Thread: CCD options?
View Single Post
  #4  
Old 20-07-2014, 09:27 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris85 View Post
Cheers, Greg. The Xpress cameras do look very good, especially with a few people claiming that they hardly need any darks at all. However I would've thought the 4022 wouldn't suit the SD66 with it's 7.4um pixels?

Chris
SD66 with any camera is going to undersampled. Its like using a 16803 chip on an FSQ - 9 micron pixels but it works.

It would depend if you intend to never upgrade your scope to something larger as 66mm aperture is going to limit it largely to widefield views which are typically undersampled.

Other factors come into it as well- like QE, noise, well depth.
I've seen many nice images from the 4022 chip - its a high performer. But so is the Sony ICX694. Perhaps the ICX814 would be better which has even smaller pixels but not much of a drop in QE at 70% and high QE in Ha so its good for narrowband.

The Sony's have the lowest read noise, the highest QE and are low cost but are small. Also shallow well depth. Its usually some sort of a compromise somewhere in that equation.

If Sony brought out a 35mm sized CCD watch out. Nobody would use the Kodaks again. That line of CCDs has been stagnant now for a few years and it seems less and less likely to be a source of future high end new chips but you never know.The future is likely the Sony's but they need to make some larger CCDs.

Greg.
Reply With Quote