Reader Forums
Astronomy forums are FREE. If you wish to participate you must LOGIN | REGISTER.

CCD imaging

Camera and Pixel question.
Last post 10-15-2008 02:52 PM by galactic_photog. 4 replies.
Sort Posts:
Page 1 of 1 (5 items)
  • 10-14-2008 12:34 PM

    Camera and Pixel question.

    First - are all pixels the same size. 

    Second - is the size they say  3048x2014 mean that many pixels wide and high.

    Third - is it the more pixels the better.

    Forth - the chip thats the glass thing at the end of the camera that goes in the focuser.

    Last- are all the pixels in the chip. 

     I'm sorry for all the questions but I'm trying to learn in small bites.  Thanks for any Help

     Andy. 

    Signature
    I like helping people. that like helping people
    equip.
    meade 12'' LX 200 w\80 mm celestron guidescope.
    D.S.I Pro & amp; DSI -II-C
    comming DEC.08 20'' Astrosky Dob
  • 10-14-2008 02:15 PM In reply to

    Re: Camera and Pixel question.

    andybyrd:

    First - are all pixels the same size. 

    On a given chip, the pixels are the same size. But different models of camera have different chips and the array (pixels x pixels) may be different, as well as the individual pixel sizes. In addition, some pixels are square and some are rectangular.

    Second - is the size they say  3048x2014 mean that many pixels wide and high.

    Yes, that is called the array size. In the example you mentioned, many folks call that a 6-megapixel chip because it is approximately 6 million pixels in all.

    Third - is it the more pixels the better.

    Generally yes, expecially for field of view, but not always. For example, a 6-megapixel 35mm-format DSLR is not generally as good for planetary imaging as is a 1.5-megapixel Webcam.

    Forth - the chip thats the glass thing at the end of the camera that goes in the focuser.

    Yes, if you look down into the front of the camera you will see the chip sitting in there. That is the end of the camera that goes in the focuser. We call it the "business end" ... LOL.

    Last- are all the pixels in the chip. 

    Yes. The chip is the camera's "sensor" -- equivalent to the film in a 35mm camera. Some chips are "compound", meaning they have a sensor area for imaging and separate areas (sometimes for guiding or other purposes).

    Some chips are "masked", meaning one or more rows of pixels may be "turned off" because they have "dead" pixels.

    Most, if not all (I haven't kept current on the chip specs), also have a "readout" area that is essentially an array of pixels that are masked off from light input but "hold" the charges that are read out from the imaging portion of the chip ... it is a "memory register", in effect.

    Take a look at Jay's Web site: www.allaboutastro.com for more info on CCD imaging.

    Signature
    Visit my Flickr! astrophoto album at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chipdatajeffb/ and our Three Rivers Foundation for the Arts & Sciences website: www.3rf.org.
  • 10-15-2008 12:49 PM In reply to

    Re: Camera and Pixel question.

    Jeff.  This is what I'm getting at. I want a new camera. The DSI III is 1.392.640 pixels -1360 x 1024-- the new Starshoot.is 6.112.512 pixels 3032 x 2016  this has 5 times the pixels as the III and 12 times the pixels and 4 times the the size that my DSI II has. would my scope be able to pick that size up without having some coma problems. and also  both cameras being the same price would it not be best to buy the bigger one or is there something I don't understand about these cameras.  because there sure is a big difference in the amount of pixels here and if thats what makes the picture then this should be a no brainer.  can you give me some advice here Please.  thank you. Andy

    Signature
    I like helping people. that like helping people
    equip.
    meade 12'' LX 200 w\80 mm celestron guidescope.
    D.S.I Pro & amp; DSI -II-C
    comming DEC.08 20'' Astrosky Dob
  • 10-15-2008 01:28 PM In reply to

    Re: Camera and Pixel question.

    andybyrd,

    The size of the chip is going to make a big difference also. Here is a link to some math can can help you calculate what each chip is going to do for you.

    Remember also that if they describe the chip as 1/2", that is a diagonal measurement of it. You will have to apply Pythagoreans theorem to determine the width and height of the chip. The chips are mostly in a 3 to 2 ratio.   

    http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/t/35674.aspx

    JJ 

  • 10-15-2008 02:52 PM In reply to

    Re: Camera and Pixel question.

    A good compromise on spatial sampling of the seeing disc requires an image scale of about 80-90% of the FWHM you see on stars at the meridian under a typical night at your location(best sampling at 80% of 1/2 of the FWHM) . Beware, however, of small pixels that this type of sampling would dictate, if using a short FL scope. All pixels are NOT created equal. Small pix usually have less full well depth, and lower dynamic range.

    If you want best resolution, go with a monochrome and filter set/wheel. The Bayer matrixed OSC (like the Orion you mentioned) will offer scene dependent resolution, sometimes as much as 20% less than the monochrome w/ filters. The up side to the OSC is lower overall cost (filters/wheels get expensive).

    If you do go with the Orion 6MPix, be sure to give us a review. It uses the same CCD as the more mature, and popular, Starlight M25, but at a MUCH lower price.

    The DSI III uses the very low noise Sony 285, BUT it isn't cooled. No matter waht they do in SW, it'll not compete in the max exposure time you can use, when compared to a similar CCD that is on a 30-40 degree cooler (which the Orion may be?).

    Robert

Page 1 of 1 (5 items)
E-mail Address: Password:
Remember me?

Forgot your password » | Login help »

Not a member? Register » | Why join? »

My Profile

Copyright © 2007 Astronomy.com
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems