Quote:
Originally Posted by nebulosity.
Thanks Ray for starting this thread and for everyones informative comments, I've learnt a heap  |
Hi Jo - I agree, there have been some very thoughtful and valuable contributions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by naskies
In this case, comparing 1 vs 10 vs 50 vs 100 hours does give a rough idea of what to expect.
|
Interesting observation Dave, maybe my original thesis is not applicable within subsets of the astro community - Darwin rules, even in Astro imaging? Even so, there is a 2:1 range of imaging times inherent in the QEs of the chips you mentioned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by renormalised
Most people would go with an OSC simply because it's a lot more convenient and simpler to run than having to contend with filter wheels, filters etc..
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb
I can relate to this. I always take my OSC with me when I drive out to dark skies once in a blue moon. At home I'm stuck doing NB with a mono. I would never contemplate a filter wheel and doing color on the field. Not enough time for this.
|
and with an OSC, you never get stuck with 3.5 hours of luminance, 21 minutes of red and clouds for the next week - followed by the moon.