Quote:
Originally Posted by alpal
Do you have some results that you could post please?
That would be only stretched examples - no other processing & at full scale.
|
Well no, not really. Id have to plough through large numbers of subs from the LX200R to find the best and I couldnt now tell if the seeing was the same as the subs taken with the RCOS many months apart.
Perhaps I should have said I didnt spend too much time keeping the LX200R in perfect focus either so the number of samples that matched the RCOS were pretty small.
Seeing for both at the same urban site was usually around 6 arc secs, the best was 4 arc secs and that was rare.
With megadata on the same object for both OTAs with 6 arcsec seeing at the same exposure times and with my usual overprocessing, the 12" actually often gave better results on dim objects (less noise due to less stretching with more apature).
Now that I am in dark skies at typical 2 arcsecs and some times better seeing, I dont think the LX200R would compete with the RCOS, you wouldnt expect it to.