Will I Switch? Canon vs. Nikon for Astrophotography

[@Naztronomy]

I really thought at the end you would have made an announcement where Nikon decided to make a camera just for you called the Nicon.

[@hunter133official]

"Nightkon"

[@michael.a.covington]

The 60D is not Canon's latest and greatest. If you try a Canon 80D or later (including the 200D and 800D, if I recall right, at bargain prices), with a newer generation of Canon sensor, you'll find the noise level of Canon is much closer to Nikon. I switched from Canon 60DA to a modified D5500 a few years ago, but if I were doing it now I would probably simply get a newer Canon. Thanks for publishing your test!

[@limebulls]

I will get my first dslr for my f4 8“ Newtonian. Would you recommend the Canon 200d or Nikkon D5500

[@michael.a.covington]

@@limebulls The D5500 has an odd problem with off-axis color correction that is applied in firmware. I would recommend the Canon. But will your Newtonian reach focus with a DSLR, which requires 55 mm of back focus?

[@limebulls]

@@michael.a.covington you’re right, my cc has 55mm of working distance. The D5500 does have 46,5mm of backfocus. Only 8,5mm left for oag and filter drawer. Not possible. Now I’m thinking about a „true“ astrocam or a Guidescope. Been leaning towards an true Astrocam, because I want to remove weight (because of precision of the mount) & OAG is more precise & lighter.

[@michael.a.covington]

@@limebulls Any DSLR with a T-ring on it has 55 mm distance from the front of the T-ring to the sensor. That is a standard that goes all the way back to interchangeable T-mount lenses for film SLRs in the 1970s. The place to ask these questions is the Cloudy Nights Forum, not here -- you will get many well-informed answers from people using equipment very similar to your own.

[@kevinhaynes9091]

Very interesting, and commendable impartiality. It occurs to me though, that if the level of scrutiny is at this level, then a dedicated astroimaging camera, such as QHY, ZWO and Atik, rather than a modded general purpose DSLR, is the way to go.

[@alanalain4884]

Yes, but at the same time aren't these DSLR videos also aimed at travelers or beginners that may just be with a small tracker, no electronic (guider, laptop and such) and their DSLR (often would be cheap used moded eBay style), with just their lens or tiny scopes (as Askar, RedCat, etc.) for widefield , but still looking to achieve the best with their modest gear. (Hey, looks just like me for now ;).
Entering the dedicated astro cams world could also feel more intimidating, might endebt the subject over 3 generations (a grand for a filter wheel ?..) and could look like Parsec away option for beginners. (Sooner or later they'll die to dip in, but let them come, DSLR is a nice, inconspicuous bait. ;)

[@allenbaylus1912]

@@alanalain4884 I have an ASI 294MC Pro which I am not happy with its performance - I would like to get a DSLR which I can use with my ASIAIR Plus (unfortunately they do not work with Sony full frame cameras), so I am looking for an alternate camera to connect to my scope (8 inch SCT - 2000MM). The Nikon d810 and d850 seem to be excellent candidates for this. The d810a (astro modded) may be the best choice but it is not that affordable (even used).

[@jorgebunge]

I've been going nuts for about 10 days trying to figure out why I get this horrible bands when shooting Andromeda and the Pleiades with my Canon T6i (750D) at ISO 100 and doing 2 min exposures and you just explained it perfectly. I guess I'll be doing 15 sec exposures at ISO 800 from now on... I was very puzzled by this because i've been using the same camera for 3 years and i've never seen the banding, but on the other hand, I wasn't shooting at ISO 100 either. I knew the low ISO setting had something to do. I was trying to compensate with very agressive dithering and gathering a lot of data.

[@NebulaPhotos]

Glad I could help! The higher ISO should definitely help with banding on Canon.

[@DeveshPande]

I have started using Fuji XA5, a budget mirrorless camera, and it's read noise is even lower than Nikon at ISO 200. Basically it's an iso invariant model. I haven't even modded it and it's Ha response is comparable to a modded canon. May be you can add this camera to the comparison in the future?
In your comparison, the Nikon clearly looks the winner. I just hope the optolongs and the astronomics start building filters for Nikon

[@Seeker_of_F1r3]

I know its late but the XA series in Fuji's lineup use the traditional CMOS sensor with a Bayer-filter array instead of the X-Trans CMOS sensors used by the other Fuji X-system cameras. Since the resolution is also 24mp, the XA5 probably uses the same or a slightly modified version of the same sensor used in the Nikon 3000/5000 series and the Sony Alpha 6000 series.

[@gary122]

The x-tran senor models are great for astrophotography, low noise and around 50% Ha transmission through there uv/ir cut filter. My x-t1 or x-e2 are my favorites

[@rudyastro]

I just started astrophotography with a Nikon d5600.

[@barqbros]

W

[@IndranujBanerjee]

Lol me too 😂

[@-_--le3zk]

Do you have banding if you shoot under exposed images and then lift the shadows in post?i just bought d5200 and it does have unfortunately,not all the time but if i under expose too much or use high iso

[@rudyastro]

@@-_--le3zk Nope, haven't noticed any banding.

[@satyajitbhadraroy7723]

Yes there are some banding issues in my D7100 also.

[@chrzanik666]

I can listen to you and your content for hours. I am so new to astrophotography literally started last spring so much to learn it can be overwhelming but with your help from videos I made some significant progress. Thank you for that Nico.

[@shippy5338]

Hi. I’m in the same boat. Just bought a 60D and wondering if it’s necessary to modify it

[@hunterhanson945]

@@shippy5338 Just bought my D5300 yesterday and after some research I don't think its necessary right away. personally im going to try to get some practice in with the stock camera, then once I feel comfortable and confident ill get it modded. The stock images will definitely be a little dimmer and less colorful but still a good place to start!

[@rtoip1981]

Canon's 18Mpix sensor used in 60D, 7D and some of their other cameras of that time was one of the worst they engineered. Sensors used by Nikon usually tend to perform better in terms of noise and tonal dynamic. I still like Canon ergonomics more.

[@blasterman789]

High five. See my new comments. My 10D has better color response and accuracy over my 60D.

[@-_--le3zk]

But some nikon cameras have banding too like nikon d5200 and d7100,i just bought d5200 and it has banding,so all that additional dynamic range it had over canon is getting wasted,but this only happens in lowlight and on high iso

[@vedranb87]

The 32Mpix sensor in 90D has equal sensor noise to Nikon 5300 at ISO 400

[@andrewleno591]

Pentax is very good for landscape astrophotography, it has Astrotracer function and it's super useful function, you can capture images without any classic startrecker, without alignment on polar star. You just calibrate it, by simple movement of camera around it axis and you are free to go. 2 min need to start shooting a tracked images. Also very cool that you can move with camera where you want and no need to make again calibration. With classic startrecker you need make polar alignment if you moved camera from its initial place or if you exidently moved/hit your tripod. There is also benefit in weight, Astrotracer in some cameras are build in and in some it's an extension module, maybe 40 grams... Not few kg...
Cons of Pentax Astrotracer then you can't make so long exposures with Tele lenses as with classic tracker... But still around 20-30 sec at Tele lense is possible and then just stack them.

[@rinceart]

You should've compared the Canon to the D5600. Quite a significant leap forward from the D5300; even less noise. The Nikon D5600 is still a highly sought after astro camera for beginners.

[@JLTPhotog]

I can't speak for the Canon Mirrorless....but I switched to Nikon from shooting Canon for 2 decades. Primarily for the lack of an AA filter, but also the VASTLY better ISO performance. The Z6 in particular is truly astounding.
Good luck with your decision. It was not an easy or cheap endeavor...but it was very much a benefit for me.

[@Riveda1972]

Hello Nico and thanks for this comparison. I should be happy about the results, as I have a nikon d5600, but actually you are right about the lack of clip filters for nikon DSLRs. If you arent' in the mood (and I'm not) to spend more money for a clip filter than the money you spent to buy the camera itself, the only alternate solution is to buy LARGE round filters which could be adapted on all (or most of) you lenses by using step-down rings.
But I'd mention another issue I have with Nikon DSLRs: vintage lenses. The second hand market is full of "vintage" lenses which could be pretty good for astrophotography (they surely can do much better than the stock zooms like 18-55 or 55-200) and cheap enough to be considered as an alternate choice if you have low budgets. T2 or M42 adapters allow you to mount them on almost all cameras, but here comes the trouble with Nikon dslrs, as they loose the infinite focus. Unless you use a specific adapter, having an additional lens in the middle, which brings back the infinte focus, but it also causes a loss of quality. Or unless you unscrew the lens itself and "hack" it, which is beyond the skill of 99% of amatorial photographers, I bet...
As far as I understood this is a trouble affecting Nikon DSLRs only. Canon cameras (both mirrorless and dslr), and Nikon mirrorless cameras should not be affected and shouldn't need any additional lens to get the infinite focus back. Probably this is another aspect to be considered when deciding between Nikon and Canon DSLRs, above all if you have a low budget and vintage lenses could help a lot in containing the expenses :)

[@satyajitbhadraroy7723]

Ya makes sense. I am a Nikon user and for clip in filter I have 3d printed some adaptors that take 1.25in round filters (all types) and they work perfectly. Great comparison sir. Loved the content.

[@AzimuthAviation]

Thanks Nico!
As a long time visual astronomer and former engineer with a half dozen telescopes, I went with a D5500 to begin my dive into AP along with an ASI1220mc. This was a good comparison and spotlights the clip in filter issue. The specs of the Sony sensor drove my choice in a camera I'll self mod and cool as part of the hands on tinkering aspects to be had. Your processing tutorials are a fantastic resource. Thank you!

[@robertbailey7798]

Nikon still designs their sensors in house same as Canon, but they contract out the actual production of them to Sony and Toshiba, Another one you may want to try is the Pentax K1 mk1, it uses a modified version of the Nikon D810s sensor and seems to have more Ha sensitivity than is normal for a DSLR, not to mention its astrotracer function.

[@rochditidjani]

Nico the most obvious difference is dynamic range between these two sensors. The Nikon has deeper blacks than the Canon sensor. The fact that the blacks are deeper is testimony that the Nikon sensor has lower noise than Canon's. Thanks for taking the time to illustrate these differences. It was worth it.

[@stevethompson8154]

Thanks this helps me better understand what to look for in my next camera. I currently use a Nikon D 7200 and that looks like another strong option instead of the 5300. I am considering a Z6ii and that looks pretty good as well. I will check out Night Sky Camera

[@cjt5mith]

It would be interesting to know if more modern canon cameras are any better. For example, photons to photos seems to think the sensor in the R7 has extremely low noise (although again only really above about ISO3200). I wonder if that can be seen in a visual comparison.

[@pleappleappleap]

If I'm reading the graphs right, it looks like the best performer might be the Nikon D7200. It has a similar profile to the Phase One medium format digital back, which costs more than 10 times more. It outperforms any of their full-frame cameras or professional cameras. The semi-pro D500 is right in there with the D7200 too.
Fortunately, so is my wish-list camera, the Fuji GFX50S-II.

[@windmillstudio]

I think another important spec is the quantum efficiency of the sensor. Astro Photography Tool site says QE for 60d is 40% and for d5300 it is 54%. Not sure if this is correct, and also different camera mods can alter this spec differently, but a significant theoretical 1.35x advantage of a Nikon camera. Would also be interesting to compare d5300 with the newer 80d camera (or any other with the same sensor).

[@stay_at_home_astronaut]

I am still using my Nikon lenses from when I was in high school, in the 1980's.

[@janmelantu7490]

That sweet sweet vintage glass

[@Kaboom1212Gaming]

It's so wonderful being able to buy a 40 year old lens and it will just mount and work without an adapter.

[@stay_at_home_astronaut]

@@Kaboom1212Gaming Indeed, it is.

[@AstroLaVista]

After many years of chopping and changing I settled on Fuji because of their good Ha response and low noise. The analogue dials are cool too!

[@Matt_10203]

I’d rather just Astro mod a Nikon or Canon, or just use a CCD cooled camera.

[@heatherm8261]

Thanks for a great side by side comparison. I am looking into getting a second Nikon body to remove the ir filter on. The read noise chart will be helpful to helpful when comparing my current camera with a potential purchase.

[@TedByrneTV]

For anyone considering a Nikon for astrophotography I would strongly encourage jumping directly to an astro-modified Z model. I have both a D5500 Ha modified and a Z7 Ha modified (both done by LifePixel, no affiliation). There are clip in filters now available for Z bodies from Astronomik (no affiliation). Image quality and noise levels are much better of course since the Z’s have a newer sensor. Most importantly, however, is the ability to use live view and focus peaking for accurate focusing on stars. Yes you can get the job done with the D5500/D5300 but the live view is somewhat crippled and frustrating compared to the Z series live view abilities. Also, the files coming out of my Z7(a) have much better sensitivity to the Ha wavelengths. Hope this helps! Thanks for the video.

[@User1dentification]

Also importen to know is that Nikon "low - mid range Cameras" like a d5300 can't do a propper live view exposure simulation;
To have the possivility to change the ISO in Live View you need to enter the
Movie Setting> Manual Movie Setting > ON
So you can change the ISO in Live view. But this is only a workaround. For the d5100 there is a hacked firmware allowing you do do a better live view exposure simulation.
And some Nikons do have a "feature" called star eater this is implemented in the Nikon D300+ series, this can only be disabled by a different firmware.
Maniplulation of firmeware will break you warranty and might cause a "brick" and could cause damage to the camera not easy to repair.
If you are willing to take the risk what I don't recommand:
simeonpilgrim.com/nikon-patch/nikon-patch.html
Moreover not sure if this will work with new Firmware already installed as this work has not been extended...

[@gpdude22]

Unless money is no object, and If someone is only "considering" it, I would advise them to first learn how to master a used D3k series Nikon before "jumping" into a modified Z-model. The money saved can go towards nice supporting gear/mount/optics that will not have to be replaced when you change camera models.

[@jacobperzan6544]

If you want to do any computer control for fuji your best bet is to get an x-t2, xt-3, or x-t4, and use indi based software (I like kstars/ekos). The x-t1 has issues shooting over 30s and it was difficult to get it to work. Any other model camera doesn't really support tethering. It's a shame they aren't better supported as the increased h-alpha response was a big driver for me to switch to fuji, but its just too difficult to get it to work in any sort of automated workflow. the x-t2 and newer should be better though, as they support 2, 4, 8, 15 min exposures.

[@NebulaPhotos]

Nice, thanks for the info! I'm interested in both the XT line and the GFX line of cameras.

[@davidjames4915]

I have an X-T1 and I just cannot get it to work in Ekos ... which isn't surprising because it also doesn't work properly in Entangle. I'm pretty sure it's due to flakiness in my particular unit. I plan to get an X-T3 to replace it for astro work.
It would actually be neat if some of the other Fuji model lines like the X-A and X-E would support tethering as they're smaller and you don't necessarily need some of the features in the X-T line for astrophotography. Fwiw the X-A I believe use a Bayer rather than X-Trans sensor, though if that means they have a low-pass filter then they won't have the same h-alpha response.

[@jacobperzan6544]

@@davidjames4915 I've gotten the x-t1 to work in ekos, but the main problem I was running into was the tether would fail after about 1-1.5 hours. Still not entirely sure why it would happen, but the steps I had to take to get the tether to work with bulb mode were kinda hacky so not totally surprised either.
Some better tethering support would definitely be appreciated, I was actually planning on getting one of the x-e line cameras until I learned about the tethering issue. You're right about the x-a line using bayer sensors, I wonder if fuji would clarify if they use a color-limiting filter other than the one they use for their x-trans sensors if someone bothered to ask. Could make for a nifty wide-angle astro setup paired with a fast manual prime lens, and no Ha mod required.

[@classicalchannel9997]

As a professional photographer I always wonder why anyone would ever use Canon cameras instead of Nikon or Sony, and then I realized that most of us are not professionals and Canons are more amateur friendly and, in the end, cheaper ... which is crucial when you are beginner and want new hobby which one day may became your profession. But, Nikon first, then Sony and maybe Fuji or Canon on third place if you mean serious any kind of photography. You're welcome.

[@alanalain4884]

Thank you Nico for this comparison. It's interesting to see that, noise aside, it seems that the Nikon defines better in some occurences. At 13.50 it shows, if one looks at the horse head on the right (I believe it's what it is...), that it seems more defined wiith the Nikon, whereas more hesitant with the Canon.
Also, the Nikon seems to always have a better, more clear cut contrast.
At the same time stars look more "blobby" with the Nikon.
I would also think that the clip-on filters selection is a big plus for the Canon.
Best...

[@actudoran]

Dude ... You got some guts 😂
I know so many die hards who either pick one camp and fly it's flag to death :)))
Very eloquent comparison! Somehow I feel the 4 min subs stacked at iso 400 would carry the read noises and will become problematic when stretching to get the finer details in team canon ... Just a hunch ...
If anything you video made my mind up to modify my 2000d to full spectrum :)
There was quite a huge difference in detail when picking up fainter stars...
I wander how hard can it be to perform the mod myself? ... Got to go googling ;)

[@LeeDavisonYo]

It's not too hard a mod. I'm looking at this video becuase I want to cool a DSLR, and 2000D is my top spot for that at the moment...

[@Butzemann123]

@@LeeDavisonYo hi, im also thinking about buying a dslr for modding. Right now i use a 1200D(filter removed and cooled), which has horrible banding.
I wonder why you would choose the 2000d over a D5300, which should be comparable price in used market

[@LeeDavisonYo]

@@Butzemann123 it's because the back of the sensor is accessible with the canons. I'm not sure what the best plan is, I'm still open to ideas etc. The 5300 seems to be the better camera, but there's a big board right behind the sensor assembly which prevents putting anything on there easily. My idea involves cooling a box, and then putting a heat sink on the back of the sensor...

[@astrojet9484]

Well,that's a nice comparison between brand, but full spec will collect more light which means it will has less noise, so using a same mod should be more fair(I think), but overall it's not a big deal, cuz the main problem with Canon is banding.

[@balboadancer751]

Excellent review! Always good to get away from the numbers sometimes and look at real world results!

[@astroventure2221]

What stood out most to me was the number of stars and the dynamic range of the Nikon. However, like you pointed out, the mods weren't the same.

[@calebwhite681]

Just my recent experience. Bought a Canon 6D off of ebay with some manual fast lenses for astro on a star tracker....beats my A7S by FAR. The canon preserves detail better it's hard to explain. And, of course, in BULB mode, forget about it, the A7S is unusable. Not sure if Nikon bakes their RAW files like Sony does.

[@T0ly113]

What do you mean by baking? Should i worry about it with my A7?

[@calebwhite681]

@@T0ly113 So, with EARLIER sony cameras in BULB mode and on Mark II bodies, single shooting past 3.2 seconds would employ a noise reduction that you can't turn off, making splotchy stars that, on my A7S in bulb mode, look like confetti. Mark II bodies get around it by using continuous shooting mode, but this limits the RAWs to 12 bit.
It's NOT as big of a deal with A7 III, A7R III etc. but Sony is STILL doing something to their RAW files even when 'star eater' isn't the issue. Alyn Wallace is a professional astrophotographer who uses the A7 III, so it's not a huge deal.
When I say baking, by the way, I do not mean baking as in a large amount of heat inside of the camera or anything, not sure where your level of English is, but it's an expression. Nothing it LITERALLY baking :)

[@jasonpressler7111]

@@calebwhite681 i doubt they would be copying Sony's internal processing, that would be a patent issue. since it is done through the processor and the interface, unless Nikon uses the same interface as Sony and pays them for it, i find it unlikely they would use the same processes for the capture.

[@Kaboom1212Gaming]

That's because a 6D has nearly twice the number of megapixels. From a pure technical standpoint the 6D should always be sharper for detail. Not to mention - the A7S is designed as a video shooter mirrorless platform. While the 6D is a photography platform. They are meant for different things. As you have likely heard and seen, the A7S performs better overall in low light because of that low megapixel count, giving you more area for each part of the sensor to take in more light. But when you are taking pictures of points in the sky, that point resolution is limited by how much your lenses and sensor can resolve them.

[@calebwhite681]

@@Kaboom1212Gaming while this is true, the 6D has more megapixels, I am mainly speaking to the amount of blue and red confetti that is created on the Sony when shooting in bulb mode. it's a joke. Still, i use my A7S for timelapses of deep sky and other astro when i require short exposures, because the A7S is more sensitive and has such a low noise floor.
It don't know if it has anyting to do with being designed for video. The A7S is more sensitive, regardless of the application. Sony just ruins the camera with built in noise reduction and RAW processing.

[@Fossbear]

As a Nikon D5300 user i always wondered what the Canons are really up to in comparison. THX for this Video!
Some of my Astrophoto friends use Canon and always wonder how my pictures are like that with ISO 800 :) Guess i´ll try lower ISO´s next time

[@jameplatex]

I would really love to take lot and lot of pictures of the vast outer space in a future as you do, but I don't understand a damn thing about what you talk about in your videos and also that I'm still learning English xD but I hope to have that passion in a future. I love your content and the time you have dedicated to it dude

[@amarm5716]

The main reason is that the Canon crop sensor is slightly smaller than Nikon's DX crop sensor. Which is also why Canon 60D has a slightly higher crop factor compared to the Nikon D5300.
It just comes down to physics. For the same number of photosites, they will be more closely packed on the Canon sensor than on the Nikon sensor, leading to more random electron excitation and heat registering as noise.

[@prabhakarrao4922]

Excellent comparison Nico. I have previously owned and used for astrophotography (all unmodded) Canon 6D, 5D MK III & 5D MK IV and everyone of them has exhibited terrible banding issues. Last year I purchased a secondhand Sigma Fp and it literally blows all the Canons out of the water in Astrophotography. It has a superb sensor. I personally feel the Canons have marketing hype rather than real world quality backing them. If want to experience just how far behind Canon is behind others in sensor technology have a look at the Nikon D810 unmodded for Astro work. It is simply amazing. The only reason I didn't go for the Nikon is the fact that I have a heavy investment in Canon Lenses. Thank you for proving what I have personally experienced in this arena.

[@ilikepizza1275]

I have a Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D that my dad gave me along with a 70-300mm lens and I'm excited to try it out. Wish it had live view, but I can live without it.

[@engineerncook6138]

Thanks. Comparing newer/pricier Canon and Nikon APS-C models, looks like read noise in Canon sensors have nearly caught up to Nikon's (Canon 90D vs Nikon D7500) at ISO 1600. Although at ISO 400, Canon 90D is no better than the much older Nikon D5300. I have have a 70D, SL3 and lots of Canon glass and accessories. Thinking about a Canon 90D and your video convinced me I won't be missing out.

[@d.fresh.750]

Another great video, Nico...great comparison! I'm just waiting 'til I can afford a better star tracker, so I can put my 5D Mark II & assortment of EF lenses to better astro-use! The Move Shoot Move is a great cheap little tracker, but really only good for super wide angle Milky Way-type shots. Seems to be too much periodic error for much deep sky.

[@luboinchina3013]

Nikon D5300 is my first proper DSLR. I also have been given Canon 5D miii, full size sensor, so here is my bit to comparison. Usability:Live view zoom - Nikon D5300 wins big on this. It can zoom much further so I really can nail that manual focus D5300 wins big on this one. It also has no problem to focus on bright stars in autofocus mode using 35mmF/1.8 lenses I use for wide field. The intevalometer means I can make timelapses without extra equipment. The menu in D5300 is just sooooo much better. It has extra part that remembers last I think 15 settings you have changed recently so it has no problem to find what you have changed to change it back. When you use fn button everything is so fast to change. With 5D Miii I struggle to make it read the exposure value from single focus point when I want to focus on something and half way change the composition for daylight photography. The manu there is just awful. However of course I cannot deny the quality of 5D sensor, but here is where ISO invariance kicks again. On other side, Canon has got problem with stuck and dead pixels, much bigger than Nikon.

[@travelthetropics6190]

I moved from D5200 to 6D few years ago, and I feel the same. That Nikon 35 mm f/1.8 lens was a beauty for the price, I still couldn't find a similar lens for Canon. I also had a Nikon Ai-S 50 mm f/1.4 from the 80s and the amount of light it could capture was huge.

[@mattcero1]

The different mods made a difference. The Nikon full spectrum looked better in all cases. I'd like to see the 60D with the full spectrum i.e. apples to apples. Great video man. I'm motivated to buy a local 6D for $400 with less than 4k shutter count.

[@benjaminolry5849]

I can confirm, that the rave about which camera brand's sensors are better is very tribal. After doing photography and especially astrophotography for several years I have come to the point that bothering about the sensor performance is only worth it if the difference is at least one stop. So the step from apcs to full frame (if you have the optics for it) which is roughly 1 stop difference in noise is worth it. But I won't even start comparing uncooled cameras of the same sensor size to each other. But nice to see that these sensors despite their size difference (canon apsc is smaller than every other manufacturer's apsc) and one being more isoless than the other perform so similar.

[@pbolsson8664]

Not a completely fair test, as the Nikon camera is 10 years younger.
The Canon 60d is from 2002
and the Nikon d5300 is from 2013
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_D5300
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_60D

[@NebulaPhotos]

Read that link you posted again. It says that 60d was released in 2010, not 2002. That would make a 2.5 year difference in release dates, not 10. The reason I picked these two models is they are two of the most popular for camera mods to this day. People tend to buy older cameras to modify to save money. Cheers, Nico

[@pbolsson8664]

@@NebulaPhotos OH, just readed the start line. Sorry.

[@Neanderthal75]

I got a Canon 60D (full spec), Nikon D5300 (same full spec) and also used a Canon T7 (unmodded) recently although I only borrowed it. Guess which one I liked better? My Pentax K70. 😂 Absolutely no astro support gadgets like filter , not even wired tethering, but I just love the images it makes with my wireless intervalometer.
I think you should also try Olympus cameras, they do have some dedicated astro mode, like even star-focusing.

[@NebulaPhotos]

Thanks for the insights Frank 👍 i often forget about Pentax and Olympus, but both have some interesting astro-specific features

[@Butzemann123]

nice comparison, i still struggle to decide if i should go for a d5300 or a canon 2000d or 600d
One thing i wonder, how well does the nikon connect to N.I.N.A
Edit:
After reading about that "green star" problem with Nikon cameras, i will buy a Canon camera. The 2000D is huge improvement over the 600D, in terms of colour noise and banding.

[@dominiqueleblanc2193]

It's fun to try other gear, but when you have a lot invested in a brand, unless making piles of money, I would'nt change. Great video.

[@meneerhalfwerk7096]

Sony makes the sensors for Nikon to Nikon's developed specifications. That's a bit different than them using Sony sensors.

[@alejandrocalori6298]

For a 2009 sensor (The 18 megapixel that was used in the 7D, 60D, T3i, T4i, T5i, Eos M, Eos SL1) vs a 2013 sensor (Nikon D5300), considering the huge developments in sensors, I'd say the Canon fought really well.

[@hindey19]

Nikon looks like it has less noise and higher contrast.
Nikon seems to have the better sensor, while Canon has better accessory support like clip-in filters. It's a tough call, unless you use a telescope to image and can use 1.25"/2" filters that aren't camera body specific.

[@MacM545]

a Guy from facebook group created a tracking mount for his homemade 8 inch dob that can allow for single exposure of at least 40 seconds without trails

[@jorymil]

Lens compatibility makes a difference for me. More lenses work with Canon EF bodies than with Nikon.

[@davidaylsworth8964]

I’m using an unmodified Canon 70D for astrophotography and like you I never shoot below 1600 ISO. I’m guessing that the dithering is mostly taking care of the horizontal banding. Great summary Nico.

[@TheCondoInRedondo]

Gosh, I wish I could post a photo to illustrate my point. Check out the two photos at the 8:40 mark of this video. Compare the asterism located at the 10:30 position about halfway between the center and the extreme upper left corner. Looks to be a variable star very dim in the Canon exposure compared to a maximum in the Nikon exposure.

[@TheCondoInRedondo]

Actually, I found an even more pronounced difference. It's very near the top of each image, located a bit below where the Nikon's frame title reads "1:1". Start there and look down just a bit until you see two medium-bright stars side-by-side. I'm speaking about 1/8th of the image height down from the top. On the Nikon image, there is a third object of approximately the same magnitude that forms an equilateral triangle with the side-by-side pair. On the Canon, that third object is completely missing. Either it's an asteroid or a star emitting light the Canon just cannot detect.

[@gregerianne3880]

Great comparison, Nico. I've always wondered about the difference between the two brands. I see quite often that Nikon users seem to prefer their cameras for focusing on stars. I don't have any experience at all with Nikon (since I just barely have experience with my Canon DSLR!), but is there a higher zoom on Nikon when using live view, or is there some other advantage when trying to focus on stars?

[@billvinson7859]

I have the Canon 60Da, and the Canon EOS Ra. The Ra is said to have a invariant sensor. I get good data from it with my Williams Optics Redcat a my Star Watcher Star Adventurer. I also use Fujifilm cameras which because of the X-Trans sensor have a higher sensitivity to Ha. Try the Canon EOS Ra vs the Nikon D810a.

[@gravelking2.071]

13:27
Nikon shows obvious dark dust nebulae near the M42 shell, while in Canon you see none, the noise is too high. Enough reason to stick to Nikon IMHO.

[@RayPaganJr]

I bought a Nikon D90 for my wife like 10 or 12 years ago. She barely used it. Now that I’ve decided to get into this hobby, I dusted it off and am currently just reading up and watching these videos before I start. By the time I am able to start, it will be hurricane season here in Florida. 😂

[@MikeHammer1]

Apart from the difference in the modification of the two cameras, which for the full-spectrum mod seems to give the Nikon richer colors, the 60D is older technology (2010) versus the D5300 (2014). And both are old relative to current CMOS technology which has been improving rapidly. The comparison is a great idea that hopefully can be updated to more contemporary tech down the road. I have wondered whether any of the Nikon or Sony cameras are employing the Exmor R tech that eliminates amp glow as found in the dedicated astro cameras like the ZWO ASI533MC pro.

[@Wigalot]

IMO whwn comparing the two images @10.00 the Canon on the left looks visually better. Stars appear slightly tighter and less spread out.
When zoomed in the Nikon has better detail on all images because its full spectrum.

[@crusty3260]

Dang! I am brand new to astrophotography. Have been trying to do all my research before buying the equipment. This video alone convinved me to go with Nikon. From my point of view every single photo comparison was of higher quality than the Canon. The darker colors really stood out for me and when you zoomed in I could tell quite easily that the noise was FAR less with the Nikon.

[@paulvinova]

I started on a Sony a5100 2 years ago and upgraded to an a6600. I will go full-frame when I can afford it, but I enjoy the extra each with the APSC.

[@ahooogerhuis]

You mention the Nikon intervalometer doesn't deal with bulb mode, but another crippling feature on Nikon is that it will stop shooting if you get exposure time that exceeds the interval time. Even on a D6. Otherwise an awesome camera, but that renders the internal internal intervalometer unusable for many uses.

[@martrich1098]

Very interesting Nico, thanks for making the effort! Out of interest have you ever tried the Magic Lantern firmware add on - I use it on my venerable modded 6D to give me an in camera intervalometer

[@NebulaPhotos]

Yes, should have mentioned that I do use it, and really like it! Wish it was available for my Ra 😂

[@alanalain4884]

Hi, and does this Magic Lantern 6D setup give you an intervalometer that allows for exposure time selection ? Or is it like most cameras which have one but where you get a semi-useless intervalometer that can't rival external ones for functionalities ?

[@martrich1098]

@@alanalain4884 Yes you can set the Bulb exposure time, interval time, delay time and exposure numbers. There are many other features, this is just a small part of the firmware add-on, but be aware that it is free open source, and would invalidate the warranty on a new camera (not in my case with an old 6D) and there may be bugs, but I find it very useful

[@alanalain4884]

@@martrich1098 Thanks for your insight !.. Nice it does that, I saw couple of screen capture of ML, what refrains me is that it seems very different menu looks that what I'm used too with the Canon. May be I'll ry it some day, I have an old 7D that could be a good candidate for the switch...

[@billvinson7859]

NASA uses the newest Nikon full frame cameras for the ISS. I would love to go up there just for Astrophotography and for photography of the Earth. For me I have the Canon 60Da, Canon EOS Ra. I also have Sony full frame cameras, Fujifilm, and the Pentax K70, K1 Mk 2.

[@Unknown-tk4ul]

How do you always come up with an amazing video, I'm surprised you didn't reach a million subs yet!

[@davidrussell4636]

Hi Nico, your presentation style is so easy to watch, I really enjoy your work. Ive been seriously into photography for a few years now, but have just become interested in astrophotography. Your content has certainly contributed to my new found interest. i'd like to use my existing gear, but am also considering buying a Fornax lightrack 2 mount. Can you advise the best combination of my current gear for setting up 2 cameras, one for wide Milky Way Landscapes and one for tighter compositions. I have the following Canon gear. Eos R5, Eos 5DS R, 1DX Mk2. Lenses Canon 300mm f2.8, Canon 500mm f4 IS, Canon 24-70 f2.8 Mk2, Canon RF 800mm F11 and RF 2x converter, Sigma 14mm 1.8 Art. So far i've only taken single exposures at up to 30 seconds, and im not keen on spending time stacking images, only some touching up in Lightroom if poss. Do you think I could make satisfactory images with a tracker but no stacking? Cheers, David

[@boaty1968]

Neither get a cooled Astro cam and use the lenses on that with correct adapter

[@entropytango5348]

You missed out on Pentax. Especially the later K1, K3II etc models. With built in astrotracker and a huge range of economy legacy lenses. Works well for me. And no nasty bands like I often see with Canon.

[@tankivulture148]

If I had to do this choise, I would choose to get a mirrorless camera that has a good input noise performance and adapt the telescope as you normally would to Canon cameras but adding an adapter from canon EF to whatever mount you are using

[@xophaser]

guessing dslr sensor are better than milc for astrophotography, since most dslr has no on sensor AF focusing which might cause noise or banding like milc? Plus older dslr are cheaper and you can use the money to mod the sensor filter.

[@daveinthewild]

With a lifelong passion for photography and due for an upgrade, I found this video very informative. I was pretty much set on Canon (and still may be) but with using the camera for other things besides astro, I was stopped dead in my tracks. Tony & Chelsea Northrup just came out with a video highlighting Canon's announcement that the DSLR is discontinued. Nikon will follow suit. Both manufacturers are putting all of their development into their mirror-less lines. I narrowed down my selection to a Canon 90D but will start over again looking at mirror-less cameras. One of the biggest deciding factors will be in camera filters and what brands they are most available for. I'm guessing it will be Canon, but the minute advantages the Sony sensor has could sway me.

[@NebulaPhotos]

When it comes to mirrorless, I am really digging my Canon Ra (now discontinued). The RP and the R are both good choices for deep sky astrophotography in my opinion. They use the same sensors as the 6dmk2 and the 5dmk4 respectively, but with all the advantages of the mirrorless design including a much brighter and more responsive live view. Don't know as much about the Nikon mirrorless. I know the Z6 got a lot of attention early on, but some people found circular banding that was annoying.

[@CM-2000]

Hi Nico, thank you very much for your very informative video. As a Nikon user, I acknowledge the qualities of the astro modified Canon cameras, but a change would be a heavy cross. But I continue to inform myself and remain open to everything. Cheers

[@pshearduk]

I love Nico’s channel and his ap skills 🙌🏼

[@tobiasgroeneveld9892]

But what about Pentax? Those sensor have a risicolous low read noise, and since the K-3 the have a kind-of tracker which makes use of the GPS, compas and sensor shift technology. For older models.like K-5 / K-7 there's a hotshoe mountable item that does the same.

[@DVSx86]

waiting for fujifilm comparison to canon and nikon.
i was canon person long time ago, but amount of lenses for fuji were higher at that time. for mirrorless cameras at least.
so switched from canon to fujifilm. kinda sorta want to know "was it a good idea or not".
thank you for what's you're doing, Nico!

[@alekseimills3854]

If you do switch to Nikon, a good camera choice is the D810A or the D500.

[@WarguyPlayz]

D500 is a dam good camera. Proof that even a Crop Sensor can punch higher than its sensor size.

[@3DAstroTC]

I fixed the Nikon clip in issue with my adapters. Now all 1.25 filters can be used.

[@swagonman]

Fujifilm cameras have intervalometer and a bulb mode that goes up to 8min (if I remember correctly). I often use 2min or 4min myself. Also, without modification, they have good sensitivity to Ha. My Fujifilm XT4 has same Sony sensor as ASI2600MC, but with a Fijifilm proprietary RGB pattern that is pseudo-random to mimic the human retina. Today’s astro software decides the pattern just fine. Fujifilm cameras don’t get the attention they deserve, IMHO.

[@pleappleappleap]

Sony doesn't only have mirrorless. They have DSLR and Pellicle cameras too. Sony is what used to be Minolta.

[@AstroFarsography]

I've been looking up Nikon's for Astrophotography also Nico, this is a well timed video for me! Thanks

[@barrymak421]

Thanks for the shoot out! It's good to see that while there is differences between the two, they don't appear to be earth shattering. That being said, if you were just starting, and didnt have the previous investment in shooting routine and accessories, would the lower read noise draw you to Nikon, or is the filter situation enough to keep you with Cannon?

[@NebulaPhotos]

Yes, for deep sky with filters, I prefer using dedicated astronomy cameras from ZWO and QHY. For nightscape / milky way shooting where I don't normally use filters, I'd seriously consider Nikon without the previous investment in Canon. As you said though, I don't think the differences are as extreme as some people make them out to be.

[@barrymak421]

@@NebulaPhotos Awesome and thanks for the reply. I have to keep reminding myself that instead of buying new gear, I should work on my technique, and work with what I have.

[@jimking2393]

I would be interested in seeing a comparison of Pentax, Canon and Nikon cameras. I have been using Pentax for years and the comparisons you made in this video are similar to what I get with a stock Pentax K-3 using long exposure atlow ISO settings. I'm not really sure why Pentax is not well supported in the astrophotography world. Their cameras are well made and they have a great selection of features with each camera. But, maybe thats going to be one of lifes great mysteries.
(One thing I have come to realize is; they do not work with many of the popular software versions specific to astrophotography. That alone makes them no a top choice.)
Thank you for the very informative comparisons and the great content of your videos. You have helped me with several of the Astro decisions that I have had to make. Also, thanks for pointing out some of the great companies that specialize in astro modding dslr cameras. I look forward to more great videos.... Cheers

[@kamilkp]

Great video Nico! So which ISO do you use when shooting with the Ra? Judging by photonstophotos charts the optimal one is 4000?

[@NebulaPhotos]

3200 usually. But sometimes 1600 or 6400. I have always avoided intermediate ISOs, after reading some technical paper that suggested they may use digital scaling in Canon cameras to get the intermediate ISOs. Not sure if that's still true, but just to be on the safe side, I stick to the 'native' values of 1600, 3200, 6400, etc.

[@AmatureAstronomer]

Interesting. A good comparison might be a Canon and a Nikon of the same cost.

[@riaandewinnaar5040]

The 6d is probably the cleanest full frame large pixel dslr sensor ever. Usb connection.

[@AresVisualsMeva]

I’ve loved my D780 for Astro stuff. Not too familiar with Canon but personally I’ve grown a lot using my Nikon.

[@vasuca1tutoriales]

Looking forward to see a comparison with Fuji, my very first Orion Nebula shot was with an 800mm telescope and a Fujifilm X-T20, hoping to reshoot that photo with the X-T4

[@DLMVegas]

Had a Canon camera many years ago. It was a pain to use. Went to Nikon and have been happy for many years. Now, like Alyn Wallace, I use Sony. Nikon equipment is not light in weight. My Nikon D810 and a 150-600mm lens was pushing the limits of a Skywatcher Adventurer 2i. With the Sony A7RIII and my 100-400mm Sony lens the load is much lighter.

[@afryhover]

Another top-notch video. Very informative and helpful. Well done!

[@donaldmartin7109]

thank you for sharing and excellent display. Happy New Year.

[@lawrencelamb9601]

Just found your channel and I find it very helpful. I'm completely new to astrophotography. I did a lot of photography back in the day of the darkroom and smelly chemistry. Actually, I like the smell of the chemicals and will probably still do some but I suppose it's time to get with the 21st century. I would like to see more videos like this. Perhaps more on choosing and using software too. Anyway, thank you.

[@leboch65]

U forgot to mention . Canon can use magic lantern to enable the intervalometer function without using an external one. So in this case it isnt a real drawback compared to nikon.

[@McMaxW]

You may want to check the Fuji XT100, I heard it was quite good with the amount of noise it produces (and it’s not expensive).

[@mikecapell3996]

I have Nikon D810 and I have Nikon D810A and they work great but doing Astro photography on the D810A works great never have any issues With it

[@rowgegaming5048]

I feel like I'm missing something. If a lower input-referred read noise by ISO is lower, isn't that very desirable for shooting nebulas? It seems like the Nikon would be preferred for this kind of photography. Also, great content! Just found your channel and it is very informative.

[@NebulaPhotos]

Correct, the Nikon is preferred for that reason. I'm not sure how well it came across in the video, but the Nikon clearly had lower noise.

[@ruiner101]

I have the STC optics Duo Narrowband and Multi Spectra clip in filters for Nikon APS-C. They work very well. I think Trevor has a review on the Duo Narrowband filter for Canon APS-C. I shoot Nikon. I learned on a Nikkormat FT2 when I was a kid. That's the only camera brand I knew about. Now I'm a jelly belly that would love to shoot with Canon or Sony. Maybe in the next life.

[@Interstate66]

On your video, at least, its looking like a BIG difference in dynamic and contrast between the 2. The Nikon is just because of this great advantage the winner for me. There is so much sharper edge and darker background on the border of the nebula on the Nikon.
I just searching for a new astrocam right now and researched now a few weeks dozens of cameras... And one is really outstanding, I found: Its the Nikon D500... If you compare it just on photons2photos you see what I mean in the Input referred Noise (1.01 &1.04log² on 60D & 5300 - 0.19log²!! for the D500! at ISO-3200) thats crazy! And also in the dynamic range, specially in the lower ISO-regions... just slightly better... Downside: The still high price of around 800-1100 $... But maybe you should have a look at this ​ @Nebula Photos ;)
By the way. Thank you so much for your content and showing how u can do astrophotography without thousands of dollars, well euro in my case :D You and your channel brought me back to start this again after I tried it some years ago, where this stacking software and stuff wasnt available that simple and no chance to get any nebula out of the city, or border, with a DSLR and a lens! 🖖💝

[@michaelgrimes3564]

Loved The Comparison Nico....I have been tempted also....But after your Video I think Ill stay put....I have a Lot of Canon Products, DSLRs, Point and Shoots..Etc......But, My First Digital Camera was a Nikon Coolpix 990, and I loved It ( Still Have it...LOL)....Then, I bought a Canon 300D and the Rest was history, Been pretty Much Team Canon ever Since.....Nikon is Tempting, as is Sony's Alpha line......They all have there strengths and weaknesses.....Canon I have always found to be far more pliable for a DSLR and far more accessories to choose from....Lots of Choice with Canon and very competitive in pricing.... Some other Tubers like Alyn Wallace, Stan Moniz use Sony, but do Widefield and Landscape Astro....Works well for them....One thing I took from The Sony Crowd that translates---Stan backs a Hoya StarScape Filter That I have bought and Come to Adore for my unmodded T6 and 450D. Highly Recommend....But, Most of who Is who in this hobby though seem to lean toward Canon.....We just do.....Canon also seems to be keen to cater too us also.... If I were going to Leap toward another Brand, I am Smitten with Pentax....That New K1 is Impressive.....

[@uav4206]

I would love to see you do a review of Pentax's astrotracer function. I love my k-70 and have been really contemplating it!

[@terrance_huang]

Nikon is known doing sneaky NR in it's raw images, and black point at 0... That's why I switched from N to C