Jump to content

Banner.jpg.657c26aa416d79803b2519a8862171c5.jpg

ASI 1600MMcool vs STT-8300


Rodd

Recommended Posts

I am considering getting the ASI 1600MMcool to use with my Televue np101is.  At present I use an SBIG SATT-8300 and it gives me a resolution of 2.06 as/p.  The ASI 1600MM will give me a resolution of 1.45 as/p WITH THE SAME FOV.  I already have a filter wheel and filters becuase I own the ASI 174MM (uncooled).  My question is, would I see a difference in a 1.45 as/p resolution instead of a 2.06 as/p resolution.  

Thanks,

 

Rodd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can get bogged down doing the maths Rodd, theoretically you need 2 pixels across the Airy disk to satisfy the Nyquist sampling criterion in an ideal world but plenty of people manage  great images with less than mathematically perfect set ups.

Is the ASI a cmos sensor ? don't know how it compares to CCD but I know there are differences.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it is CMOS--very sensitive, low noise.  But the Atik 490ex is a CCD and I have the same question as I am also considering this camera for the same reason (smaller FOV though).  Would a 1.45 as/p look more detailed than a 2.06 as/p?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As usual our enemy is the seeing and other errors in the imaging setup so unless you're using the HST you are more at the mercy of the diffraction disc which may be at least three times the size of the Airy disc.

Images may be sampled at the critical point where the image is captured with just enough pixels to capture all the available detail .

Bigger pixels will undersample but not particularly detrimental allowing a bigger FOV.

Smaller pixels will oversample meaning no information is lost again not disastrous .

So none of that has really helped I guess it's just a case of suck it and see :grin:

Dave

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Davey-T said:

As usual our enemy is the seeing and other errors in the imaging setup so unless you're using the HST you are more at the mercy of the diffraction disc which may be at least three times the size of the Airy disc.

Images may be sampled at the critical point where the image is captured with just enough pixels to capture all the available detail .

Bigger pixels will undersample but not particularly detrimental allowing a bigger FOV.

Smaller pixels will oversample meaning no information is lost again not disastrous .

So none of that has really helped I guess it's just a case of suck it and see :grin:

Dave

 

That's the unfortunate thing about having cloudy skies---I sit around and talk myself into buying more gear.  4" refractor becomes a 5.5" refractor in an instant--cameras multiply like flies (focusers, reducers, filters, domes, extenders....etc.)  I wish skill could be added as easily. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can be slightly annoying when you see an image captured with a DSLR on an cheap 80mm refractor that knocks the socks off your own image just because it was taken somewhere nice and dark with good seeing.

Over the years I've lowered my expectations of what is achievable from my back yard despite spending thousands on equipment :grin:

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah--maybe it really is mostly seeing conditions when you get down to it.  One day soon I will try and see if this is indeed the case.  Remote sites are hard to do in the middle of a CT Winter (-20C).  But Summer it is doable.  Its on my to do list.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.