ASI183MC Pro or ASI533MC Pro

[echocae]

Hi guys

I'm a newbie in this forum and also starting to learn about astrophoto using my mirrorless, My telescope is Skywatcher ED72 and i lived in Bortle 5 and has other property on Bortle 2. Im not ready for Monochrome camera, may be in future

I have shortlisted 2 cameras in my mind, ASI183mc Pro and ASi553mc pro. I know the different (Picture Shape, Sensor Size, resolutions and Amp-glow) with these 2 cameras.

Now the question is which one should I get for my 1st OSC astrocamera.

I asked several shop they said get ASI183mc pro and spend the different on proper program like PI or APP.
I know about the shape of the picture (Square v Rectangle) I prefer the rectangle as is more normal in my eyes.

As for the sensor size i know Asi183mc-p is smaller but With binning should be the same as Asi has enough resolution to do it and for the Amp-glow I know ASI533mc-p virtually no ampglow whatsoever as the 183mc-p has alot of it but can be remove with calibration (which is another skill to master)

so can any of you point me to the right direction
asi183mc pro or asi533mc pro the price different is about $100 which is good amount to fund proper program (APP or PI). I cant believe choosing this is harder than naming your kids:lol::lol:

[gregbradley]

Hi Brian,

I got the 183mm Pro. Its a good little camera but the amp glow is a bit annoying as I have only used dedicated astro CCDs before.
So the 533 with no amp glow would be my choice. It has lower read noise, higher 14bit converters and same surface area. The 183 has the nicer rectangular shape but I think you'll find that is a minor advantage as I also image with a 16803 CCD which is square and never find the shape a problem.

I got the 183 because it offered a mono version.

With no amp glow you most likely won't need to do any image callibration at all. Perhaps flats but the small sensor may not vignette anyway.
Amp glow means exactly matching darks. That matching in temperature, duration, gain, offset. So you can get a lot of combinations. Slightly mismatch the darks (you don't use bias frames with these cameras) and the amp glow does not fully clean up.

If all these cameras suffered from amp glow it would hold their future back enormously. But the later models seem to have conquered that.

The 3.76 micron pixels of the 533 sound the same as the very popular ASI2600 and 6200 models and will suit small refractors well.
They will still be workable up to medium focal length scopes. The 2.4 micron pixels of the 183 will start to be a mismatch as you get longer in focal length and require nights of good seeing to work well.

Also 50,000 electron well depth is very nice compared to about 15,000 with the 183. This means you'll be able to retain good star colours on longer exposures compared to the 183.

Read noise is also significantly lower on the 533. Apart from the shape I don't see any advantage of the 183 over the 533. Its one sided.

Having said that I am finding the 183mm Pro a nice camera to work with.

One aspect I have not heard anyone else say but I am finding the very small pixels make my scopes harder to focus than with my CCDs. Quite a bit harder. Small focus changes don't seem to very the image as much as usual and weak seeing can then make it very hard to focus accurately.

3.76 micron pixels of the 533 are also quite small as the smallest CCD pixels are usually around 4.54 microns.

Greg.

[echocae]

thx greg for ur input... but is using asi183mc pro will be more hassle? compare to 553? and is it easy to remove the amp-glow ?

[nsavage]

I have a 183MC. First camera I have ever tried using for Astrophotography. Managed to get my first subs on Saturday night.

I messed up my flats and was unable to use them. The image below is using my darks only. I am not even 100% certain I got the darks right to be honest. I asked some questions elsewhere regarding my flat frames and I was told that if I get them right I will be able to get rid of the amp glow. Have seen plenty of pictures taken with the 183 cameras that do not have amp glow present so I am confident it is possible.

Once again bear in mind that these are the first photos I have taken with the camera so by no means are they anywhere near perfect. I just felt it was a great opportunity to give an example from a very novice user.

[echocae]

good to know. that the amp glow can be remove.. is DSS will able to remove.it or I have to use specialise program like PI or APP, and also is the learning curve to remove the amp glow?

also is the 20MPX of the 183 is better when use the 2x2 binning as is produce enough resolution?

[nsavage]

I have no idea re the binning. So far I am just using DSS. I have an image with my (very bad flats included and the amp glow looks like it may be less but it is very hard to tell).

The below picture was posted by someone when I asked the question elsewhere and they said they are able to get rid of the amp glow using good darks and properly created flats. Only time will tell for me as to whether this is true or not but it gives me hope.

[echocae]

at the moment.. im towards 183mc pro.. rather than 553mc pro.. coz i think Square picture looks wierd... and also asi183 is older camera.. it seems most people already know tips n tricks of this camera.. am I right?

[Camelopardalis]

The 183 is a known quantity at this point. The amp glow can be a little variable and may not calibrate perfectly every time...although note that my 183 is uncooled, so you should have more luck with the cooled version.

There's not a lot of doubt that the 533 will prove to be a solid performer.

Besides the amp glow, the other main pro/con between the two is the pixel size. The 2.4 micron pixels on the 183 like light...expect to take longer exposures with the 183 than the 533 (which has larger pixels).

Oh and you can't bin a colour image in the same way as mono CCDs. Each "colour" pixel is constructed of a cluster of 4 pixels, 2 green, 1 red and 1 blue...so if you bin 2x2 you end up with a single black and white pixel. You can, of course, resample the image down after you have processed it ;)

[echocae]

so what exposure (sec/mins) of the amp glow start to become uncalibrated.. fo you know?

[Camelopardalis]

From what I've heard, you want to keep your exposures below 10 minutes. The longest I've take have been 4 minutes, and I had no problem with it.

The amp glow can look quite frightening in a single uncalibrated sub, but I find it usually calibrates out well.

It just seems that some people's workflow make them more or less susceptible to it.

[Spartacus]

Hi Brian, the amp glow should be able to be calibrated out reliably if the camera is cooled as the calibration masters should if possible be done at the same gain, offset, exposure length and temperature. With an uncooled camera this is more difficult to achieve and may require darks to be done in the same evening as the lights which is a pain. Either that or a note made of the ambient temp and try to approximately replicate when doing darks especially.
The exposure will make the amp glow worse but if the darks are addressing all the above variables the amp glow should calibrate out well.
I don't have the 183 but do have a 294 which if anything has even worse amp glow but still calibrates out (I have used up to 300 sec exposures) so I don't think that you should worry about amp glow being a factor.
Having said all that the 533 does look nice. Getting advice if something goes wrong is always more difficult with newly released gear.

Mike

[nsavage]

So I worked out what I was doing wrong in DSS and changed a setting and I was able to integrate my subs, flats, dark flats and darks and remove the amp glow.

Again this is with the ASI183MC PRO and this is my first image, EVER. Never shot astrophotography before. I have a long way to go but so far pretty happy with the result.

Also once again the point I am trying ot make is that a novice user can get photos with the 183MC PRO and remove the amp glow.

[echocae]

Ok...I just arrive home.. and my wife suprise me with early bday present and is an Asi183mc Pro... now everything is real... i hope I made the right decission... for asi183 mc pro...and also what is the possibility that u need exposure more than 7-10mins?

[nsavage]

This thread will help you with exposure times.

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=166567

I also go on to Astrobin and look at what others are doing.

Congratulations on the Birthday present!

[echocae]

thx for that... now i need to learn how to make master calibration of dark, bias n flat .on DSS.. any pointer? or should i get APP or PI

[Spartacus]

Hi Brian,

Happy Birthday. I wish my wife was as generous!!
Check out this video from Robin Glover of SharpCap and the follow up after he ran out of time. It explains about exposure time and the law of diminishing returns with longer subs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RH93UvP358
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ub1HjvlCJ5Y

It gives a way of finding out your optimum exposure time for your conditions.

Mike

[echocae]

I astrophotography friend just now regarding as183mc pro that I recieve from my wife and he told me to return it and get the 533 mc pro instead as he said is easier to work with than 183mc pro because he said im a newbie in dedicated astrocam...

is that true?... or I just keep it ... what u guys think?

[nsavage]

I guess that is a decision you will have to make yourself. As I have mentioned I am a complete newbie and I managed to get started with it OK.

Also depends on what scope you are going to pair it with. What scope are you planning to pair with the camera?

[echocae]

im gonna use skywatcher ED72 atm.. and in future i will upgrade to ED80/82

is this camera enough?

[nsavage]

If you are shooting widefield you should be fine with the 183.

[echocae]

cool.. yes i ony interested in dso on widefield.. thrn ok I wont listen to my friend. .:D

[Camelopardalis]

The 183 is a pretty versatile camera and should work well with your scope. You will likely need a field flattener, as short refractors are notorious for their field curvature. You’ll get lots of detail out of a 183 under the right conditions. Calibrating is easy once you get the hang of it, it’s just a step in your processing.

Personally, I wouldn’t bother swapping it out. There’s always something out there that’s “more, better”, but the 183 is already pretty excellent at what it does. The challenge will be honing your technique. At this stage, I think that’s more important, but it’s your choice of course!

[echocae]

Thank you... I decided to keep my 183, and what you said is correct regarding "Honing my technique" is better get ugly now.. so later one when I decided to get serious I understand the process without cheating (with no-amp glow camera), btw Do I have to make Calibration library?

If I do need to make make calibration library (DARK) for 183 what gains, exposures,temperature that I should focus on.. is that any series/sequence that I need to concentrate... eg. -5, -10, -15 ... gain 0,10,20,70,100,150 and exposure 10 sec, 30sec, 60 sec, 90 secs... etc2?

[Spartacus]

Hi Brian,

With my 294 I do a dark library once a year. As I tend to only image at gain 120 as this is the lowest read noise for this sensor that gives a gain to keep exposures low.
I do a library for 30 sec, 60 sec, 90 sec, 120 sec, 180 sec, 240 sec and 300 sec. I don't use bias masters apart from calibrating flats.
The reason for stopping at 300 sec is that for my location longer exposures start to get more light pollution and my equipment may start to run into guiding issues etc. You may want longer if you go narrowband but I would use a broadband or light pollution filter first if you are in suburbs or metro urban areas and probably none in a dark sky site.
You will need to do say 30-50 frames for each then integrate each set into masters that are used in the calibration process.
You will need to do bias frames, darks and flats all integrated into masters that attempt to remove as much from your light frames that is not related to the signal that you want. That is, intrinsic chip noise, general thermal and other noise and problems with the chip (cold and hot pixels) finally the dreaded amp glow. Then there is the imaging train stuff like dust on your optics and vignetting that are removed with flats. Oh also don't try to get the temp down too low as the advantages are less in CMOS and it causes a lot of current draw in cooling. I try to stick to -10 as this is unlikely to lead to cooler power more than 60%.
Here is a reference article that will help to familiarise you with how the calibration works especially if you use pixinsight but are still relevant for the other calibration and stacking software. https://pixinsight.com/forum/index.php?threads/for-beginners-guide-to-pis-imagecalibration.11547/
I really would encourage you to read it as it contains great insights in regards to calibration and the videos from Robin Glover that I referenced in a previous post.
Remember to stick to the same temp (I use -10 degC), gain 120 would be a good start "so called unity gain", unlike the 294 there is not a sudden change in read noise that makes a particular gain perfect but 120 is middle of the road. I am not sure about offset as this may be fixed in the driver. If you change any of these parameters in your lights you will need a new set of calibration frames especially if for any reason you change offset as this can lead to clipping in the calibrated light frames. Also avoid using automatic white balance values. In the 294 these auto values in the native driver can lead to problems. Check for the best values (in the 294 this is WB-B 50 and WB-R 50). Check online for advice.
Let us know how you get on. Generally users of this camera get pretty good results and there is a lot of information on common problems and their solutions. This is the advantage of getting a camera that has been released for a few years.
Good luck and clear skies
Mike

[gregbradley]

Correct darks remove the amp glow not flats. Flats handle uneven illumination of the sensor like vignetting and dust donuts.
Don't use Biases.
Amp glow is a hassle to a point. You need to have exactly correct darks otherwise it does not remove it. With the various combinations of settings you need a lot of different types of darks to match the light exposures.

When properly matched the amp glow seems to disappear.

Greg.

[nsavage]

Thanks Greg.

I clearly misunderstood the information I was given regarding my darks and flats but as you probably saw later in this thread I was able to work out what I had done wrong with my darks (which I then tested by integrating my subs and darks only and can confirm that this got rid of my amp glow) and then integrate my subs, darks, flats and dark flats which resulted in a corrected image.

[echocae]

In Australia, What temperature setting u guys are using on Summer and winter?

i was thinking -5 to -10 for summer and -15 to -20 for winter..

[Camelopardalis]

Brian, for cooling, refer to the manufacturer data...

https://astronomy-imaging-camera.com/wp-content/uploads/DCvsT-183.jpg

Multiply the value by the exposure time and you get an estimate of the thermal noise contribution.

You should be good for -5 or -10 all year round.

Which brings me onto darks...IMO experiment with the camera first before worrying too much about a dark library...you can always create that afterwards - the light frames don’t self-destruct without it!

Typically, folk find they settle on a given gain, temperature and exposure time for certain types of objects (for example, deep sky) and stick to it. That also makes it easier when you want to create a dark library ;)

[gregbradley]

Not sure what you mean by this. But you only subtract darks once not twice.

You open all your light exposure files. You dark subtract and apply flats to each one of them.
Then you combine them into one image. I don't bother with flat darks but it may make a very minor difference. The cameras are so clean its probably not needed.

Greg.

[nsavage]

Yes sorry I was not real clear.

I worked out what I was doing wrong with my darks so I did a test run just using the darks with the corrected setting as a test. Once I realised that my correction had worked I did a brand new stack using my lights, darks, flats and dark flats.

In regards to the dark flats I was just following a suggested workflow. No idea how much of a difference they make if any but given your comments I may experiment with them a little to see fi I think them worthwhile.

[The_bluester]

Regards a dark library, I am in the middle of shooting one for my new camera at the moment. Once you settle on a gain and a temperature you expect to use commonly you can shoot darks more profitably, there should not be a need to shoot darks for loads of different temperatures, just pick one you can probably achieve all year and shoot both lights and darks (And flats depending on length of flats) at that temp. It looks like my new ASI2600 will comfortably hold -10 sensor temperature in any reasonable ambient temperature so I am shooting 30, 60, 120, 300 and 600 second darks while I wait for some more gear to arrive. If I find that I want to use a different gain or there is a hole in my list of exposure times, I will shoot darks to suit later.

[echocae]

Do u have to do the dark library once a year? what if u dont do that.. is that any significant changes?

[The_bluester]

I actually shot one about every six months with mine. If you notice hot pixels creeping through calibration it might Be time to think about it. I mostly used 300 second subs so it was only one new mater dark to shoot Most of the time.

[echocae]

Hi guys... I done the dark library of GAIN 120 with 30 sec, 60 sec, 90 sec, 120 sec, 180 sec, 240 sec and 300 sec.

I forgot to tell, I have a tri-band Narrowband filter for OSC that work on Bortle 5 - 9 skies... should I make more than 300 secs exposure (eg.500 secs, 600sec or more)? or the 300 secs should be enough with triband narrowband filter usage?

[Craig_]

I haven't used the 183MC Pro but I find the 533MC Pro to be a pleasure to work with. The only way it could be better is if they offered it in a mono version like the 183MM.

No amp glow, extremely clean files, and have had no issues with calibration so far (touch wood.)

I'm sure the 183MC Pro will serve you well, though. The pixels are smaller so in theory you will need to expose longer, but on the flipside, you will gain more latitude to crop your files in post, something that the 533MC doesn't offer much of.

[Spartacus]

Brian,

I use a duo band filter in similar skies and 300secs is the longest I use. Best thing is try it and see if it is enough for your intended target. Mind you I rarely go for really faint targets from my backyard and make these a focus for my dark sky trips. You can always do longer darks if needed. Just do your flats using the same filter on the night and you should be good to go.

Mike

[Camelopardalis]

Yeah ultimately you only need to expose long enough to overcome the read noise. This helps keep the stars from blowing out also.

The read noise is very low with this camera - 1e at gain 100. I’d be surprised if you needed long exposures...although the filter may kick the ball down the road.