Quote:
Originally Posted by rmuhlack
I assume that as Mr "Narrowfield rules" that your statement of "anything under 2m FL is rubbish" is just hyperbole. Surely FOV comes into "image impact" as well. I mean, if we were to use an Orion Optics ODK12, that has a FL of 2040mm. A KAF16803 and a KAF1603 both have similar well depth and QE of 100,000 and 55-60% and the same pixel size of 9micron, yet the 1603 on that scope will give a FOV of 23.5'x15.6' where as the KAF16803 will give more than 10x the area at a FOV of 62'x62'
 |
Sure, as long as you crop the hell out of the 16803 pic to maintain the "ascetics", that works. But why not spend the money on even higher QE instead of boring multi megapixel WF FOV?.