Quote:
Originally Posted by Atmos
They're two very different cameras.
The ASI1600 has a larger sensor, larger pixels and lower read noise but having a little bit lower QE.
What this means is that you'll have to take significantly longer exposures with the ASI183 as you will the ASI1600. As you're only using an 80mm telescope you probably don't want to be trying to resolve down to its Dawes limit (it's ability to resolve) so I think you'd be better off with the ASI1600 personally.
The microlens issue that people (myself included) have experienced tends to happen more so with larger faster optics than an 80mm F/6. It'll be there on brighter stars but it won't be as intrusive as a bigger and optically faster telescope.
|
Looking at quite a few images of the microlens issues people have and it's been the biggest turn off for me with the 1600 (unfortunately seen a lot of examples of it even with f6/f7 refractors). Have you had much success processing/calibrating it out?
As per the need for longer exposures I don't really mind. I'll be coming from a stock Sony crop sensor, battling low sensitivity to Ha as well as star eater issues, so I'm sure I'll be blown away with results using the same 5 min subs I've been taking.
I guess I'm just a bit lost with all the information on under/over-sampling. If it were unavoidable and I had to be in one ball park, I'd prefer to be over-sampled to my understanding? Or will this still provide bad results