View Single Post
  #12  
Old 01-07-2017, 11:02 PM
alpal's Avatar
alpal
Registered User

alpal is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,612
Hi Everyone,
The question remains about oversampling & undersampling.

I have a 10" f4 scope using a KAF8300 sensor.
It has 5.4 um pixels.

My arc-sec/pixel = 1.11
http://www.wilmslowastro.com/softwar...m#ARCSEC_PIXEL

Therefore if say - my seeing conditions are very good
I will get 2 arc seconds FWHM.

Using the Nyquist sampling theorem you need double the
arc-sec/pixel ratio - follows that to sample 2 arc seconds you need a minimum of 1 arc second per pixel.


Therefore I am slightly under sampled at 1.11.
In theory I can gain something from using drizzle.


I think that the above theory is wrong & you really need 3 x to be correctly sampled
as the pixels are square & not round like stars:
https://astronomy.tools/calculators/ccd_suitability

I certainly noticed a difference - an improvement - using 3 x drizzle
on my last image.
I got that little bit more detail when zooming in on tiny structures.

I was always interested if Mike Sidonio could gain anything by using drizzle.
I checked & he's oversampled so in theory he can't but
I would like to see the results - if only I could twist his arm.


cheers
Allan
Reply With Quote