View Single Post
  #196  
Old 30-05-2016, 06:35 PM
codemonkey's Avatar
codemonkey (Lee)
Registered User

codemonkey is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Kilcoy, QLD
Posts: 1,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiraz View Post
I think that all applies if read noise is the limiting factor. If sub exposures are long enough that shot noise buries the read noise, then QE wins out. The 674 is still a very effective chip, especially for Ha - it just needs much longer subs than the 1600 (sub length varies as RN^2).
Yep, I think you're right Ray. I used my trusty SNR spreadsheet and it backs up what you said (not a surprise).

By the way, I'm absolutely in agreement that the 674 is still a very effective chip. Really, it's better than the 1600. The 1600 has, however, just the blend of features that make it especially attractive to me with my specific conditions / gear, so that I think I would be happy to make the switch, as long as the 1600 does perform.

I'll be very interested to see how you find it in comparison to your 694.
Reply With Quote