DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

From an astro perspective...


Well-Known Member
The camera industry is still welded onto the past - clinging to ISO, shutter speed and f/ratio. But these concepts all stem from the film era.

There is another small niche market - astro cameras - which use the same sensors as consumer cameras, but take a very different (clinical) approach based on how these sensors actually work, noting that CMOS is essentially linear, whereas the exposure response of film is highly non-linear. Perhaps in 10 years time we'll be talking about gain and exposure duration, instead of ISO...
Last edited:
I agree that ISO is largely an afterthought for astro. It's all about the sensor's dynamic range, quantum efficiency and presence/absence of amp glow on long exposures.

I shoot with a modded D5300 Nikon that you buy so cheap these days, a used 135mm Samyang/Rokinon likely nets more on the used markets. But the Sony IMX-193 sensor has good dynamic range, it's largely ISO-invariant (I typically shoot 400 or 800 ISO) and when coupled with that 135mm Samyang f/2 lens...look out. It'll make even an absolute beginner look like a pro if they've got a decent star tracker to put it on.

I hear people say all the time, "astrophotography is expensive!", not thinking about how expensive WILDLIFE photography can get with a 500mm - 600mm f/4 prime. I prefer to pay for my optics with cash or checks, not HELOCs.

And that's actually one nice thing about astrophotography--most of the expensive bells and whistles modern camera bodies have to justify their stratospheric price levels simply aren't needed for astro. Heck, you don't even WANT autofocus. A good telescope to hook it up to can easily be found for $1,000 USD or less. ALL forms of photography are ultimately results-oriented enterprises. Proof is in the pictures. If it works, then in the words of James Hetfield, "nothing else matters."
Would not use a DSLR. You really need to look at what's possible from the CMOS astro cameras (ZWO in particular). The huge thing is the use of a TEC cooled mono sensor combined with narrowband filters which produce amazing results even in suburban skies, and a camera were RAW does mean the real sensor output, no compression, no fiddling in camera by software, as a straight PNG.

You simply cannot do similar with a DSLR equipped with a Bayer (RGB filter).
I have an astrocamera, though it's OSC. I've got the ZWO ASI533MC-Pro. Works great for my Bortle-6 skies and the occasional travel to nearby Bortle-4 and -5 skies. Back-illuminated, cooled astro cameras are, yes, much better for astro than DSLRs or MILCs. The QE gain alone makes the change worth it.

As few clear nights as I get, I don't want to make the transition to mono astro cameras. Too much of a PITA Factor and too high a chance I'll only have some of the channels on a southerly object (i.e. NGC 253) I might get one or two cracks at in a given year.

DSLRs and MILCs still have their place when it comes to wide-angle, nightscape shots or when used with short telephoto lenses. My modded D5300, the 135mm f/2 Samyang and a Star Adventurer are capable of some amazing shots under dark skies.