The ST8's QE is lower than the ST10, QE is not just a factor of the pixel size, but also the inherent sensitivity of the CCD. The ST9E has 20 micron pixels, but is not as sensitive as the ST10XME.. Remember also that you can bin the ST10 upto 3x3 making the pixel size 18 micron, and still having 17% more real estate...
Oversampling is always better than undersampling in my opinion. Its better to have less than 1arcsec per pixel than 2arcsec per pixel as processing routines like deconvolution tend to really appreciate oversampled data.. not to mention that on nights of great seeing, you'll get better resolution.. I think the ST10 is the best choice of all the current SBIG cameras for what you're attempting to achieve.. The ST8 would be close, but not as sensitive, more noise, less resolution and only 1.6mp vs 3.2mp... When taking pretty pics MP is a big thing, its all well and good to have an image that looks fantastic, but if its not big enough to set it as a desktop background, or have printed out at least A4, then really, whats the point?
Yes, I was amazed at the sensitivity of the ST10XEi and my first thoughts were "imagine what it would be like with the XME! 30% more QE would have made a noticeable difference I think.. The scope I was using was a GSO 8" F/8 RC.. Unfortunately I never got a chance to use the ST10 in my TMB!.. I did however get a pic of M8 through my WO ZS70ED, This is attached to this post.. That was 60x1min subs with 13nm Ha also.. so again, you can see the sensitivity and resolution..
A great place for you to have a look at would be
This Site. Fred (Bassnut) on these forums used his ST10XME with his meade 12" LX200R scope at both F/10 and F/6.7 to deliver some breathtaking images.. If those pics dont tell you that the ST10 and a long focal length scope are a good match then I don't know what will!
