View Single Post
  #25  
Old 04-06-2019, 05:50 PM
strongmanmike's Avatar
strongmanmike (Michael)
Highest Observatory in Oz

strongmanmike is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atmos View Post
This is where it gets complicated. The ESO 2.2m is a F/8 with what I can figure out as 15.27 micron pixels (125x125mm 67megapixel sensor). Mike has a F/5 with 9 micron pixels.

In faint nebulosity the 2.2m only collects an estimated 12.5% more light per unit area. This however doesn’t take into consideration QE, the reflectivity of the ESO mirrors or scatter (the FSQ would have about 95% transmission given high quality coating and minimal dust). Given ESO likely recoat their mirrors and there is likely several corrective lens in there as well, ESO could have a 20% transmission loss without taking QE of the sensor into account.

On non stellar objects ESO and Mike are neck a neck in depth BUT ESO 2.2M does that depth at 0.18”/pixel... which is pretty amazing!
Ah Col, don't worry about arguing the toss, Peter just posted that roll over to denigrate, using yet another misguided and miss leading comparison, he has plenty of form in this regard. Heck even me just saying that will likely produce a contrite pompous rebuttle...it's just not worth it.

Mike
Reply With Quote