Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
The run of inclement weather in Sydney has made it difficult for me to explore the QHY600M's capabilities further, but I am coming to the conclusion the intrinsic noise of its CMOS sensor is about an order of magnitude higher than my KAF16803.
Read noise looks to be a red herring. It is simply the consistency of the signal your read-up, and says nothing about the pixel to pixel variations.
Problem is CMOS have outliers that while consistent in value, are spread over a much wider bell curve....
I've put some more test data here.
Don't get me wrong...I like this camera a lot. The resolution is awesome.
But for ultra dim targets from my urban sky....humm...no revelation so far. |
Thanks Peter,
that's a good write up -
especially the 2 pictures shown with these words:
Quote:
|
Below two 12x 300second SD stacked exposures through a Takahashi FSQ106 and Baader 7nm h-alpha filter. Dark and flat calibrated. The 9 micron CCD pixels clearly undersample the stars in the image
but shows the nebulosity very well with a clean background. The 3.76 micron IMX455 sensor better samples the data and resolves faint background stars The higher noise floor of the CMOS sensor is also evident.
|
The CMOS sensor is superior.
cheers
Allan