Thank you for comments and attention to this issue.
Some new words about
:
Quote:
|
about 25% across from the left hand side
|
.
False. This is a theoretical, laboratory-mathematics, knowledge.
When you have high skyglow this percentual and theoretical recomendations don't work.
Quote:
|
480 seconds should show deeper stars than 120 seconds.
|
It makes sense, only if the atmosphere is clean and with low refraction (mainly by humidity).
Quote:
|
is that your camera works much better at ISO 800
|
Not full time. If I need to shot nebula, ISO 800 catch more information from clouds. If I shot stars (cluster) ISO 800 saturate the stars. Look the shape and the borders of stars with 120 seconds ISO 800. After the DSS stacking ... it will be not natural. I will show later the stacking comparison.
Gain unity = 1
Some people says that gain idea is a flawed concept.
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/...mance.summary/
The most curious is that many people talk about the response of sensor used by Canon. And they are talking not only about sensor, they are talking about the sensor with the electronic Canon inside the camera.
However, none of them work inside the Canon Inc. None of them work inside the laboratory that produce the cameras to Canon Inc. And Canon Inc never sign below of any document about theirs cameras. All technical documents from Canon Inc are laboratory measurements of isolated parts of theirs cameras.
It seems that Canon Inc doesn't know really theirs equipments. They make a camera. Measure its responses ... and sell it !
Question:
Who use cameras by cameras only ? Or better, you will use cameras always in enviroment that cause distortions of camera responses ! They are not out in the space, as the cameras of Hubble and others. There, the most problem is cosmic rays.
So what works for me, here aside the beach in Brasil, can not work
well there, Australia near the beach, also.
