Hey everyone, my name is Mack Murdock here with OPT
and today we're going to talk about the new and upcoming ZWO ASI 2600mm Pro
and how it compares to its older brother the ZWO ASI 1600mm Pro.
The 1600 is one of the highest selling astronomy cameras and has been for a long time
and for good reason. It's a great camera, but is it worth the upgrade?
Well let's find out! But first if you enjoy the content we put out please
just destroy that like button! Click that good looking thumbs up until it turns blue.
Trust me it's more fun than it looks - Here I’ll do it with you. It helps the channel
out and gets this video and the knowledge of space out to more people. And if you're
not subscribed already subscribe now and hit the bell for notifications so you never miss a video!
Alright, so let's talk about cameras. We do not have the ASI 2600 at the moment to show you guys,
but that doesn't stop us from going over all the specs and seeing how
it compares with its predecessor - the ASI 1600 to help you make some choices.
So let's start with the basics. So the cameras are going to look pretty much the same as every
other cooled camera in the ZWO lineup, both with a port for power to activate cooling and a USB
3.0 hub. The 2600 is going to be slightly heavier at one and a half pounds versus the
one pound on the 1600, not a big difference. But since weight is something to factor,
it is something to be known. They are both using monochrome sensors,
so you will need filters if you want to get a color image in the end, and they both have
a cooling system to cool your sensor down and greatly reduce the noise in your images.
Just be aware just like the rest of the ZWO lineup, you will need to include a power cable to
power the cooling - for it does not come with one. Now let's talk about its many differences. So,
huge upgrade on the 2600 is its much bigger sensor. The ZWO ASI 2600 has a 26 megapixel
APS-C sized sensor while the 1600 has a smaller 16 megapixel micro 4/3 size sensor. Neither are bad,
but the larger sensor gives you a bigger field of view that gives you more area in your image.
For example, with the ASI 1600 you will see the Orion nebula looking something like this when
paired with a Radian Raptor versus the wider field of view. With the 2600 the pixel size
between the cameras are very similar to the point where it doesn't make too much of a difference.
The 1600 has a pixel size of 3.8 microns versus the 2600 that has a pixel size of 3.76 microns
but while it doesn't make very much of a difference there because the pixel size are the
same. But the 2600 has a bigger sensor, you get a much bigger resolution and a much bigger image.
The resolution on the 2600 is 6248x4176 versus the 1600 at 4656x3520.
This also allows you to bin the 2600 by 2x2 to get a much bigger
7.52 pixel size and still have a good resolution. This is especially good
when pairing with long focal length scopes to stop you from going over or under sampling.
Both cameras are good, but the 2600 does have a fair advantage here. The 2600 sensor is also
back illuminated which will help reduce noise and eliminate those pesky annoying
amp glows that you see in your images. The 1600 does not have this tech which is why
it's known to have some amp glow which can be corrected easily with calibration frames
which you should be taking anyways. One last thing that the 2600 sensor has that the 1600 does not
is a built-in dew heater to keep any sort of condensation off your sensor
causing the occasional dew spots. You can turn this on and off at any time as well.
Another huge advantage that the 2600 has is bit depth. The 1600 has a 12-bit depth
which is about 4096 shades of grey between black and white. The 2600 has not 12-bit,
14-bit but has 16-bit depth which is a huge check mark on this camera. With 16 bits you have 65,500
shades of gray. This creates a much smoother image with better blending of colors,
but next similarly speaking is full well depth. The full well depth on the 1600 is 20,000
electrons while the full well depth on the 2600 is more than two times more at 50,000 electrons.
Now let me explain full well depth and why it's important to know. The well depth is based on
the amount of electrons that can fill each pixel until you get pure white and no more
information can be recorded, so having a larger well depth is ideal. Also it's worth noting
that when a pixel well is full those electrons spill into the other pixels beside it and can
create unwanted light and bloating stars. Having a deeper well depth and a bigger bit depth means
having a much better dynamic range and longer exposures are possible before clipping occur.
Next, let's talk about quantum efficiency. This is where the real power comes out.
The 1600 has a quantum efficiency of 60 and the 2600 has a quantum efficiency of 91.
Quantum efficiency is basically the percent of light that hits the sensor that actually
gets recorded into the final image, which means the 2600 is accurately reading 91 percent of the
light hitting the sensor versus the 60 of the 1600. That's 31 percent less light that is not
getting recorded on the 1600 sensor compared to the 2600. We as astrophotographers are always in
a search to be able to capture as much light as we can so the 2600 has definitely got a leg up there.
Now, where the 2600 does fall short is in frames per second.
The 2600 has only 3.5 frames per second versus the 1600 that has 23 frames per second.
So if you're imaging something like the moon or the sun and taking a video for later stacking,
the 2600 definitely is not your camera. This is because you have a much bigger sensor and
a much bigger bit depth, so recording that much data so fast isn't possible with a higher frame
rate. You can get great single shots with some amazing resolution but stacking a video file
it's much better to go with the 1600, or better yet a planetary camera like the ASI 174 or 120.
And finally let's talk about price, because we all know that's an important part of making a
decision. Currently at the time of recording this video, the ASI 1600 is $1280 and the new ASI 2600
is $2480, so there's a decent $1200 difference. That pretty much covers the main differences
between the 1600 and the 2600, but technology does grow and improve and while the 1600 is
still a great camera that will take you far, the 2600 has exceeded greatly in almost every spec.
You can check out the link in the description to
take you to our page to learn more about the ASI 1600 and 2600mm Pros.
And with that said, if you like this video and found it helpful,
please hit the like button and subscribe if you haven't already.
My name is Mack Murdock here with OPT and we'll see you in the next video.
Clear Skies!