Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
0.62"/pix sounds like a reasonable image scale for high resolution imaging. You'd need 2 arcsec seeing to take full advantage of the resolution (approx 3.3 times the image scale.) It won't be the fastest system but it won't be terrible. I was running a RC10 with a KAF-8300 for a while (5.4 um pixels) and I thought it worked pretty well. 0.92" would trade off some resolution for speed and give you some extra FOV.
|
I'm use to the system not being fast anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
How are you guiding? You'll probably struggle to get good results without an OAG at 0.62"/pix and a reflecting scope.
|
Already using an OAG, no plans to change there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
From an image scale POV it looks OK. I'd be concerned about the size of your image circle with a sensor that size. You'll probably need to use the flattener (and check the specs to see how well it will cover the sensor.)
|
I used the flattener with my DSLR - Canon 6D full frame and it worked well, so I think that should be ok?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
Your reducer may struggle to present a large enough flat field for the sensor as well.
If you're willing to crop corners it may not be such a big deal.
|
That's possible. I think remember needing a slight crop with the 6D when using the reducer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
Yep, you'll need bigger filters and may find you get a fair amount of vignetting even then. I like Astrodon filters but they are expensive.
|
Of course.
I'll review prices to see if I can fit them in budget. Maybe they might be a gradual acquisition instead of getting all at once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
You'll probably have to fiddle with spacing for the flattener to get the right distance to the sensor. You might also find you need to deal with tilt.
|
What's likely to tilt?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
Another thought: the 16200 doesn't have the most fantastic read noise. You'll need to be prepared to do long subs in narrowband.
|
What amount of time are we talking about here at a minimum? I've found you need a fair amount of time anyway to get narrowband data, that I've done up to 30 min subs. Probably the minimum I've effectively used is 5 min and that's just Ha.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
Here's another option to think about: a camera with a Sony ICX-694 sensor. With the reducer that would give you an image scale of 0.69 arcsec/pix. The ICX-694 is very low noise and has great QE. It's smaller so the image circle of the reducer is probably fine and you can use your existing filters. The only downside will be the smaller FOV...
|
A better QE to the 16200, dark current noise a little bit better than the 16200. The FOV is definitely not as nice (but I might be able to get over it
) and it's has under half the full well capacity (is this an issue?).
Would the Sony still be ok to use without the reducer if I want to use the full focal length?