More or less

[Mav359]

Hi guys

Sorry full of questions tonight

Does 120x1min exposures totalling 2 hours give the same quality of data as 12x10min exposures totalling 2 hours ?

[Afro Boy]

I'm no scientist/mathematician but I would say that it doesn't give you same amount of data.

Longer exposures will give time for photons from fainter stars/features to build up and register on the imaging chip.

The idea of using multiple subs/exposures and stacking them is to remove random artefacts like noise from your images.

Having said all this, someone correct me if I'm wrong!

[Shibby]

There's no straight forward answer to this one, it's been discussed many times!

http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-discussion/77387-long-exp-vs-loads-stacked-subs.html

http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-discussion/69770-lots-short-high-iso-subs-few-longer-ones.html

http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-tips-tricks-techniques/141005-long-exposures-lots-short-exposures.html

[Mav359]

Cheers Lewis i'll Have A Read

[LukeSkywatcher]

It really depends on the level of LP in your observing location. If it is terrible then lots of short exposures and then stacked is preferrable. If you are at a dark sky location then you can get away with longer exposures and less of them.

Its all relative.

[themos]

if we had a perfect camera, it would be the same outcome.

unfortunately, every time we read a real camera sensor, we get a few random pseudo-photons added to the mix.

It's fair to say that beyond a certain minimum exposure time (which depends on your particular camera and sky conditions), doing it either way matters less and less.