2600MC for the win!! I have one, the quality of the images it produces blow me away everytime! I use it for broadband and narrowband images. I paired it with a dual band filter (Antlia or L- Extreme) and get my narrowband images this way. I was thinking of getting a 2600MM for narrowband work but with the 2600MC I don't see that necessity anymore. I fully recommend it to people who have few nights with clear skies every month. Even fainter narrowband targets are possible with that camera producing amazing results. The oil leak did not affect everyone and if it happens is fully covered by ZWO now.

@astrodad656

2 жыл бұрын

Ditto. I would get a second 2600mc-p to shoot 2 scopes at once ...but my wife gave me that look.

@DeveshPande

Жыл бұрын

I am actually in the market for a mono camera, specifically the 294mm, and was wondering if I can switch to the 2600MC instead. I currently have the 294MC pro and do NB an BB imaging from my bortle 7 sky. I am a bit skeptic about mono for two reasons 1. The limited number of clear nights and 2. The problem of shooting LRGB for BB from light polluted skies. I am torn between the 2600MC and 294mm since my interest is in NB imaging but galaxies are super imp to me as well. Suggestions? Can the 2600MC give me comparable results to 294mm for NB? I am using Aakar sii OIII filter to create SHO images currently. TIA

@hael8680

Жыл бұрын

@@DeveshPande the 2600 has no amp glow and is very easy to calibrate. It has a superior sensor. If $ is an issue, check out the touptek cameras. Same sensor, great built and cheaper. There is even a US reseller now.

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

Жыл бұрын

@@DeveshPande if you go for galaxies then you need focal length otherwise you are limited to the big ones like M33. If you go for NB then the MM versions of the camera makes more sense because of higher sensitivity. Jm2c, cs tom

I just bought an ASI2600MC Pro yesterday and it shipped this morning. I'm really looking forward to pairing it with the Redcat 71, which is also on its way. I'm moving away from DSLR, and I couldn't be more excited. Your video got me even more excited!

@whatsappvids8715

2 жыл бұрын

What if someone wants to do landscape astrophotography is well? I think there is no replacement for DSLRs when it comes to landscape astrophotography or wide angle milky way shots. Can we use an astro dedicated camera for wide angle Milky Way photography?

@JeffRivera

2 жыл бұрын

@@whatsappvids8715 there is some use for astrophotography cameras in landscape, but I agree with you. There's no better option than a DSLR or mirrorless camera for wide shots of the Milky Way.

@expressivenebulae1188

6 ай бұрын

@@whatsappvids8715This may be outdated now but, a dedicated astro cam paired with a high quality wide angle lens will get you the best possible milky way photos. Since you’re attaching the Astro cam to a ‘regular’ lens, you can still take advantage of a Kase diffusion filter such as the Starglow to really accentuate star colour and bloom. Then simply remove it and use the setup as is for the milky way structure itself. No dslr is gonna beat that. A nightscape photo is definitely better off with a dslr/mirrorless. But if you want the best. Make a composite and use both. It’s an expensive combination though. 💸💸

Thank you Tom for this video it was really helpful. I am still new to this and I found this video very helpful.

Very nice review, short and concise. I’m buying the 2600MC as my next camera! Be safe, Cheers..

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

2 жыл бұрын

Alejandro Gonzalez excellent choice the 2600 MC, you will love it!

I just bought the Zwo 2600mc pro after 3 years of using my Zwo 294mc pro and came exactly to the same result, but your great comparison was missing the file size from 23mb to 52mb and using PI drizzle size to 1.3 GB size. the larger diagonal sensor need 2" filters and good flats to control vignetting! Thanks again keep up the good work.

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

Жыл бұрын

Excellent choice, congrats!

Thanks very much. I was torn between the two. With your inpiut, I wil oeder the 2600 tomorrow. Cheers.

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

Жыл бұрын

Excellent choice, congratulations! Cs Tom

thankyou for this...I'm considering an upgrade myself, and this was a very helpful comparison.

wow great video thanksssss. love the comparison of the noise levels - exactly i was looking for

Don't miss the 294MM amp glow at all. But the 2600 needed a whole new larger filter set, new filter wheel , and larger M48 extensions - all adding to the whole price layout. But even then still worth it :). Thanks for the comparisons!!

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

2 жыл бұрын

Many thanks for your kind words!

Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Body $100 ZWO ASI1600 $2000 The ZWO is better. BUT IS IT $1900 BETTER? HELL NO... I've seen amazing things done with DSLRs and most astro cameras are OVERPRICED for the marginal "upgrades" they provide. Here's a fun fact: The Canon SL1 (a camera that is almost 10 years old) has an 18 megapixel sensor, has its own built in touch screen, it handles all its fuctions onboard, is small and lightweight for a DSLR and costs $100 or CHEAPER... The ASI294 (a modern astro imaging camera) has ONLY 11 megapixels and costs $1000. You pay $900 extra for what? More weight, A cooling fan and 13 megapixels FEWER resolution???? Doesn't make alot of sense to me. Cooling is overrated. Post processing takes care of noise. At 18 megapixels shot with an F5 ed refractor and field flattener will nigate any concerns about a full frame... I don't see the need to upgrade really unless you desire attention from snobs on Cloudy Nights and you want them to know you have an overpriced piece of equipment that has trouble putting to rest a 10 year old DSLR... That's what it comes down to. This is why most people are put off by the hobby. They make it seem like you NEED all this expensive equipment when you really DON'T...

@jailtonj.4221

Жыл бұрын

Concordo plenamente 👏👏👏

@XxLukexX

Жыл бұрын

Your description checks out, you're an amateur, the advantages of the ZWO do make it $1900 better as sensor size is a thing as is gathering light capability which is actually important for astrophotography. They're hardly 'marginal' improvements and I'd like to see you getting remotely close results out of a $100 DSLR.

You forgot to mention the lack of AMP glow on the 2600. No AMP glow is worth the upgrade alone! I would love to own a 2600, will I own one?.. hmm. My 533mc does a good job currently.

Hi Tom, Thank you for your review. Consider how much you cool your cameras and to use darks and flats files to remove fixed pattern noise at the chip. Asi294mc needs to cooled low (-20), such that dark current doesn’t dominate, asi2600mc not so much. At higher temperatures, dark current dominates, and testing is not valid, since it is then a dark current test, and not a camera test. Also note that asi2600mc is much better without proper calibration frames, but the difference is minor with calibration frames, due to fixed patterns. Try to test at -20 at both cameras (if possible) and with 1-2 times dark frame exposure, such that dark noise and fixed patterns doesn’t dominate your pictures and a 100 flats exp 0.9s. Best regards Thomas

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

2 жыл бұрын

Hi Thomas, many thanks that is good advice from your side; cooling has a significant inpact on noise levels. the cooler the better ;) Clear skies Tom

@davidkennedy3050

2 жыл бұрын

@@tomsastrophotochannel3243 There is very little noise difference between 0c and -20c on the 2600. There is little reason to go lower and only stresses the cooler.

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

2 жыл бұрын

@@davidkennedy3050 I setup my dark library at -10 deg Celsius, that works in summer and winter so I am not changing this and the cooler is not overly stressed.

I use the 294mc pro on the C14 hyperstar for outreach. No post processing and in a few minutes project it onto the big screen for instant gratification. I was thinking of upgrading to the 2600 MC pro. but considering the 2600's weight, longer back focus and larger diameter I have decided not to. What do you think? Thanks for your logical review video.

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

2 жыл бұрын

Hi Jay, the 294 has less backfocus therefore you can add a filter drawer to the hyperstar system, with 2600 it becomes impossible. On the other hand 2600 is easier to postprocess. In the end its about your specific needs and of course budget.

Amp glow is reason enough not to get the 294. I got sick and tired of dealing with the 294's amp glow in post-processing, which I couldn't always eliminate with calibration frames. The 294's amp glow is the main reason I upgraded to the 2600. Well, not exactly--I upgraded to a Risingcam IMX571, which costs significantly less than the 2600 but has the same sensor and works like a champ. Note, however, that if you have an ASIAir, the Risingcam won't work with it. Neither will the ASIAir work with any other non-ASI product such as Esatto or Moonlite focusers, QHY cameras, etc., etc.

Excellent review! 👍

спасибо, мужик. это полезное видео для меня.

As of today (nov 2023), the 2600 is on sale for $1500, which makes it very tempting. I currently own a 294mc pro for which my major complaints are 1) the amp glow, and 2) use of single or dual narrow band filters require carefully exposed flats due to an interference effect that apparently comes from the uneven thickness in a thin film coating somewhere in the sensor itself. Amp glow I can deal with ok, but it's that second issue that I found most annoying and would not buy the camera today if I were just starting out.

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

9 ай бұрын

Richardshagam8608: yes agree because of the small price difference between the discounted 2600 mc vs 294 mc I would go for the imx571 modern sensor. I am happy anyway with my 2600 mm and mc never looked back, cs tom

I think I made a mistake (dont tell the misses!) 294mc pro does not seem to collect anywhere near as much light as the 7d I was "upgrading" from. doh

This is a 1k$ camera vs a nearly 2k$ camera by the way. I don't feel like the price makes sense unless you exclusively do AP and exclusively use small aperture short refractors because with larger scopes like newts and dobs the signal is going to be so much more which makes noise less of a issue..but that's just my opinion with my limited knowledge on the subject. Within their own product stack they don't look bad.

What about for EAA? might like the bigger pixels of the 294 no?

As I see the 2600 oil leak reports I'm more convinced that 294 was a good choice.

@miguelmorales9667

2 жыл бұрын

It's very easy to fix any grease migration and it usually only needs to be done once. ZWO may already fixed the issue. The 2600 is a much better camera if you care about image quality... which I have to assume is the most important criteria for nearly all AP'ers.

@Mistr_A

2 жыл бұрын

issue has been fixed in latest batches

@Sidecontrol1234

2 жыл бұрын

apparently the oil leak is from an old batch, ZWO say send it back and they'll replace it.

Tom do you sell photos ? I would love to Make some tshirts. I tried to take photos last night on my canon but they turned out horrible. Thank you

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

Жыл бұрын

ThoseDaysMovie Hi, actually I do not sell any of my photos, they are free. Let me know if you want a specific one I can send it to you in hires. Cs Tom

The 2600 is much better there's no doubt, but the 294mm image looks quite a bit more 'bloated' than the 2600, is this due to the camera? Or perhaps focus isn't as good?

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

2 жыл бұрын

Hi, you are absolutely correct the image was slightly out of focus. at thst time I did not have an EAF for autofocus.

@adri4538

2 жыл бұрын

He also used gain 200 with the 294 instead of unity, maybe that is the reason

Hello, can you tell me what is the difference between ASI 2600MC Duo vs ASI 2600 MC Pro Color.!?? Thank you.!!!

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

Жыл бұрын

The Duo has a guide camera included. Old idea. Cheers Tom

Great video.

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks a lot. What do you think is a comparison between 2600 mm and mc something which I shall do? Thanks in advance tom

Hi Tom are you still answering questions? Thanks.

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

2 жыл бұрын

Sure. But as I am on business trips it can take longer to answer. Clear skies Tom

@williamkacensky4796

2 жыл бұрын

@@tomsastrophotochannel3243 HI Tom, thank you. Can I use a ZWO ASI 178 MC astro camera attached with a ZWO ASIair Plus, plugged into an all in one computer without a telescope? If not, can I use a Sony or Cannon low f/stop lens? I will not be using this application for photographing planetary or star systems. This will be used for photographing 5,000 to 15,000 ground based vertical feet of a white light source only. Thanks.

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

2 жыл бұрын

@@williamkacensky4796 you can plugin the cam into your computer and run sharpcap or other sw, no need to use asiair in this case. Question is what do you want to achieve?

@williamkacensky4796

2 жыл бұрын

@@tomsastrophotochannel3243 Truefully? You see that photo on your left by my name? Well take a screen shot and expand it on your screen. Now compare this photo with Lt. Graves photo taken from his cell phone from his fighter jet. It's all over the news so you must know about it. Canny resemblance? Mine was taken here in Las Vegas on May 9, 2020 at 5:58 pm from my Samsung S-10 in 4-k video. I already had a 7 member lab team confirm the video as genuine and they believe it is a UAP. I have been observing them for Over 61 years. So the bottom line is this. Extraterrestrial visitation is here PERIOD. They are not foreign adversaries or ours, and they are certainly not of natural phenonomon. I figure it's time to gather a little more evidence to add what I have and bring light to the world on to this subject. To much false BS is floating around about them. So now you know Tom.

Hi, what about the QHY8L, is it similar to the ASI 294?

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

Жыл бұрын

Patrick Pat the QHY has a ccd chip from Sony the 413 icx chip so it is differnet from Sony 294 sensor. Not comparable. cs Tom

@patrickpat5277

Жыл бұрын

@@tomsastrophotochannel3243 so 294 is so better? In your opinion

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

Жыл бұрын

@@patrickpat5277 hi, Patrick, I can not compare those 2 cams as I know only the 294 but I guess modern cmos cameras have more advantages than the older ccd versions. Cs tom

sono 2 fotocamere diverse, un confronto andrebbe fatto in modo piu imparziale e logico non a 100 gain e a 200 gain sulla 294...., gain uguale cielo uguale, telescopio uguale e fatte nello stesso momento, la meteo può cambiare, ecc ecc, é inutile paragonare la risoluzione, é ovvio che la 294 ne ha meno, quindi ingrandire le immagini é tutto a vantaggio della camera con piu pixel, mettendo sul piatto della bilancia le 2 fotocamere con il loro costo, tenedo in considerazione il campionamento e il telescopio che si andrà a utilizzare apertura e lughezza focale (se oltre il metro meglio pixel piu grandi) e non dimentichiamo la montatura magari qualcuno e gia oltre il limite di peso e pochi grammi potrebbero fare la differenza, il seeing medio della zona , per alcuni vincerà la 2600 per altri la 294.cieli sereni a tutti

the one thing i don't see reviewers talking about is Under & Over Sampling and suitability of a camera to a particular imaging setup. it is something that everyone needs to consider and just saying that one camera is better than another is misleading.

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

11 ай бұрын

Adrewweller5119: modern cmos cameras have pixelsize of 3-4 mycron, thats fine for low to medium fl but for high fl you would need larger pixel or you do binning otherwise you oversample or you get a ccd cam. And then there is the option to drizzle which I use for my Rasa8 to avoid blocky stars. Cs Tom

There is an opinion that 294 photos are almost impossible to calibrate with flats.

@tomsastrophotochannel3243

Жыл бұрын

@anata5127 actually I had no issues using Flats for my 294 MC. The problem initially was making correct flats but that was my mistake and not related to the camera. Clear skies Tom

@anata5127

Жыл бұрын

@@tomsastrophotochannel3243 Ok. Great to know. Thanks.

@anata5127

Жыл бұрын

@@tomsastrophotochannel3243 Ok. I could add that according to your data, 2600 is massively better than 294. It is somewhat unexpected, since 294 has larger pixels.

apples to oranges seriously the 2600 is a newer camera with better specs. no need for a comparison

$1000 extra to save hundreds of hours of processing