View Single Post
  #14  
Old 28-03-2013, 04:38 PM
rmuhlack's Avatar
rmuhlack (Richard)
Professional Nerd

rmuhlack is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Strathalbyn, SA
Posts: 916
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerg View Post
I think this question is irrelevant because you've placed so many unrealistic fixed constraints on your example. You say "camera specs such as QE, noise etc are held constant" yet you say both systems have 1"/pixel at different focal lengths.

Realistically your pixel size will have changed in order to have 1"/pixel at both focal lengths, affecting QE and probably other aspects of the camera (full well depth?), noise characteristics of the camera?, etc.
I take your point. It is of course an unrealistic scenario. I posed the hypothetical like that simply to try and tease out )in my own mind as much as anything) how these different properties would impact on data acquisition. This is firstly so that I might have some clue about how I can scale the equipment specs used for images that I see others post here to get vague ballpark equivalent capture details with my existing equipment. And second, that if I were to upgrade my camera and/or scope, what specs to focus on within a finite budget to optimise the performance:price relationship.
Reply With Quote