View Single Post
  #5  
Old 22-06-2015, 02:08 PM
Shiraz's Avatar
Shiraz (Ray)
Registered User

Shiraz is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ardrossan south australia
Posts: 4,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustigsmed View Post
so Ray did I get this correct for my setup?
S = 0.3

newt d300mm, f4
camera pixel size 4.3
QE 40% http://www.sensorgen.info/
?

interesting comparisons

Russ
Hi Russ.

Yes, but I wouldn't rely on the Sensorgen info at all - its full of obvious contradictions. eg, they quote QE for one camera as 87% whereas the Bayer filter restricts the maximum possible average QE to less than 40% (so who knows what they mean by QE). they also have a Powershot with 0.9 electron read noise ???? If you could find a science camera with 0.9 electron read noise, you would be paying $50k or more - and it won't be a Powershot. Assuming that the technology of DSLR sensors is roughly on par with modern mono chips, it would probably be reasonable to expect about 20% average QE for a DSLR, but that is still a guess.

Hence your system possibly works out at around S=0.15. ie you have a system that is slanted towards high resolution sampling and large image scale rather than sensitivity.

Last edited by Shiraz; 22-06-2015 at 08:32 PM.
Reply With Quote