Fuji DSLR versus a ZWO?

[pakarinen]

I might have a chance to get a Fuji X-A1 for cheap and I'm wondering if I should do that or save my pennies and buy a non-cooled ZWO of some kind.

The Fuli has the advantage of interchangeable lenses for non-astro pix and no cables to muck about with, but the ZWO could eventually be run via ASI Air (for more $$$) if I read the literature correctly. The Fuji has not been modified for astro. The Fuji has WiFI so it should be a simple matter to port pix to my laptop for processing / archiving.

Opinions?

[JayTee]

Starting with the DSLR is typically the better way to go because it is so versatile in so many areas and it's easy to use. The fact that it hooks up to your computer is very important. It allows you to run image acquisition software. You can attach it to the telescope for prime focus, or you can use one of the camera's lenses to shoot through. So I see the DSLR as a better way to go than a CMOS non-cooled Astro dedicated camera for starting your AP journey.

Cheers,
JT

[Mac]

Having used a DSLR that was not astro-modified as compared to the ASI533 or ASI1600, the difference is night and day.

Save your money for a cooled astro camera if you want to do AP, otherwise go with the Fuji where it can have multi-purpose.

[JayTee]

Having used a DSLR that was not astro-modified as compared to the ASI533 or ASI1600, the difference is night and day.

Save your money for a cooled astro camera if you want to do AP, otherwise go with the Fuji where it can have multi-purpose.

Sorry steve, but I completely disagree.

There is so much to learn for all areas of AP that sinking that much money in initially and then finding out that you're not really suited to this side of the hobby, is not the way to go. The DSLR will get you very good results early on and let you decide if you want to spend more money to go further down the rabbit hole. Just remember the movie Contact, "small steps Ellie, small steps."

JT

[Mac]

Having used a DSLR that was not astro-modified as compared to the ASI533 or ASI1600, the difference is night and day.

Save your money for a cooled astro camera if you want to do AP, otherwise go with the Fuji where it can have multi-purpose.

Sorry steve, but I completely disagree.

There is so much to learn for all areas of AP that sinking that much money in initially and then finding out that you're not really suited to this side of the hobby, is not the way to go. The DSLR will get you very good results early on and let you decide if you want to spend more money to go further down the rabbit hole. Just remember the movie Contact, "small steps Ellie, small steps."

JT

Why are you sorry?

Is one not allowed to have an opinion without be called out for it?

[SkyHiker]

While I have Fuji X-a1 (two actually, modified) myself and am happy with it, Steve may very well be right.

For automation and remote access a Canon camera will serve you better. I tried using the WiFi and was not very successful at it. I did not try very hard because I did not need it so YMMV. For AP automation by ASI air you need more than just WiFi. I believe that Ekos needs gPhoto support, many Fujis have that just not the X-a1. ASI air is similar to Ekos.

On the other hand, for AP you can just use a remote timer and forego any kind of automation of your imaging camera. That's what I do. If you have Fuji lenses then why not, it's not a bad way to start. The Fuji X-a1 has one of the best sensors of all DSLRs for AP. Don't pay more than $125 or so because that's about the current rate on EBay.

It will probably never be as good as an astro cam, even when you modify it. For an astro cam you need computer support, a DSLR works stand alone, is cheaper and has a larger sensor for the money that's the scoop pretty much.

[Piet Le Roux]

I am not that into astrophotography so I got a X-T100 with its 15-45mm kit lens(it has been replaced by the X-T200). Like the X-A1 it has the Bayer colour filter array sensor but the newer 24M pixel version. It gives me the option of nightscape photography and so far I am impressed with the plastic kit lens....it appears that Fujifilm makes cheaper lenses but no bad lenses!

[Juno16]

I think that it’s different for each person. For me, I am glad that I started slowly with no guiding and an unmodded dslr. Had to use an intervalometer at first, then Digicamcontrol to conrol the camera. I moved to a modded dslr and just recently purchased a ASI 533 mc pro.

I learned a ton (literally) by taking “baby steps” and for me, that was the best. Each small step was fun and a big accomplishment. I remember the first time that I successfully drift aligned, wow! The first time that I used Sharpcap to polar align. I set the scope up, ran Sharpcap, had success, broke down everything and couldn’t hardly sleep because of the excitement.

You might find that an unmodded, unguided setup is your “sweet spot”. Or, you can go for the gusto and sling a bunch of cash down hoping that you can figure it all out.

The ASI camera is a big jump from the dslr, but a bigger bite out of the wallet more skills to master too.

I’m learning a lot and probably always will. The hole that I fell into has very steep sides and thankfully I have a big parachute (retirement funding) to slow my fall.

It is a wonderful and rewarding hobby. Enjoy whatever sounds good and fits your goals. Just watch where you are walking. The rabbit hole is nearby!

[mbocca]

I am not quite in the retirement phase, but am looking forward to that in ~8 years or so. One thing my wife and I always discuss is "Its a Hobby, not a Hurry". Her passion is quilting, which doesn't sound too expensive, but it is a very expensive hobby. Not quite astrophotography though.

In general, our approach is to purchase something and master it, then move on. It is like peeling a very large onion. Once one layer is removed, there are still more underneath it with a whole new set of problems.

My suggestion is to go at the pace that is comfortable. If the x-a1 is a small investment and there is something to be learned, it may be worth it to take the step. I know processing a DSLR image requires a lot less steps, so the learning there needs to be considered as well.

Good luck with your decision.
Mike

[Graeme1858]

I'm a member of the step by step school of thought. If I had bought the equipment I have now on day one I really don't think I would have got my head round setting it up and using it. The frustration of failed sessions would have done my head in! The path to where I am now has been one of a thousand steps, the understanding and mastering (mostly!) of each step has allowed me to get to where I am. And I have a good understanding of where to go next (once I can afford a mono camera and some filters!)

All I need now is some clear skies to get some practice in!

Regards

Graeme

[Greenman]

Interesting read, as I have been going through a thought process parallel to the discussion. I came into the forum as I was looking to find my place in the hobby. I was undecided, impressed by deep sky, and none too interested in the solar system. Then I ventured into buying an ASI 224MC and Mars came along. I have gained a much greater interest in planetary work.

Still, I knew that as winter approached that I wanted to explore some of the bright nebulae and larger objects. That drew me to purchase the Altair refractor, as at heart I am a refractor enthusiast. So now the quandary begins. Do I need a cooled deep-sky camera? It sounds a logical step and if I want, I have the money available to spend.

I looked at the ASI533MC, nice camera but with the standard x1 flattener I have the FOV, is not wide enough. So, a reducer, well I would need to go for a 0.6. That would give me the FOV, but I would probably need to go for heavy cropping due to vignetting and lack of flattness. Hmm...

I know a 294MC with a 0.8 flattened will do this, the cost was creeping past £1,000. Now, are my skills good enough to qualify that spend?

Back to the FOV calculator. This time I looked at comparing my existing DSLR. It would do the job, and with my existing kit. Admittedly not to the standard of a cooled camera, but I can play around and see what I'm capable of. When I get limited by the Canon EOS 100D, I can look to move on the next stage.

In the end, this is what I am going to do. I am still going to splash some cash though - I have ordered a £15 Bathinov mask for my 80ED.

Baby steps indeed.

Clear skies all.

[JayTee]

Why are you sorry?

Is one not allowed to have an opinion without be called out for it?

I just didn't want to sound impudent because I respect your opinion.

Cheers,
JT

[BABOafrica]

I have used several Fuji cameras -- all either X-A1s or X-A2s. Modded and non-modded. Great way to begin.

I would avoid getting an astro-camera that is NOT cooled. The Fuji cameras work quite well without the cooling but the astro-cameras do not (at least from what I have read elsewhere) unless you're doing short exposures for doing the moon or the planets.

Like Henk said, you should be able to get one for less than $125. I was patient on ebay and got a Fuji X-A2 for $90 on ebay last year.

Make sure you also get an intervalometer.

I have gone to great lengths to use the Wi-Fi function on the X-A1. It's the one part of the camera that really disappoints -- everyone who has tried says the same thing. However, that's really not a problem. Just use an 8gb or 16gb memory card. Works great.

BABO

[Sandy04]

I briefly owned an X-T100 for astro which had an excellent sensor, but was let down by awful live view. No native astro software integration like most Canon or Nikon bodies though, if that is important to you.

There's little point going for an uncooled astro cam for DSOs over a MILC/DSLR. Either get a cheap regular camera or save up for a TEC cooled astro cam.

Recent Fujifilm bodies have amongst the highest Ha response of any brand unmodified camera, btw.