the easier it is to accurately measure your seeing...if you can borrow an ASI178 or QHY178 from a friend, which also has the same size pixels, and use it on your longest FL scope, that would probably be the best way to measure), as well as...
I don't know, but a lot of people probably think that I'm oversampled with my IMX178 (also with 2.4um pixels) when I image with my 5" refractor working at a focal length of 660mm. On a night with average to poor seeing I might be, but on good nights it can produce some reall...
they grow brighter with longer exposures. The general characteristic of the glows seems to be about the same as with any other Sony CMOS sensor, which all (based on my testing of IMX178, IMX174,
they grow brighter with longer exposures. The general characteristic of the glows seems to be about the same as with any other Sony CMOS sensor, which all (based on my testing of IMX178, IMX174,
Page 26 of 48 - Sony IMX183 mono test thread - ASI, QHY, etc. - posted in Beginning Deep Sky Imaging: All the images will have noisy borders, because I am a fairly aggressive ditherer. You should crop out the borders that are noisy, then process. As fo
. Jon (apparently) has one for beta testing and the unavailability of the mono IMX183 is one reason I suggested that people look at results that have been done with the IMX178 (available for the last two years). I have some hope that someone will get the mono IMX183 within the next ...
Page 8 of 48 - Sony IMX183 mono test thread - ASI, QHY, etc. - posted in Beginning Deep Sky Imaging: I will bite, can you link this Newt that would cost less than a QHY16200A, a set of LRGB ADon filters, that uses his existing ecosystem for auto