Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

How Low Can You Go - Realistically With Today's CMOS Offerings

  • Please log in to reply
1 reply to this topic

#1 bigeastro

bigeastro

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2,405
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2015
  • Loc: Southwest Florida

Posted 17 January 2022 - 11:00 AM

I have an extra ZWO 183 Camera hanging around.   I would like to deploy it.  I have an array system with the following focal lengths.   2000mm or 2432mm,  952 mm or 761mm, 612mm or 489mm, and  430 mm.  Each combination is already pared with a camera.   I have been thinking of strapping the Rokinon 135 mm on the array paired with the 183.  However, the pixel size although small, is not small enough for the 135 mm Rokinon to get a good image scale. 

 

Hence the question.  How low in focal length can you really go with the lack of availability of small pixel chips?   Is there another option to the Rokinon that would fit Astrodymium Ring System and produce a say 200 mm or 300mm focal length that would be better suited and produce a better image scale?   

 

I tried out the 294 but frankly, the chip was very quirky and difficult to process in the unlocked 2.4 plus or minus micron pixel size, so that camera is out of the question at least for me given the fact that I am searching for a good match to go low on the FL and I did not like the chip.  Are there any cameras on the horizon that have a small pixel size?  The selections are not very abundant.  I can only think of the 183 and the 294 chips.

 

Anyways what are combinations that people think are good that match the potential value of the $450 Rokinon with the Astrodymium Ring System and the  ASIAIR and autofocusing solution?



#2 Maxtrixbass

Maxtrixbass

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 594
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2016
  • Loc: Camano Island, WA

Posted 17 January 2022 - 11:52 AM

Below 300mm fl I just plan on being undersampled and drizzle. My takumar 200mm and QHY 163c is ~3.9 as/px, but my seeing is typically in the 2s anyway. I also shoot at 135mm, but just consider that a widefield and don't worry about undersampling. I don't shoot much below that anymore unless its a landscape, rare aurora, or the like. If I want a wider field, and have the clear sky window, I do a mosaic.

 

I considered the  183 for the 200mm, but I would miss the slightly larger chip on the 163. I agree, there aren't too many options.


Edited by Maxtrixbass, 17 January 2022 - 11:55 AM.



CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics