First Canon EOS 60Da samples (Andromeda, Orion & Pleiades)!

[Simdub]

Canon Japan has just released the first samples from the new Canon EOS 60Da.

They used a φ115mm ED Astronomical telescope and images are modified by DPP. Here they are:

M42 Orion nebula


M45 Pleiades


M31 Andromeda galaxy

They also give a comparaison shot with the 60D (non-a):

60D                                                                                          60Da

Here is the link to the official Japan Canon website: http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos60da/

What do you think of these samples?

[Tijn]

They look like black clipping was not done or done poorly, but then again I'm not familiar with how astronomy photographs are supposed to look... Might just be the nebulas, but to me it looks hazy.

[Marsu42]

They look like black clipping was not done or done poorly, but then again I'm not familiar with how astronomy photographs are supposed to look... Might just be the nebulas, but to me it looks hazy.

Maybe the 60da shots aren't supposed to be comparable to the Hubble space telescope :-p .. and if you'd apply black clipping, you'd saw off nebula detail - I'd say a little more shadow gammy curve adjustment would be in order.

[daveswan]

From the Japanese site it looks as if they just took single shots and processed in DPP, instead of a set of subs and stacking in DSS (Which is free).

I can see the improvement in the H-alpha but it's still not the best advert. Why they couldn't have fitted a square cut-off 400-700nm filter beats me, after all Baader and Astronomik do.

[kirispupis]

Just curious, I know almost nothing about astrophotography, but how does the 60Da compare to the sensors that cost tens of thousands of $ that many astrophotography nuts use?  I am mainly curious to know what the difference is.

[JerryKnight]

Just curious, I know almost nothing about astrophotography, but how does the 60Da compare to the sensors that cost tens of thousands of $ that many astrophotography nuts use?  I am mainly curious to know what the difference is.

I don't know much more than you, but I'm pretty sure that high-end astronomy CCDs are actively cooled and have no color filters (ie. Bayer pattern). You take multiple exposures with multiple filters (not necessarily RGB). The cooling cuts down on sensor noise, and the lack of built-in color filters makes the effective resolution higher, and I'm pretty sure they have no IR/UV filters unless you use your own, so you can photograph any range of light spectrum you want.

[lol]

I can see the improvement in the H-alpha but it's still not the best advert. Why they couldn't have fitted a square cut-off 400-700nm filter beats me, after all Baader and Astronomik do.

Maybe I missed it, have Canon said what the 60Da filter response is somewhere?

Just curious, I know almost nothing about astrophotography, but how does the 60Da compare to the sensors that cost tens of thousands of $ that many astrophotography nuts use?  I am mainly curious to know what the difference is.

In short, the astro CCDs are optimised for high quantum sensitivity and low noise, helped out by active cooling on them. They are certainly "better", but at what cost...

[riogrande100]

I actually came to photography from Astrophotography! And for years the community chose Canon as its DSLR of choice as it seemed to work better for long exposures and less noise. Canon identified this and released the 20Da.

Essentially since the 20Da was retired many astrophotographers have been hacking DSLR and removing the UV filter manually to increase the colors in HA.

The haze captured in the photos are called nebulosity and something astrotogs look for as it shows the feint dust clouds! However these pics with the exception of M42 have not been tweaked for contrast!

Whilst CCD cameras are used for monochrome images, the larger sensors are high MPX means higher resolution pics!

A lot of CCD cameras are cooled as when open for long exposure the sensor heats up and generates more noise! Yes temperature of the sensor has an impact on noise performance wonder how many people factor that into their noise tests!

However a Full Frame CCD sensor puck is in the 1000s and can only be used for astro! now by removing the UV filter it does make the camera almost unusable in the day as all images capture more Colors in the infrared!

But i am happy Canon released this camera should have done so sooner!

[emag]

Fairly clean images for 8 minute exposures at ISO 1600.

[dr croubie]

So, ... they've just introduced a Canon camera with more red? 

[epsiloneri]

Just curious, I know almost nothing about astrophotography, but how does the 60Da compare to the sensors that cost tens of thousands of $ that many astrophotography nuts use?  I am mainly curious to know what the difference is.

To begin with, back-lit CCDs are way more sensitive (no Bayer filter + higher QE => up to 5 times more sensitive for a given wavelength) but as important is that astronomical CCDs almost always are actively cooled to reduce the dark current. Dark current can easily be the most signicant source of noise for very faint sources that require long exposures. An additional problem is that the dark current fills up the electron well with time, reducing the dynamic range unless the photo-sites are periodically reset by making multiple shorter exposures, but the problem with multiple exposures is that each readout adds noise.

The advantage of the 60Da on the other hand is that you get all three colours simultaneosly, and at 18 Mpix, for a low cost. And you can easily use it with EOS lenses, something that can be a bit involved for astrophotography-dedicated CCDs.

[FunPhotons]

They look very good for DSLR astro photos. I'm not much into DSLR astrophotography, because the captures look blobby, low res with washed out colors compared to a good CCD with color wheels. But its an easy way to get a picture without having to spend $10k and mess with the filters. If you're into it then this looks like a step up.

Makes me wonder, by the time you get a decent mount, 'scope, etc, and spend the time to set up and the hour(s) to take the shot, why bother putting a substandard imager on there?

[emag]

Valid points re: cooled CCD/filters vs. DSLR.  The truly spectacular images are taken with such equipment (cooled CCD), there are always better ways to image faint fuzzies than what any one of us has or likely will ever have.  A DSLR is a capable imager that allows us to photograph things we can't see and doesn't require hours of accumulated imaging time followed by even more hours combining LRGB, Ha, OIII, S2 or whatever colors.  I do a lot of public outreach work and stargazes for Scouts camped in the dark country an hour away.  A DSLR with a 300L piggybacked on a small scope is the perfect combo - they can look through the scope and see (I believe the technical term most often heard is) a fuzzy blob, wait a minute or so and then see the Lagoon in full color on the laptop or a monitor.  On those relatively few nights per year when weather, work and moon combine to permit a night of imaging, I can spend hours on two or three objects in the hopes of capturing something spectacular or capture a dozen or more objects in quality adequate to please me and not make it feel like work.  My concern with the 60Da is whether it is so much better than a modified T3i that the heftier price is worth it (to me, at least).  I'll let things shake out for a few months.

[nitsujwalker]

They look like black clipping was not done or done poorly, but then again I'm not familiar with how astronomy photographs are supposed to look... Might just be the nebulas, but to me it looks hazy.

Maybe the 60da shots aren't supposed to be comparable to the Hubble space telescope :-p .. and if you'd apply black clipping, you'd saw off nebula detail - I'd say a little more shadow gammy curve adjustment would be in order.

I dunno, I just did slight clipping on the third photo..  Didn't lose anything really.

[Caps18]

From the Japanese site it looks as if they just took single shots and processed in DPP, instead of a set of subs and stacking in DSS (Which is free).

I can see the improvement in the H-alpha but it's still not the best advert. Why they couldn't have fitted a square cut-off 400-700nm filter beats me, after all Baader and Astronomik do.

I wonder why DPP can't do stacking...

I wonder if back-lighting or sensor cooling would help at all.