ollypenrice
-
Posts
37,999 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
302
.thumb.jpg.2650ab2c7b3a8686215d18bbbb665ca0.jpg){kind=tracking}
Single Status Update
See all updates by ollypenrice
-
Hi Olly,
I image with a QSI683 (8300) and was considering an FSQ. Looking at the numbers, it seems that the FSX106EDX is better matched to the 8300 in terms of arcsec/pixel. Still, numbers only carry you so far. You said that you would love to have another FSQ85 if you were using an 8300 chip again. I know you own a couple of FSQ106EDX's. What is it that makes you feel the 85 is so superbly matched to the 8300? I really value your insight since you have used both.
Renae
-
Hi,
In fact I use two FSQ106Ns, one mine and one Tom O'Donoghue's. These cannot take the focal reducer, and we use full format CCD chips which are, really, too big for the reducer anyway, even if it worked with our older fluorite scopes, which it doesn't. I think you can make a perfectly good case for either the 85 or 106EDX, with or without reducer, for the 8300 chip since in all cases the image circle is big enough. You are just trading resolution for field of view but resolution never drops below a level which will give a decent result. If you want better resolution go for a longer FL and do a mosaic.
I don't think the choce is a big deal, it just depends mainly on your FOV requirements. Tom and I are very 'widefield' but Tom doesn't hesitate to set out on 30 panel mosaics. I'm a bit less ambitious!!
Olly
-
