View Single Post
  #14  
Old 22-09-2014, 08:31 PM
Shiraz's Avatar
Shiraz (Ray)
Registered User

Shiraz is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ardrossan south australia
Posts: 4,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRejto View Post
Ray,

Many thanks for the spot diagrams link. That is most interesting. Remember that I am imaging with two scopes simultaneously! The TEC180 for luminance with a CLS filter (strong UV cut!) and the TEC140 for RGB/narrow band. I put a similar post at Cloudy Nights and received some very interesting info there re the ICX694 on a TEC140 (not a Trius, a QSI). Using Astrodon blue he is getting decent results and put a link to a blue fits file. It is a big improvement over what I'm getting. The Astrodon seems to cut at 400 nm whereas the Baader cuts at ca 380. Enough of a difference? Perhaps. At least with the QSI it seems to be. Could camera electronics come into the equation, or cover glass material? Also, yes, Greg Bradly shows bloated stars in luminance with his Trius on the TEC180. If you are curious here is the CN post:

http://www.cloudynights.com/topic/47...ius/?p=6219293

Now, if I could just incorporate a CLS filter with just BLUE I might be quite happy. The CLS cuts at 450 nm.

Peter
thanks for the link Peter. One of the posts suggested a Baader UV-IR cut filter, which might be a solution if the problem turns out to be violet CA. If the IDAS makes a significant difference, that could be the next thing to try, since a UV-IR cut filter could stay in place without harming the LRG data.

thinking about it, you guys are really pushing the boundaries by using the scopes outside of their design spectral region, with pixels 1/4 the area of more common ones and with chips that have high sensitivity in the violet region.

Last edited by Shiraz; 22-09-2014 at 08:52 PM.
Reply With Quote