Out of an impulse after testing my DMK 31AF03.AS with Peltier cooling, I sent a quotation request for a DBK 21AF04.AS yesterday and got very quick response from them, the shipping cost is pretty low, sounds like a great deal. But they will need wired transfer which is a bit troublesome.
I checked that HSBC online ebanking can do wired transfer, so the trouble is far less now, and the remittance cost is not high as well, at least far lower than what I tried before. Therefore, it boils down to whether it's a correct decision or not.
A DBK can let me do one shot deep sky imaging with my existing C mount lenses, problems are:-
1. even with the widest field lens like 2.5mm cs mount, the field of view is still not very big
2. it cannot do snapshot type imaging as easy as a DSLR, a computer is required
3. a DBK shines actually on planet imaging, which I don't do as often as before when I've a C8
4. my Vaio U3 cannot support the fast data rate for planets, and I cannot do planet inside home with my desktop for most of the them now
What makes it attractive is that, it can use C mount lenses which is a lot cheaper and more portable than a DSLR, what I mean cheaper, the cost of DBK is just half of one of the DSLR lenses in my mind.
With a DSLR, the bad things are:-
1. it's less portable when we talk about deep sky imaging, and the image scale won't be as big as the DBK with C mount lens due to smaller pixel
2. far more expensive
3. occupy far more space, my playing room is now occupied mostly by a piano of my daughter
The simplest thing is to do both, save the 200mm f/2.8L and use only the DBK/DMK with c mount lenses for higher power shots, DSLR is for wide field and snapshot only?