View Single Post
  #6  
Old 12-03-2019, 09:40 AM
glend (Glen)
Registered User

glend is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lake Macquarie
Posts: 7,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by skysurfer View Post
Modding of DSLRs is not needed anymore with modern cameras.
I have an unmodded 6D and can take nice pictures of even faint red nebulas like Heart Nebula IC1805 and Elephants Trunk IC1396 (when using a UHC filter). Barnards Loop is displayed as well and Eta shows also many reds, in both cases I did not use filters.
Proper postprocessing does the trick.
Of course Skysurfer's post is off the original topic, but it is important to not let comments like this pass through without remark. I suggest you read this, particularly Jon Rista's post #7:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/5...transmittance/

"
Most DSLRs attenuate the reds such that they gradually fall off into IR (750nm) where transmittance is 1% or less. At the H-alpha line, transmittance is rarely more than 20% tops, and as little as 10%. For the 6D, given what I've seen with John Hayes can do with one, Ha transmission is probably around 20%. This limitation is ultimately imposed by the IR cutoff filter.*
For an unmodded DSLR, you then have 25% of the pixels passing 20% of he light. So its .25*.20, or a mere 5% Ha transmission. Throw in the quantum efficiency on top of that, which according to sensorgen is 47% (although that is for green, which is usually a bit higher than red or blue...but let's go ahead and use it), you then have .05*.47, or 2.35% actual sensitivity.

If you remove the IR cutoff filter, then you get significantly greater transmission. It's not perfect, but lets say it's 90%. So now you have 0.25*0.9*0.47, or 10.6% sensitivity.*

In comparison to a mono CCD camera, which is going to have no filtration at all and thus its entire Q.E.: For a KAF-8300 ~49% sensitivity; For a KAF-16200 ~55% sensitivity, for a Sony ICX834 ~70% sensitivity.*

No amount of post-processing mumbo jumbo is going to improve a 2,35% Ha sensitivity for an un-modded 6D.
Reply With Quote