First light STXL 16200

Stevec35 (Steve) · #1 23-01-2017, 10:55 PM

This image of Eta Carinae reaches no great heights but it's only a first light. For the 14.5" I binned everything 2x2 giving 12 micron pixels but I eventually plan to use this camera with my FSQ106 when I get round to attaching it to the main scope. I was planning to do a narrow band version but that is not currently feasible with the weather.

Cheers

Steve

http://members.pcug.org.au/~stevec/e...RC14_HaRGB.jpg

Atmos (Colin) · #2 23-01-2017, 11:19 PM

Very nice Steve!!

Stevec35 (Steve) · #3 24-01-2017, 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atmos

Very nice Steve!!

Thanks Colin.

Paul Haese · #4 24-01-2017, 12:03 PM

An interesting rendering Steve. What treatment are you using for the sharpening?

I can see why you would be using it on the FSQ. It will have better resolution than using an 11002 sensor and a nice field of view too.

atalas · #5 24-01-2017, 02:52 PM

Nice work Steve

in your face with close up detail....congrats on the new camera.

I've been thinking about getting one of these 16200 chipped cameras but probably stick with Fli.

Stevec35 (Steve) · #6 24-01-2017, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Haese

An interesting rendering Steve. What treatment are you using for the sharpening?

I can see why you would be using it on the FSQ. It will have better resolution than using an 11002 sensor and a nice field of view too.

Paul, I'm using a combination of PI wavelet and deconvolution processing and PS contrast tweaks but I'm not happy with the result and I'm currently trying to reprocess. It should still be useful with the 14.5" though as binning 2x2 gives about .75 arcsec per pixel but I agree it's really a camera for short focus telescopes. I have an astrophysics reducer for the RCOS which brings it back to about F7.5. That might be interesting.

Stevec35 (Steve) · #7 24-01-2017, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atalas

Nice work Steve

in your face with close up detail....congrats on the new camera.

I've been thinking about getting one of these 16200 chipped cameras but probably stick with Fli.

Thanks Louie. Can't see how you would go wrong with FLI. Of course the current definitive Carina nebula image in my view is Peter Ward's magnificent effort with his 16". My image is nowhere near that.

topheart · #8 24-01-2017, 03:26 PM

Hi Steve,
Wonderful first light - I look forward to seeing more from this setup.
Cheers,
Tim

Stevec35 (Steve) · #9 24-01-2017, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by topheart

Hi Steve,
Wonderful first light - I look forward to seeing more from this setup.
Cheers,
Tim

Thanks Tim

Placidus (Mike and Trish) · #10 24-01-2017, 07:20 PM

The 2x2 binning was certainly not limiting. Excellent detail in the Fickle Finger, for example.

And it meant lots of structure in the darkest dust.

gregbradley · #11 24-01-2017, 09:14 PM

Nice image Steve and congrats on your 16200. I have found it to be an excellent sensor and yes better suited to a wider scope.

Greg

Stevec35 (Steve) · #12 24-01-2017, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Nice image Steve and congrats on your 16200. I have found it to be an excellent sensor and yes better suited to a wider scope.

Greg

Thanks Greg. Didn't realize you had one otherwise I probably would have asked. Yes, although better suited to a wider scope I still think it will be useful with the with the 14.5" at 2x2.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Placidus

The 2x2 binning was certainly not limiting. Excellent detail in the Fickle Finger, for example.

And it meant lots of structure in the darkest dust.

Thanks M&T. We'll see how it performs on other things such as the faint planetary nebulae that are part of my repertoire.

willik (Willik) · #13 25-01-2017, 12:55 AM

I Have got ccd 16200 upgrade from ccd 8300 gives you a larger senser but
Sencertivity is about the same on imageing

willik (Willik) · #14 25-01-2017, 01:02 AM

IT looks like you cropped that image for some reason not the full senser size
it is quite a large senser

Stevec35 (Steve) · #15 25-01-2017, 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willik

IT looks like you cropped that image for some reason not the full senser size
it is quite a large senser

Nope. The only cropping was a bit at the edges because of minor sub-frame misalignment.

gregbradley · #16 26-01-2017, 10:00 AM

Thanks Greg. Didn't realize you had one otherwise I probably would have asked. Yes, although better suited to a wider scope I still think it will be useful with the with the 14.5" at 2x2.

No need to bin it on a decent night though. If the seeing is weak then yes binning is the way to go. I have taken some test images using the 16200 on my CDK17 and they turned out quite well. The lower read noise of the 16200 is mostly what its about. On the Honders it seems to make more vibrant images and probably on longer focal length less time needed to get to a good result as its not all about QE but more about low read noise. 6 microns for average seeing suits anything up to about 1500mm focal length at a guess.

Greg.

marc4darkskies (Marcus) · #17 26-01-2017, 10:27 AM

Nicely done Steve - colours are rich and accurate IMO.

The mottled look detracts bit though and is indicative of over sharpening at the larger scales (say >10 pixels)

Slawomir (Suavi) · #18 26-01-2017, 02:10 PM

Congratulations Steve on your new beautiful camera!

Very nice image for the first light too

Stevec35 (Steve) · #19 26-01-2017, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slawomir

Congratulations Steve on your new beautiful camera!

Very nice image for the first light too

Thanks Suavi. Bit of work still required before it's working at optimum though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by marc4darkskies

Nicely done Steve - colours are rich and accurate IMO.

The mottled look detracts bit though and is indicative of over sharpening at the larger scales (say >10 pixels)

Thanks Marcus. Point taken - I over sharpened it a bit. I had seeing and focus problems.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Thanks Greg. Didn't realize you had one otherwise I probably would have asked. Yes, although better suited to a wider scope I still think it will be useful with the with the 14.5" at 2x2.

No need to bin it on a decent night though. If the seeing is weak then yes binning is the way to go. I have taken some test images using the 16200 on my CDK17 and they turned out quite well. The lower read noise of the 16200 is mostly what its about. On the Honders it seems to make more vibrant images and probably on longer focal length less time needed to get to a good result as its not all about QE but more about low read noise. 6 microns for average seeing suits anything up to about 1500mm focal length at a guess.

Greg.

Thanks for the info Greg. Seeing is generally not good from my site. I don't know what you get. The unbinned images are .37 arc seconds per pixel which seems horribly over sampled so that's why I was intending to mainly use it 2x2 with the 14.5"