras, and I usually buy what I know and like, again and again....brand loyalty, I guess. But the "a" designation in the "D20a" was reportedly a specially red-sensitive chip which (at that time) was BEST suited to astrophotography.

I'd like to know what current Canon cameras are well-suited to astrophotography? What should I expect to spend? What focusing assistance should I consider? (Right Angle; w/wo replaceable screens, etc?) Is there any real difference in how "easy" one model is to use over any other?

 Too detailed for a reply, probably, but is there any advice at all out there? The models of Canon cameras and the expected $ are my main concerns.

Bob

If you really want to use a DSLR for astro work, take a serious look at the (filter) modifications as offered by Hutech at:

http://www.hutech.com/AstroCamera.htm

starryknight1920:

I have been considering whether to buy a new CCD camera or possibly a DSLR instead. Snooping around on several webpages for DSLR's gives me the idea that this might be the better way to go

If you want the best quality photographic results, especially on low surface brightness nebulas and galaxies, forget the DSLR, and other uncooled cameras in general, Go with a cooled monochrome CCD cam and filterwheel loaded w/ LRGB, and at least Ha filters. Second choice is a cooled, bayer matrixed, Sony (low noise) CCD like the Starlight M25. The new Orion version of this cam, at less than 1/3 the price may be worth looking at.

Robert

 WOW! Thanks, Robert, for that HUTECH link. Very impressive, and extremely enlightening. Same with the advice on the Orion. That camera had actually caught my eye, at least the 4.1 Megapixel part, but I still have reservations about Orion products. Since its a new product, and since its maybe 2-to-4 months before I plan to buy, maybe I'll find a forum about their quality and dependability by then.

The Meade DSI-III is the same price, but its a color, single-pass camera, so what do you know or have any advice about this camera. I'm a nearly beginner at astrocams, but I have used DSI, LPI and NexImage cameras. The Orion and DSI-III's are much closer to the costs of the Canon 400D which would likely be my choice for a DSLR.

Thanks, Robert

Bob

starryknight1920:

Same with the advice on the Orion. That camera had actually caught my eye, at least the 4.1 Megapixel part, but I still have reservations about Orion products. Since its a new product, and since its maybe 2-to-4 months before I plan to buy, maybe I'll find a forum about their quality and dependability by then.

I was referring to the recently announced, Orion version of the TE cooled, 6 Mpix one shot color, using the Sony CCD. This Sony sensor is the same as used by Starlight, in their well proven, and popular M25 camera. The big difference is the MUCH lower price, compared to the Starlight. I expect that the Orion gives up something (performance, reliability ???).

The Starlight has been around for a few years, but the newly announced Orion version probably isn't even available for delivery yet. If you're looking at a few months before buying, it may be available when you are ready. I'd at least keep my eyes open for reviews. The 30 deg cooling makes a BIG difference in the time you can expose, if your sky is dark enough.

Robert

 Perhaps your search was fruitless because the model number is "20Da"

Hutech provides modified cameras with increased red sensitivity (Hydrogen-alpha wavelength, the emission of most nebulae in the sky). They can also put clear glass over the camera sensor allowing infra-red photography, but if you image through a refractor, you'll get bloated stars due to uneven focus. Mirror telescopes do not have this problem and can allow IR wavelengths. There aren't too many astrotargets that benefit from IR wavelengths, but it sure makes for interesting daylight photos in combination with an IR-pass-only filter.

Which is a good segue into my next comment of DSLR vs. CCD. The DSLR does two things the CCD cannot:

- Can be used for regular daytime photos of your cat, kids, vacation etc.

- Can be used with camera lenses (without fancy adapters) to take widefield astrophotos. Camera lenses over 100mm can reliably be autofocused on a bright (mag 3 or brighter) star.. making focus very accurate and very, very easy

DSLRs are also less expensive, considering the field of view you get / size of sensor / megapixels.

 The most common DSLR for astrophotography are Canons. This is the case for several reasons:

- Most astro-software and internet support is based on Canon cameras

- Nikon applies noise-smoothing algorithims to their RAW files, so you don't get true raw data-- this can inadvertently erase really faint stars or details

- Most older Nikon cameras have more noise at high ISO than Canon. Not true with models from the last 2 years.

- To capture exposures over 30 seconds, you need an infrared remote for Nikon. Canon uses a hard wire (USB or remote timer) which is more physically secure and convenient.

-  Most Nikon cameras have in-camera noise reduction that cannot be turned off. Canon allows you to turn this off. While this means a dark frame is taken immediately after your image, it also means that you're waiting 3-5-10 minutes *not* imaging while the camera does the dark frame. Canon allows you to take darks at dawn and get more images. A way around the Nikon is to turn the camera off, then turn it back on... which requires you to babysit your scope-- I like to set my camera at 11pm and come back at 7am and collect my subs without babysitting

The tradeoffs are of course it's uncooled and less sensitive.. so it takes more photos to get the same signal to noise ratio. If you want an APS or 35mm sized cooled CCD sensor, expect to pay $4000 plus. The same size sensor on a DSLR can be picked up for $300 used.

YMMV.

 I am new to astronomy and not much of a photographer. I keep reading things about "dark frames" could you please explain what they are?

cfuehrer:

 I am new to astronomy and not much of a photographer. I keep reading things about "dark frames" could you please explain what they are?

A quick and simple explanation is that dark frames are frames taken with the lens cap on or the shutter closed. Generally they are equal time to the actual exposed image frames. This helps identify noise that often shows as bright pixils. Multiple dark frames are taken throughout the process of image data collection, then the dark frames are subtracted from the images during the stacking process to remove the noise therefore improving the quality of the image. 

Have A Nice _________   

Hi everybody,  I've been using a nikon D40x. which is my first slr so I can't compare it to anything else. But I do injoy taking pics of the sky after dark with a wide angle lense. And I also put it on the back of the scope for lunar and planetary.  Hope this helps.Northernlights

I have used the Canon Digital Rebel, Digital Rebel XT, and Digital Rebel XTi for astophotography. The Canon Rebels are fine cameras. The added benefit is that you can use them for regular photography, thus making your investment more usable.

While they are hard pressed to compete with specialty CCD imagers costing BIG $$$, they provide you with astrophotos that rival what observatories were capable of just a decade or two ago.

For people with limited $$$, the DSLR is THE ideal camera.

And remember, even the BEST imager is limited by the capabilities of optics and the mount. So, by spending less and getting a DSLR, you may be able to afford to get a good mount to go with it. 

Canon recently came out with a new offering in the 10mpxl with live view that makes focusing very easy. It is the model XS.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=17316

JJ 

I use the Canon 40D I got it modified By Hap Griffin not to long ago very easy to use I put my scope onto a bright Star and focus with live view then move to the object I will be shooting, all the camera controls are on the laptop and I get a preview of every sub my camera takes so I can see if I have any problems as the night goes on  Great Camera here is some shots using the Canon 40D

 http://www.pbase.com/t_total123

Regards Les 

Is anybody out there using the new Canon XSi camera?  It is the 12mp model with live view and noise reduction.

 llamaboy,

I am using the new XSi and love it. The live view is fantastic for focusing. Seems to be well suited for AP. They also just came out with the XS a 10mp camera with live view and larger pixels that may even be better for AP.