Adjusting white balance resulted in overcorrection - like it would go from red to just completely gold or green. Then I noticed that, when taking photos of white objects in the house, there was a definite magenta hue. When I first noted this issue, I sought help on the assumption that it was specific to astrophotography. The red grain is flagrant in the stacked image, but also present in the single frame. The second is a single RAW light frame of the Crescent Nebula. One image is a stacked and processed image of the North American Nebula. Please take a look at the images in this folder. #Full frame camera vs crop fullOn the other hand, as other said, that while many telescopes claim to do well with a full frame camera, that's usually just not the case.Įven APS-C sensor cameras have issues to be a flat image with no elongated stars at the corners.Īll - thank you for your great responses.įirst, let me address the red grain issue. The resolution is there, given that both cameras have the same sensor pixel pitch value - example 3.8qm.Īs others mentioned, usually full frame cameras have larger pixel-pitch than APS-C and higher quality sensors of course, so essentially using the same telescope with a full frame, you get a better resolution /higher quality picture, even if you would crop the image down to the APS-C size. It's the same as using the same telescope, same focal range, taking an image with a full frame and cropping it down to APS-C size. The APS-C simply just crops-in in the same - let's say 800mm focal range- provided by the telescope. To my understanding, changing sensor sizes is not like changing focal length/magnification. My slightly larger 102 has a similar image circle and it just barely works with a full frame sensor. If the focuser on the 80 has the larger 3" focuser it should just barely work with a full frame with a 42mm image circle at f/6 with just the flattener. This also makes them more sensitive, and yields a higher FWC per pixel, so up to the point that they result in undersampling, larger pixels have advantages over smaller ones. FF DSLRs tend to have larger pixels than APS-C ones, so an APS-C crop of a FF image will often have lower resolution because the FF pixels are larger. Resolution changes with pixel size if the scope remains static. As a rule of thumb, the larger pixels would do better on the SCT because of the long focal length, and smaller pixels will do better on the SV80 due to the short focal length.Įdited by Oort Cloud, 22 March 2022 - 09:10 PM.įield of view changes with sensor size if the scope remains static. So if you were to take an APS-C sized crop from a 6200, you would have essentially the same image as if you used a 2600 to capture it. For example, the ZWO 6200 is FF with 3.76um pixels, while the 2600 is APS-C with the same size pixels. The moral of the story here is that you need to know not only the difference in sensor size, but also the difference in pixel size. Resolution is a function of both sensor size and pixel size. Resolution Image scale changes with pixel size if the scope remains static. I searched cloudynights for info on this but struggled to find info that compared these setups.įield of view changes with sensor size if the scope remains static. So, why is the ASC image better than a full frame RAW that is cropped in Photoshop so that the FOV is the same as it would have been with an ASC. But I’m not sure I fully understand that. I understand that the major shortcoming of a full frame camera for astrophotography is that you need greater focal length to get the same size and same resolution image. So, what is the difference between these cameras for the purpose of astrophotography? I intend to use it with a Stellarvue 80 mm for DSOs and, potentially, for high focal length photography of planetary nebula with my Celestron 9.25 Edge. #Full frame camera vs crop upgradeSeparately, I have been advised to upgrade to a Canon 6D MarkII full frame for applications other than astrophotography. I am currently using a Canon t7i for Astrophotography, but my shots are haunted by a red grain that only gets worse with processing and is captured despite dithering.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |