Atik Titan

[ashworthacca]

I'm contemplating adding a CCD camera to my imaging setup so compliment the widefield images I get with my 1000d. I noticed FLO selling a new CCD camera, the Atik Titan and wonder if it comes with a monochrome or colour sensor?

Also, has anyone used this camera with a ED80 and what is the opinion?

Any input would be welcome, many thanks.

[riklaunim]

There should be color and monochrome version to choose. Note that Atik Titan has very small sensor compared to 1000D.

[ashworthacca]

There should be color and monochrome version to choose. Note that Atik Titan has very small sensor compared to 1000D.

Thanks.

I had noticed the very small sensor but the effect will be a smaller field of view to compliment the widefield I get with my 1000d. Am I thinking about this in the right way???

Are there any adverse effects of a small sensor like this one?

[ashworthacca]

Thanks.

I had noticed the very small sensor but the effect will be a smaller field of view to compliment the widefield I get with my 1000d. Am I thinking about this in the right way???

Are there any adverse effects of a small sensor like this one?

Actually, thinking about this.....doesn't just cropping my 1000d images just do the same thing as I'd probably still get a better or equivalent resolution in the image??

[riklaunim]

You have cooling and 16 bit image format so low noise and better details. You could use it as a guider or guide this one for long exposures of small DS objects like planetary nebulas (good sensitivity for O-III) or globular clusters. As it is a small sensor you can use for example focal reducers (like those filter threaded) without catching uncorrected field in the camera.

It's also described as some intro in planetary imaging (gives 15 FPS) but it's rather much better for DS work than planetary. If you want only DS work without the planetary part - look also on other Atiks/QHYs in that price range - QHY6, QHY6 Pro, Atik 16-*.

[ashworthacca]

You have cooling and 16 bit image format so low noise and better details. You could use it as a guider or guide this one for long exposures of small DS objects like planetary nebulas (good sensitivity for O-III) or globular clusters. As it is a small sensor you can use for example focal reducers (like those filter threaded) without catching uncorrected field in the camera.

It's also described as some intro in planetary imaging (gives 15 FPS) but it's rather much better for DS work than planetary. If you want only DS work without the planetary part - look also on other Atiks/QHYs in that price range - QHY6, QHY6 Pro, Atik 16-*.

Thanks again.

At the moment planetary imaging is not an issue but that's not to say I won't give it a try in the future. Is 15 FPS ok for planetary imaging or would that be restrictive in any way. Is this camera really up to planetary imaging or is it just an after thought?

[riklaunim]

15 FPS is a bit slow for the best planetary imaging, but at high focal ratios exposure times wouldn't alow more for CCD it uses. On 8-bit at f/20 I get somewhere aroud 20-30 FPS depending on filter used so using the same histogram fill in 16 bit (longer exposures) it should be around that 15 FPS limit anyway. There aren't many images from Titan (didn't saw any planetary) so it's hard to tell how it will perform. On very good seeing 16-bit will be an advantage over faster 8-bit. QHY is baking something similar, but more planetary - IMG0S - but that didn't hit the stores yet.

So Titan would allow some planetary/lunary/solar work and it should be better than DSLR on nebula imaging (if for example mono + filters) but it wouldn't fully cover the advantages of the DSLR as more expensive cameras with bigger CCDs.

[ashworthacca]

Thanks, some good points to ponder on.

[lukebl]

I've often wondered about the relative merits of DSLR against something like the Atik Titan, in particular the resolution of the chips.

I know the benefits of cooling the chip in terms of noise reduction and maybe sensitivity, but small CCDs like the Titan seem to give poorer resulution than DSLRs. The pixel size on a canon 450d, for instance, is 5.2 x 5.2µm, whereas for CCDs like the Titan is 7.4µm x 7.4µm, so presumably the Canon would be sharper with its smaller pixels?

I'm obviously referring to long-exposure stuff like DSOs, not planetary imaging. It seems to me that these tiny chip CCDs really aren't worth it compared to DSLRs, as they only produce a small image containing relatively few and large pixels, and you need to go big and expensive if you want one capable of decent DSO imaging.

[BlueAstra]

The Canon 1000d sensor is 22 x 14.8mm, and the pixels are 5.7 microns square. The Atik Titan sensor is 5 x 3.7mm, with pixels of 7.4 micron. Without focal reducers on my Meade 5000 ED80 (f=480mm) this gives a field of view (FOV) width of 2.64 deg for tha Canon and 0.58 deg for the Titan. The pixel FOV is 2.5 arcmin for the 1000d and 3.2 arcmin for the Titan.

If both cameras were monochrome you could say the central 5 x 3.7 mm of the 1000d would image the same FOV as the Titan with better resolution. However, the 1000d is covered with a RGB filter matrix so 1 'pixel' is actually 4x4 pixels (1R1B2G). (I think this is a correct description but I'm not 100% sure). If true, the 'pixel' FOV of the 1000d is actually 10 arcmin. So in monochrome the Titan would have better resolution.

If you get the colour version of the Titan then I would think it would be covered with a similar RGB filter, so the 'pixel' FOV would become 12.8 arcmin. So in this case the 1000d would have better resolution.

So, if you do monochrome images (or colour with a filter wheel), the Titan will have better resolution than the 1000d. If you get the colour version then the 1000d will have better resolution.

The other benefits of the Titan are also video capture and a cooled sensor.

Apologies in advance if I'm talking complete b***ks because I'm not really sure about the 1000d 'pixel' resolution, but I hope I've raised a few points to think about.

[lukebl]

Thanks Blue Astra, but I didn't really understand all that! Please forgive me for being dim.

My point was that the basic fact is that the pixels are smaller on a DSLR, so (apart from the other benefits of a cooled chip, and IR filter issues with DSLRs) the DSLR would have a higher resolution (and also have a much greater field of view).

[riklaunim]

You should be correct. Color RGB CCD has 50% green, 25% blue and 25% red pixels. When imaging for example H-alpha nebula - only 25% pixels are used which gives poor resolution.

Bigger pixel works like a focal reducer, while smaller - like a barlow. Smaller pixels are - more fragile the image is to tracking drift. It's common to use bigger pixels in DS cameras and smaller pixels in planetary/lunary/solar cameras where you want max resolution and drift isn't a problem. For DS imaging best pixel size depends on your scope. For very small short refractors you can/should use smaller pixels to get the resolution for wide fields (example: Atik 314E, 320E). For long focal lenghts like in SCT/RC or bigger refractors bigger pixels would be much better.

You can use New Astronomy Press CCD Calculator to see what would be the FOV and resolution of a given DSLR or astro cam for a given scope

[sgazer]

i think you might be disappointed compared with the 1000d and should take a much bigger step up to a 314 etc to outperform the 1000d. the small ccds are better for beginners, rather than dslr users.

[ashworthacca]

Thanks guys, much to think about. I'm just thinking about the best way to image smaller dso's to compliment the widefield setup I have now.

[lukebl]

i think you might be disappointed compared with the 1000d and should take a much bigger step up to a 314 etc to outperform the 1000d. the small ccds are better for beginners, rather than dslr users.

That's my point entirely. Some people seem to want to rush onto the Cooled CCD bandwagon on the cheap (or not-so-cheap for what they offer), when in reality the results may well be disappointing compared to a DSLR. I know, I've been there.

[BlueAstra]

OK, I was talking b***ks! Start again:

The Canon 1000d sensor is 22 x 14.8mm, and the pixels are 5.7 microns square. The Atik Titan sensor is 5 x 3.7mm, with pixels of 7.4 micron. Without focal reducers on my Meade 5000 ED80 (f=480mm) this gives a field of view (FOV) width for the whole sensor of 2.64 deg for tha Canon and 0.58 deg for the Titan. The pixel FOV is 2.5 arcmin for the 1000d and 3.2 arcmin for the Titan.

If you take a monochrome Titan and a monochrome image from the 1000d you could say the central 5 x 3.7 mm of the 1000d would image the same FOV as the Titan but with better resolution. The intensity response of the Titan would be uniform (no filter above it) but with the 1000d the intensity from pixel to pixel would vary since each pixel has a different R, G or B filter above it.

If you take a colour Titan and a colour image from the 1000d, you could say the central 5 x 3.7 mm of the 1000d would image the same FOV as the Titan but with better resolution. Note in both cases the colour information in each pixel is an approximation based on interpolation of information from adjacent pixels. Also the intensity from pixel to pixel would vary since each pixel has a different R, G or B filter above it.

If you take a monochrome Titan with a colour filter wheel, and a colour image from the 1000d, the central 5 x 3.7 mm of the 1000d would image the same FOV as the Titan but with better resolution. However in this case the Atik system would produce true colour whereas the 1000d colour would be approximated.

The other benefits of the Titan are also video capture and a cooled sensor.

[lukebl]

Thanks Blue Astra. That's much clearer.

[ashworthacca]

Thanks BlueAstra, I was thinking going for the colour one as Mono with filters is not the way I want to go for a long time yet. Apart from cooling and video capture I don't really see any benefits if I understand correctly so I'll have another rethink.

Thanks for the input everyone.

[BlueAstra]

Made a small edit to the monochrome statement.

[sgazer]

just crop the 1000d image to the size of the titan. it will still be better resolution. dslr performance is amazingly good without the cooling.

[ashworthacca]

just crop the 1000d image to the size of the titan. it will still be better resolution. dslr performance is amazingly good without the cooling.

Thanks sgazer, sort of thought that but convinced myself I was totally wrong. Haha.

[davy999]

I have the Atik Titan but due to being a newbie my results are not stunning, this may well be down to the operator not the tools.

Check out the pics I have uploaded to get an idea of what a complete beginner can do with this camera.

[FLO]

I noticed FLO selling a new CCD camera, the Atik Titan and wonder if it comes with a monochrome or colour sensor?

Oops! Sorry

I must have accidentally deselected the colour/mono option for the Atik Titan. It has been reset.

Interestingly, so far, all Atik Titan's sold have been mono.

HTH,

Steve

[ashworthacca]

I have the Atik Titan but due to being a newbie my results are not stunning, this may well be down to the operator not the tools.

Check out the pics I have uploaded to get an idea of what a complete beginner can do with this camera.

Thanks, I'll take a look

Oops! Sorry

I must have accidentally deselected the colour/mono option for the Atik Titan. It has been reset.

Interestingly, so far, all Atik Titan's sold have been mono.

HTH,

Steve

Thanks Steve, Mono at the moment doesn't appeal to me. I'm really looking for a way to image the smaller galaxies. Perhaps I need to look at adding a Reflector to my kit instead of looking at CCD cameras but I'm concerned about the size I would need and whether I'd be able to track with my mount.