Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
It refers to the change from my KAF11002 based camera to my current KAF16803..... about 30% vs 45% QE in Ha.
But it really made stuff-all difference in my data...the faint stuff was simply a little less noisy.
Sadly Sony don't make overly large sensors, so despite some impressive QE numbers, it would give my RC16 a field of view similar to a drinking straw....hence the 16803 indeed saves me some time in other ways.
|
I think you are downplaying the advantages of the extra QE. I noticed the 16803 being more sensitive in Ha straight away.
I understand that it may not seem like a lot but you'd have to add up how much exposure time you now need to take to get a clean and solid Ha image.
The difference with the Sony sensor with Ha and O111 is much more dramatic. Its obvious that you can get a solid Ha image in half the time than using the 16803.
For example I could see the main jet off NGC1097 from the Trius on the Honders in a very pushed 10 minute 1x1 image. That's the QE and the F3.8 at work.
To get a similar image using a KAI11002 would take probably twice as long perhaps even more.
It becomes obvious when imaging dimmer objects like dimmer galaxies not something usually done in the burbs but if you did then the difference is plain to see.
Greg.