View Single Post
Old 14-05-2016, 10:04 PM
Eden's Avatar
Eden (Brett)
Registered Rambler

Eden is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 399
Hi Ray,

Originally Posted by Shiraz View Post
these sensors have almost zero noise Brett - they are way less noisy than anything else out there, including all the super expensive hero cameras.
Almost zero noise? Are you sure about that, Ray? Looking at the ZWO-supplied 5 minute dark frame, I would hardly call this sensor "almost zero noise". The QHY12 I am using here might not necessarily be of precisely the same specification, nor is it the hero camera you describe, but it most assuredly produces less noisy 5 minute darks than those shown here:

Originally Posted by Shiraz View Post
well depth is totally immaterial if you have a thousand frames to integrate - the effective well depth is then 1000x that of a single sub.
If this is the case Ray, then why do sensor manufacturers bother with varying well depths at all? More importantly, why do discerning astrophotographers prefer sensors with deeper wells? If what you say is true, everyone may as well abandon all other sensors and immediately switch to the new Panasonic sensor.

Originally Posted by Shiraz View Post
the quantum efficiency has not yet been specified, but this is a modern chip design from a state of the art digital camera - it has to be pretty good to be competitive in that arena.
There are numerous graphs which have been published which show the QE, both on ASI's site and also over at Point Grey.

Originally Posted by Shiraz View Post
you cannot really go past the image in Richard's link (#18) - this is definitely not el-cheapo technology.
I never went as far as calling it "el cheapo", but let's face it Ray, if you look at the numbers this is not intended as a professional/scientific sensor.
Reply With Quote