Need help selecting a dslr or ccd for astrophtography

Ok so I am looking for a dedicated camera for my telescopes a celestron c8, stellarvue 102ed, and lunt 60 pressure tuned w/ b1200.

I have a 5d mkiii and while it is great I was thinking of either buying a used dslr and modifying it for h alpha or buying a dedicated ccd. The ccd would be a little more pricey as I was looking at the 8300c so I was toying with the idea of going the dslr route.

What do you think?

I going dslr I don't know if want full frame as my 5d seems almost to wide and I think I need more of a crop factor to get more pixels on target. (Shooting galaxies and nebula). I was thinking of either a 1.6x like the 60d or maybe a 1d mkiii (1dmkiv would be to pricey to buy then modify).

Any advice?

Have you considered the Canon 60Da?

Yeah, but I have heard the modified cameras are more sensitive to h alpha compared to the 60da

skater911 wrote in post #15488169
Yeah, but I have heard the modified cameras are more sensitive to h alpha compared to the 60da

Probably true, since the 60Da still has an IR cut filter in front of the sensor. Modified cameras have the filter either completely removed, or replaced with one that lets in light to much longer wavelengths.

Mono CCD is the way to go.

fogboundturtle wrote in post #15515781
Mono CCD is the way to go.

Personally, I wouldn't go the mono route, but only because I'm willing to trade off slightly lower quality and sensitivity (the DSLR) against not having to shoot every frame 3 times (the mono CCD) to get a color image. Other people's priorities will differ, of course.

archer1960 wrote in post #15516085
Personally, I wouldn't go the mono route, but only because I'm willing to trade off slightly lower quality and sensitivity (the DSLR) against not having to shoot every frame 3 times (the mono CCD) to get a color image. Other people's priorities will differ, of course.

a color camera is about 1/3 less sensitive then a mono one. I have shot with DSLR myself. Its a pain in the arse. You have to do dark, flats and tons of post processing. Noise level is a biatch to deal with. After all is set and done, you are still missing H-alpha light (red) due to an factory installed filter.

Mono CCD is more expensive because you have to buy filter and a filter wheel. On the other hands, you can totally managed light pollution and do narrowband imaging. There is many CCD camera with 2 stage peltier cooling that don't even require darks. You think you are saving some time with OSC but you are not.

fogboundturtle wrote in post #15519426
a color camera is about 1/3 less sensitive then a mono one. I have shot with DSLR myself. Its a pain in the arse. You have to do dark, flats and tons of post processing. Noise level is a biatch to deal with. After all is set and done, you are still missing H-alpha light (red) due to an factory installed filter.

Mono CCD is more expensive because you have to buy filter and a filter wheel. On the other hands, you can totally managed light pollution and do narrowband imaging. There is many CCD camera with 2 stage peltier cooling that don't even require darks. You think you are saving some time with OSC but you are not.

As I said, different priorities. A modified DSLR won't have the IR cut filter, so they'll pick up the Ha. I don't shoot darks every time; I have a library of them for various temperatures and exposure times. And the DSLR is usable during the daytime for general photography. I'm willing to make that trade-off.

Definitely, if you want the very best possible astro shots, then you do need to go the CCD with color filter route, but if you want "good enough", then a DSLR may suit you.

archer1960 wrote in post #15519689
As I said, different priorities. A modified DSLR won't have the IR cut filter, so they'll pick up the Ha. I don't shoot darks every time; I have a library of them for various temperatures and exposure times. And the DSLR is usable during the daytime for general photography. I'm willing to make that trade-off.

Definitely, if you want the very best possible astro shots, then you do need to go the CCD with color filter route, but if you want "good enough", then a DSLR may suit you.

You are right : "may suit you" is exactly how I felt with my DSLR setup. It does a ok job. Of course, I was not crazy enough to have my Mark III modified.

You can take a look of the M51 I did with my Mark III last summer. its good but I am missing so much red.

http://500px.com/photo​/11985951

I have posted in the astro forum here on POTN with some decent M51 shots and a horsehead I got last year with my unmodified T1i (500D).

I just modified one of two Canon 300d cameras that i recently acquired.
I replaced the IR filter with clear anti reflective glass from Edmund Optics.
The camera now sees a huge amount of IR.

Perhaps try this route. The Canon 300D cost me £40. Edmund glass £30. Tools about £20.

So all in all, with some time and patience I have a totally raw IR capture device.

Now I am just trying to figure out which IR wavelength filters to use.

720nm, 850nm, 1000nm ?

Any suggestions and experience.

Thanks.

Of course with a monochrome CCD you can do narrow band in light polluted areas and have an image with a higher resolution than any DSLR. The atik 383L is pretty great. I wouldn't do a color CCD but thats just me, only because you loose all the resolution and print size. Of course you carry the added expense of filters, and a wheel if you go that route.

calypsob wrote in post #15538640
Of course with a monochrome CCD you can do narrow band in light polluted areas and have an image with a higher resolution than any DSLR. The atik 383L is pretty great. I wouldn't do a color CCD but thats just me, only because you loose all the resolution and print size. Of course you carry the added expense of filters, and a wheel if you go that route.

And need 3x as many exposures.

archer1960 wrote in post #15539186
And need 3x as many exposures.

That's a misconception here. A One shot color camera is not as sensitive compare to an monochrome camera, you need more exposure to get the same amount of details. The ration is not 1:3 at all. And then there is noise. OSC are more noisy then monochrome camera. You need to take more darks/flats with OSC camera.

Monochrome CCD allows you to do narrowband capture and completely take light pollution out of the equation. At the end of the day, Its all about your budget. If you can take a hit on your wallet a little bit, nothing beats an cooled monochrome CCD. If you are looking for the best bang for the buck, DSLR is the winner.

Why stuff around modifying a DSLR? If you have a 5DMKIII, keep it for your daytime stuff and widefield astro on a tripod with a wide-lens.

If you want something for your Celestron, dedicated for astro, then you may as well do it right and get a proper CCD astro-camera.

here's a few you could look at.