Quote:
Originally Posted by Emuhead
Thanks all for the helpful & informative responses with calculators & examples too. Much appreciated. I've only now got more questions though. 
Andy I checked out both of the astrophotographers noted and their work is very impressive indeed. I don't think I'll have the patience that Discoduck has though (50hrs), and I'm not game like Kosborne to go a 10" mirror on an eq6r pro, at least not yet while im still playing nice with the mount.
Where does that leave me in terms of going deeper and getting the most detail possible.. 8" f5, or maybe even the elongated 8" f6, which is where the next question comes in..
3 scopes:
8" f4, 8" f5, 8" f6.
Given aperture determines resolution.. do they all provide the same level of detail ultimately? That is assuming the sensors pixel scale stays between 1 & 2 arc sec/pixel via binning & drizzling where needed, and just imaging longer on the slow scope vs the fast scope to ensure the overall SNR remains consistent across all 3. If I did all that, once in post if i cropped all 3 images to the same FOV would they all basically look identical or would there be more fine details on the f6 vs f4 image?
(Last question: Or based on actual experience with scope types, do refractors arguably provide the sharpest detail available and should I head in that direction..?) |
I think you need to read it again:
I am using a KAF8300 sensor.
It has 5.4 um pixels.
My arc-sec/pixel = 1.11
http://www.wilmslowastro.com/softwar...m#ARCSEC_PIXEL
Let's round that off to 1 arc second per pixel.
If my best seeing is 3 arc seconds per pixel then
that 1/3rd of the best seeing is about right in terms of Nyquist sampling.
see here again:
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...=158389&page=2
Nyquist says minimum sampling is a factor 2 ( but 3 is better. )
https://astronomy.tools/calculators/ccd_suitability
OK so - 10" f4 or f5 or f6 won't make any real difference to the detail
give that the pixel size is matched correctly as per the above.
A 10" f4 will work better for imaging as it's a faster scope.
Speed is important otherwise dim areas will be very noisy
unless you have large numbers of stacked frames.
Stacking with 3 x drizzle will improve everything but
not many people bother doing it.
It takes longer and is harder to do.
cheers
Allan