|
I agree. The 814 is more for short focal lengths like Slawomir is using. Its a bit limited to that and the 1120 well is really only for Hyperstars.
The STL11000XCM I used to have used a luminance filter. I doubt the Bayer filters are UV and IR corrected. They certainly aren't in DSLRs and have a separate UV/IR blocking filter.
So I would continue to use your Hutech IDAS or a clear UV/IR block filter luminance.
By the way how well does the IDAS filter work? I was considering putting one in the imaging train for all the filters to see if it improved contrast. Not sure how, I suppose it would screw into the front of the Trius or Proline.
If you want to use this for colour then resolution is not as critical hence a lot using 2x2 binning. Colour gradations in a colour image tend to be gradual not with sharp sudden borders like Luminance has.
I am finding blending CDK images taken at 2 metres with 9 micron pixels are working well with LRGB data from the Honders with a Trius 694 with 4.5 micron pixels. The fact the 694 pixels are evenly half the size may help - don't know, but it can't be a bad thing.
Thomas Davis uses an STL11 Mono and an STL11 OSC to good effect.
I think the key is the FOV of the colour needs to be quite a bit larger than the luminance so if they are not exactlyrotated you can still use them as you have a margin for error. My CDK data for example from a few years ago was quite rotated from the Honders data but fiortunately the Honders image is about half the size so I can rotate it a lot and still not have to crop. Lucky but it made me realise that is something to design into your choice of cameras on the 2 scopes. So with that I think you need APS sized colour and not worry so much about exact pixel sizing. That's probably more of a secondary concern.
The upcoming QHY ic16200 is APSH and 6 micron pixels with QE matching or exceeding KAF8300 so that could be ideal. I am keeping an eye on that one for the Honders as 6 microns is the perfect pixel size. Also 35K full well would be a blessing as I personally am a bit tired of the tiny wells of the Sony sensor. The KAF16803 is bullet proof for image processing the Sony a bit touchy. I noticed lately I have to be very careful with my bias as they can introduce fixed pattern noise - a grid which must be a manufacturing pattern. If you get deep into processing and notice it later then that's not good! The image is trashed.
Greg.
|