Hi Rainer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsbfoto
You write ... - but we´re talking about seriuos hi-res planetary imaging...
If that is the case then we should start talking about the Lumenera and not the TIS cameras, be it either the Astronomy series of cameras called SKYnyx or even the industrial and scientific.
|
Most definitely! No disagreement from me. The problem is, those cameras are much more expensive. Without a doubt, the SkyNyx or Infinity would be my choice especially the large format versions for hi-res lunar photography.
However this thread was about the DMK, which is significantly cheaper but still delivers quality results at 640x480 with very low noise. I believe Matt (the OP) has investigated the other options as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsbfoto
Too much lost time and I guess we really do not have, maybe you do down under, but where I live I have not so much clear nights and my life is too short to spend my imaging time with LRGB.
|
As you say that's just one of the factors you'll need to consider when deciding to go mono+filters or colour, along with the decision of how serious you are about getting the best images you can given your equipment, local conditions, time available etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsbfoto
You also write re-focus on each filter
Well I have a set of LRGB filters from Gerd Neumann in Germany and you may believe that I always take my time for socusign and never had the feeling that I had to refocus between each channel e.g. LRGB, but here also there are many different opinions  |
I think it would probably depend on what you're imaging, the focal length you're imaging at, and the altitude of the object you're imaging.
I use Astronomik LRGB filters and they claim to be parfocal as well, but at high resolutions (over 8 metres focal length), and especially with objects lower in altitude, the wavelengths definitely require focus at different points.
For deep-space astrophotography, where the focal length is typically much less (1m - 4m), then the difference in focal point may not be so noticeable.