Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyViking
Hi Paul,
I was thinking: How do you take advantage of 0.7" seeing when it appears at your site? Do you switch scope/camera systems?
I'm asking because for adequate sampling @ 0.7" FWHM you'd need an image scale of 0.25"/pixel (or even less).
I'm imaging at 0.86"/pixel (will be 0.75" now with Paracorr) which is reasonably sampled for my regular seeing conditions (2"-2.5"), but if it went down to 0.7" I'd be severely undersampling with my current setup and thus missing out on capturing the high resolution.
What's the image scale of your wide field system? Just thinking if it's wide field the image scale must be several arcseconds per pixel and thus how do you measure 1.4" FWHM in the wide field image?
|
Hi Rolf.
I have two permanent systems in a separate observatories of their own to answer your first question.
You are right about not being able to take advantage of that sort of seeing. I don't want to go changing around cameras to suit the circumstances. It's just nice to have good seeing. It helps to make for sharp images, certainly sharper than some I see about. I could change the QSI over to the RC though and the STXL over to the FSQ. That would give me 0.46 per pixel on the RC. That would come closer than the current 0.76" per pixel.
Good point about the wide field system, I had not considered that the figures were smaller than the actual sampling. It being 2.01 seconds per pixel. I am just reading what I get in maxim, CCDstack and CCDinspector of FWHM values. Being that the maximum resolving power is 2 arc seconds per pixel that should feasibly mean I am sampling at the maximum resolution capable of the scope/camera combination and could not read any higher than that. Thoughts? I don't know why the programmes are showing these figures.