|
Ray,
Well - Yes and No
For high level signals that are well above the noise this is mostly true
The very low level signals need a lot more time to accumulate any sort of a signal that can get above all the other sources of noise.
The photon count is extremely low.
Stacking 4 subs with a weak signal with a lot of noise and not much signal may get you some signal back, but it wont be as good as the longer exposure.
An extreme example might be one of Hubble's Ultra and Extreme exposures - no matter how much stacking you do of short subs Hubble couldn't have got the detail without long exposures - they still stacked them !
Not a perfect example but good for the general idea.
So despite the fact that the read noise on the Sony might (and in some cases might not) be lower in the first place, you will not necessarily get useful data.
There are many objectives in imaging, but getting the most signal out of the most faint regions is certainly high on the list. Presently the images with the Ooh Aahh factor are making the most out of enhancing not so much the light that they are collecting but rather the lack of light ! - the shadows and dark lanes
But it can still be done with the Sony, just that the Sensors full well Dynamic Range is still a few bits shorter, so you would need to split the imaging up.
It would be great to see a real life comparison, or have someone with the appropriate skills to do the proper maths to explain it.
And it just might be the case that a good imager, with good gear and good seeing, with good processing skills is likely to produce results that might be indistinguishable !
Rally
|