Really nice analysis. I notice on your blog page you rate the ASI662MC and ASI678MC as your top picks for planetary imaging in 2023. I would be interested in hearing how you think the new ASI664MC (released in Nov 23) and the ASI715MC (released in Jan 24) compare in 2024. My reading of the specs suggest they might be good alternatives to your top picks, with the 664 being the specialist planetary one (similar FR, higher resolution, and lower noise than the 662, but a wider FoV), and the 715 being a good alternative option for planetary/lunar (narrower FoV than the 678 but otherwise quite similar).
Thank you so much for this. It must have taken a lot of work in research and editing the video. It has helped me choose a mono planetary camera for my 8 inch Schmit Cassegrain.
Great video! Think i made the right choice with the 178MC, In a few months you will have to re-do this video, as ZWO just announced 4 new planetary cams :-)
hallo Wido, an interesting point you made about using a planetary camera as auto-guiding camera. I own a ASI385MC and i am now getting some gear to build my deep sky AF rig. Do you think i can use the 385 as autoguiding and skip buying an 120 mini? (my setup will be redcat+skywatcher GTI+EAF+ASIAIR plus+DSLR). Lets hope for some clear skies in zuid holland this summer...
Yes, definitely! Your 385mc has a similar pixel size as the 120 and you can pair it with a guidescope. I have separate videos about autoguiding on my channel. Good luck and clear skies!
Hi Wido, thank you for the great comparison. I have a question according of combinations of cam and barlow (focal ratio). What is in your oppinion the best combination? I have a C925 and I will buy a 2x or 2.5 barlow (focal ratio is 20 or 25) and a cam with 3.75 or 2.9 pixel. 1. Cam with 2.9 pixel and 2x barlow, focal ratio of 20 (calculated possible range: 14.5 - 20.3) 2. Cam with 3.75 pixel and 2x barlow, focal ratio of 20 (possible range: 18,75 - 26.25) 3. Cam with 3.75 pixel and 2.5x barlow ,focal ratio of 25 (possible range: 18,75 - 26.25) Is it really possible to calculate with the factor 7 instead of online 5? I have read until now online of the factor 5. Thanks for your answer in advance. Andreas
Hi again, Wido. Up to now, I own three colour cameras, the ZWO 178 and 224, as as the QHC 462, but I haven't had a chance to use the last one yet. I actually like the 224 the most so far, mostly because the combination of a 2.5x Powermate and a IR cut filter give me good results with it. For some reason, the 178 doesn't give me clear images, even with no filter and a 2x Barlow. But I was about to pull the trigger on switching to mono for the higher resolution (I just got a Celestron 9.25 FTE in the mail the other day!), until I heard about the 585 MC. It seems the 585 has a huge sensor, a very deep well and can achieve pretty high FPS at reduced resolutions with good QE. Have you by any chance had the opportunity to check out a 585? If so, I wonder what you think of it. Thanks, as always, for the really informative and helpful videos!
Hi Dough, i just scrolled through the specs of the 585mc and on paper it's quite interesting. You do not necessarily need a wider field of view to capture the planets, but it is useful for the moon and to find the planets . For a 2.9 pixel size it certainly has a high qe and a large FWe. I saw 45fps at max fps, and no read noise. All good things for planetary. I never started with mono for planetary imaging, but if you want the absolute best planetary pics, mono is the way to go. But you'd need a large focal length telescope, the 9.25 is a good start! I've seen some amazing pics taken with 14 to 16 inch aperture telescopes. Good luck and clear skies!
I own an 8" EdgeHD, which I use for deep sky imaging. I've recently tried planetary imaging with it and my 294MM Pro. Other than a higher frame rate, what benefits are there in picking up a camera like the 178MM? Also, the 0.25"/px (or 0.1"/px) value is what matters, not how you get it, right? In other words, the 178MC with the 8" EdgeHD works out to 0.24"/px. A 224MC with a 1.5x Barlow is 0.25"/px. Is one approach better than the other?
Hello Wido.Great and informative video as usual.As we have a ligh for 24/7 now,it's time to make some clean up and HW upgrade :) I would like to ask you if you would suggest to use ASI462 MC with Edge HD 8 for planetary? Or better to use the ASI178MC? I'm ok with the FOV of ASI462MC,don't need bigger one.Just concerned about the acr" per pixel,as the ASI462 gives 0.29 arc" per pixel,which ove the limit of the 0.25 arc" per pixel.Thank you for your suggection in advance.
Hi Frank. I personally use the ASI178MC for planetary imaging with the Edge HD, but the 462MC wasn't around when I bought the 178MC. Yes, there is a minor difference in arc seconds per pixel between the two but I wouldn't worry to much about these minor differences. The 462MC is the faster camera... I personally like the 178MC though, as I'm also using it for some wider field lunar imaging. Good luck making a decision, and hope you'll have some clear skies when it gets dark again!
Hi Wido And thank you so much for the in depth reviews of the ZWO cameras. Could you recommend the best color camera for planetary and perhaps some deep sky as well which would match my Celestron Edge HD 11 inch. Im using the CGX-L mount for this scope. Thanks a million Rob
Interesting video Wido, I have the 178MC for more than a year now and happy with it for use with my Esprit80 and the Daystar Quark for solar, good combination I guess. But I am looking now for a planetary camera, probably color, to use it with my Edge 8" at 2000mm or with 2x barlow, so I need a camera then with large pixels, do you have any idea as you use the same ota ?
Hello Wido I love your videos and I have a question I own several Zwo planetary cameras, the 178MM, 224MC, and the 290MC I use a filter wheel to Create LRGB images. My scope is a 10” 2500mm Sct. My question is, I want to get a better mono than the 178MM (slow) for my scope and was looking at the 174MM as it’s so fast.what do you think about that combination. Thanks 😊
Thanks! I was also looking into the 174mm for my sct. it has a larger pixel size which can be useful when imaging in the planets at high focal lengths.
Your videos are great! I am considering the ZWO ASI662MC camera for one-shot planetary imaging. Do you have any thoughts on it? Would it be a good match for my Celestron 9.25-Inch EdgeHD SCT with a 2X Barlow (focal length 4,700 mm)?
I used the 678MC compared to a 385MC and 178MC for a few images now. Very nice camera. For a SCT running at f10 it is the perfect match by formula. 2.0 x 5 = 10. I need more nights to actually find out if the 678MC is really a worthy upgrade to for the 178MC or if i just spent 400€ for a new fancy cam. :D
The FPS of the 2600mc at 1280x720 is only 19FPS, much slower than the dedicated planetary cameras. the 290MC Pro is pretty fast at 69 FPS at 12 bit. The major downside is price as the 290mc pro is much more expensive than the cheaper planetary cameras. It would depend on your preferences... Are you looking for a deep-sky camera that can occasionally do some planetary, or are you mainly into planetary imaging. Cheers!
@@AstroForumSpace yeah exactly, was thinking of using the camera that someone already owns. But I think the 2600mc can achieve way higher framerates with ROI and 12bit than 19fps: www.cloudynights.com/uploads/monthly_07_2020/post-41338-0-96089700-1594105499.png
Hi I need an advise: I want to get pictures of Jupiter, Saturn and Moon from my balcon in a small city enviroment (really smalll problem with light pollution) . I have doubt of choosing ASI 462 or ASI224. what do you think it is more convenient from my need? thank you very much in advance
Hi Giorgio, on paper I would say the 462MC is a newer model with less read noise and high sensitivity. But the 224MC had been around for a bit longer and has proven itself as a steady camera. Most people are satisfied with the 224MC. So it probably depends on your budget and your own preferences (newer vs. established).
@@AstroForumSpace Thank you very much for your quick replay to my question. Due the not big price difference, I'd like to choose a right model to be 100% satisfied. I prefer to spend more money now than have some doubt later. But of course the MC224 established wity more experience. thank you you
ZWO should really work on the nameing of their products. Or maybe focus on less 'diversity'in their range! How is a beginner supposed to figure out what he really needs? Watching Wido's excellent videos helps, no doubt ... but frankly, is all the diversity really necessary? Can't there simply be a range for beginner, (budget) intermeiate, and pro in the fields of Planetary ... and for DSO?
Pro cameras are for deep-sky astrophotography. They have a peltier cooler, internal memory, and the newer models don't suffer from amp glow. I've made a shorter version of this video where i discuss color planetary and deep-sky cameras: ua-cam.com/video/oINbKMCopBw/v-deo.html
Hi there, I'm thinking of buying a camera, the 290-MC, but you just didn't include it when you were talking about color cameras, could you give me your opinion regarding color cameras? A very good video, thank you.
Hi Jaime, thanks. The color version of the 290mc is not available anymore in most astroshops. If you're able to get one, that's great. The 290mc is very similar in characteristics to the 290mm, so very well suited for planetary imaging. Good luck!
oh this guy .. the guy that reviews 2 different models one bigger then the other then says ... ya get the bigger one ... cause its 9.5 instead of 8" well i do want to know about these cameras so lets see which he'll suggest ... lol
![Дон ДОН, Алаудинов и СБЕЖАВШИЕ из под Курска ахматовцы 😁 [Пародия]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dEfCf5IK26Q/mqdefault.jpg)
I was all in for a 485MC, but that was discontinued in favor of the slightly improved 585MC. So that’s the one for me! Thanks for the rundown
Really nice analysis. I notice on your blog page you rate the ASI662MC and ASI678MC as your top picks for planetary imaging in 2023. I would be interested in hearing how you think the new ASI664MC (released in Nov 23) and the ASI715MC (released in Jan 24) compare in 2024. My reading of the specs suggest they might be good alternatives to your top picks, with the 664 being the specialist planetary one (similar FR, higher resolution, and lower noise than the 662, but a wider FoV), and the 715 being a good alternative option for planetary/lunar (narrower FoV than the 678 but otherwise quite similar).
Thank you so much for this. It must have taken a lot of work in research and editing the video. It has helped me choose a mono planetary camera for my 8 inch Schmit Cassegrain.
Thanks Leon! Yes, I'm always underestimating the time I need to spend on creating these comparison videos 😉. Glad it was useful for you, clear skies!
Thanks Wido for all the info.
BINGO! i bought asi462mc before this video.
Also thx for informative videos.
It will be interesting to see where the 585 lands when it is released
Great video! Think i made the right choice with the 178MC, In a few months you will have to re-do this video, as ZWO just announced 4 new planetary cams :-)
I'll be ready😉, thanks!
hallo Wido, an interesting point you made about using a planetary camera as auto-guiding camera. I own a ASI385MC and i am now getting some gear to build my deep sky AF rig. Do you think i can use the 385 as autoguiding and skip buying an 120 mini? (my setup will be redcat+skywatcher GTI+EAF+ASIAIR plus+DSLR). Lets hope for some clear skies in zuid holland this summer...
Yes, definitely! Your 385mc has a similar pixel size as the 120 and you can pair it with a guidescope. I have separate videos about autoguiding on my channel. Good luck and clear skies!
Hi Wido, thank you for the great comparison. I have a question according of combinations of cam and barlow (focal ratio). What is in your oppinion the best combination?
I have a C925 and I will buy a 2x or 2.5 barlow (focal ratio is 20 or 25) and a cam with 3.75 or 2.9 pixel.
1. Cam with 2.9 pixel and 2x barlow, focal ratio of 20 (calculated possible range: 14.5 - 20.3)
2. Cam with 3.75 pixel and 2x barlow, focal ratio of 20 (possible range: 18,75 - 26.25)
3. Cam with 3.75 pixel and 2.5x barlow ,focal ratio of 25 (possible range: 18,75 - 26.25)
Is it really possible to calculate with the factor 7 instead of online 5? I have read until now online of the factor 5.
Thanks for your answer in advance.
Andreas
Hi again, Wido. Up to now, I own three colour cameras, the ZWO 178 and 224, as as the QHC 462, but I haven't had a chance to use the last one yet. I actually like the 224 the most so far, mostly because the combination of a 2.5x Powermate and a IR cut filter give me good results with it. For some reason, the 178 doesn't give me clear images, even with no filter and a 2x Barlow. But I was about to pull the trigger on switching to mono for the higher resolution (I just got a Celestron 9.25 FTE in the mail the other day!), until I heard about the 585 MC. It seems the 585 has a huge sensor, a very deep well and can achieve pretty high FPS at reduced resolutions with good QE. Have you by any chance had the opportunity to check out a 585? If so, I wonder what you think of it. Thanks, as always, for the really informative and helpful videos!
Hi Dough, i just scrolled through the specs of the 585mc and on paper it's quite interesting. You do not necessarily need a wider field of view to capture the planets, but it is useful for the moon and to find the planets . For a 2.9 pixel size it certainly has a high qe and a large FWe. I saw 45fps at max fps, and no read noise. All good things for planetary. I never started with mono for planetary imaging, but if you want the absolute best planetary pics, mono is the way to go. But you'd need a large focal length telescope, the 9.25 is a good start! I've seen some amazing pics taken with 14 to 16 inch aperture telescopes. Good luck and clear skies!
I own an 8" EdgeHD, which I use for deep sky imaging. I've recently tried planetary imaging with it and my 294MM Pro. Other than a higher frame rate, what benefits are there in picking up a camera like the 178MM? Also, the 0.25"/px (or 0.1"/px) value is what matters, not how you get it, right? In other words, the 178MC with the 8" EdgeHD works out to 0.24"/px. A 224MC with a 1.5x Barlow is 0.25"/px. Is one approach better than the other?
Hello Wido.Great and informative video as usual.As we have a ligh for 24/7 now,it's time to make some clean up and HW upgrade :) I would like to ask you if you would suggest to use ASI462 MC with Edge HD 8 for planetary? Or better to use the ASI178MC? I'm ok with the FOV of ASI462MC,don't need bigger one.Just concerned about the acr" per pixel,as the ASI462 gives 0.29 arc" per pixel,which ove the limit of the 0.25 arc" per pixel.Thank you for your suggection in advance.
Hi Frank. I personally use the ASI178MC for planetary imaging with the Edge HD, but the 462MC wasn't around when I bought the 178MC. Yes, there is a minor difference in arc seconds per pixel between the two but I wouldn't worry to much about these minor differences. The 462MC is the faster camera... I personally like the 178MC though, as I'm also using it for some wider field lunar imaging. Good luck making a decision, and hope you'll have some clear skies when it gets dark again!
Hi Wido And thank you so much for the in depth reviews of the ZWO cameras. Could you recommend the best color camera for planetary and perhaps some deep sky as well which would match my Celestron Edge HD 11 inch. Im using the CGX-L mount for this scope. Thanks a million Rob
Hi Rob, I'd go for an affordable 678mc. Here's my review: astroforumspace.com/zwo-asi678mc-review-first-light-pictures/
Nice!
Interesting video Wido, I have the 178MC for more than a year now and happy with it for use with my Esprit80 and the Daystar Quark for solar, good combination I guess.
But I am looking now for a planetary camera, probably color, to use it with my Edge 8" at 2000mm or with 2x barlow, so I need a camera then with large pixels, do you have any idea as you use the same ota ?
An alternative to the 178mm could be the 174mm for planetary as it has a larger pixel size.
@@AstroForumSpace Thanks Wido, but that's a mono camera.
What do you think of the ASI482MC ?
Hello Wido
I love your videos and I have a question
I own several Zwo planetary cameras, the 178MM, 224MC, and the 290MC I use a filter wheel to
Create LRGB images. My scope is a 10” 2500mm Sct. My question is, I want to get a better mono than the
178MM (slow) for my scope and was looking at the 174MM as it’s so fast.what do you think about that combination.
Thanks 😊
Thanks! I was also looking into the 174mm for my sct. it has a larger pixel size which can be useful when imaging in the planets at high focal lengths.
Without a Barlow the planet will cover a lot less pixels, couldn’t that be a problem?
And then with the Barlow I will loose a lot of light!
Your videos are great! I am considering the ZWO ASI662MC camera for one-shot planetary imaging. Do you have any thoughts on it? Would it be a good match for my Celestron 9.25-Inch EdgeHD SCT with a 2X Barlow (focal length 4,700 mm)?
Hi Wido. What do you think about the new ASI678MC?
I still have to try it out. I'm the middle of moving to a new home with my family. I hope to be back in September with a review of that camera
I used the 678MC compared to a 385MC and 178MC for a few images now. Very nice camera. For a SCT running at f10 it is the perfect match by formula. 2.0 x 5 = 10.
I need more nights to actually find out if the 678MC is really a worthy upgrade to for the 178MC or if i just spent 400€ for a new fancy cam. :D
Wido, is there a downside if one uses a 2600mc or 294mc with ROI to boost framerate and decrease fov? It looks like they can do similar performances?
The FPS of the 2600mc at 1280x720 is only 19FPS, much slower than the dedicated planetary cameras. the 290MC Pro is pretty fast at 69 FPS at 12 bit. The major downside is price as the 290mc pro is much more expensive than the cheaper planetary cameras. It would depend on your preferences... Are you looking for a deep-sky camera that can occasionally do some planetary, or are you mainly into planetary imaging. Cheers!
@@AstroForumSpace yeah exactly, was thinking of using the camera that someone already owns. But I think the 2600mc can achieve way higher framerates with ROI and 12bit than 19fps: www.cloudynights.com/uploads/monthly_07_2020/post-41338-0-96089700-1594105499.png
Hi I need an advise: I want to get pictures of Jupiter, Saturn and Moon from my balcon in a small city enviroment (really smalll problem with light pollution) . I have doubt of choosing ASI 462 or ASI224. what do you think it is more convenient from my need? thank you very much in advance
Hi Giorgio, on paper I would say the 462MC is a newer model with less read noise and high sensitivity. But the 224MC had been around for a bit longer and has proven itself as a steady camera. Most people are satisfied with the 224MC. So it probably depends on your budget and your own preferences (newer vs. established).
@@AstroForumSpace Thank you very much for your quick replay to my question. Due the not big price difference, I'd like to choose a right model to be 100% satisfied. I prefer to spend more money now than have some doubt later. But of course the MC224 established wity more experience. thank you you
ZWO should really work on the nameing of their products. Or maybe focus on less 'diversity'in their range! How is a beginner supposed to figure out what he really needs? Watching Wido's excellent videos helps, no doubt ... but frankly, is all the diversity really necessary? Can't there simply be a range for beginner, (budget) intermeiate, and pro in the fields of Planetary ... and for DSO?
Pro cameras are for deep-sky astrophotography. They have a peltier cooler, internal memory, and the newer models don't suffer from amp glow. I've made a shorter version of this video where i discuss color planetary and deep-sky cameras: ua-cam.com/video/oINbKMCopBw/v-deo.html
Is the new ASI678MC really better than the ASI178MC?
Ah...I have the 678mc, but due to moving to a new home my telescope gear is in boxes right now. Hope to do a test in October
Hi there, I'm thinking of buying a camera, the 290-MC, but you just didn't include it when you were talking about color cameras, could you give me your opinion regarding color cameras?
A very good video, thank you.
Hi Jaime, thanks. The color version of the 290mc is not available anymore in most astroshops. If you're able to get one, that's great. The 290mc is very similar in characteristics to the 290mm, so very well suited for planetary imaging. Good luck!
what about ASI662MC ?
oh this guy .. the guy that reviews 2 different models one bigger then the other then says ... ya get the bigger one ... cause its 9.5 instead of 8"
well i do want to know about these cameras so lets see which he'll suggest ... lol