Well, there should be a penalty:
A decreased SNR as the signal is spread over more pixel that all
contribute some noise.
For photometry every kind of reasonable oversampling is much
better than any kind of undersampling (with very bright targets
one might even defocus up to 1/3 of the chip height). Therefore
the definition of well-sampled is also a bit higher than in pretty-
picture-imaging (something around 3 pixel FWHM but usually
not less than ~ 2.5).
Clear skies
Wolfgang
--
Wolfgang Renz, Karlsruhe, Germany
Rz.BAV = WRe.vsnet = RWG.AAVSO
----- Original Message -----
From: "stan_ccd" <stan_ccd@yahoo.com>
To: <SBIG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 6:15 PM
Subject: [SBIG] Re: Which SBIG CCD for LX200R 14"
> --- "howsoft_paul" <howsoft@...> wrote:
>> I wasn't interested in the pixel size so much as the
>> number of pixels so that was governing my choice.
>> I'm oversampled at my site ... but this is not
>> necessarily a bad thing from what I understand.
>
> I agree - oversampling is not a bad thing. If you are taking a sky-
> limited exp then there is no penalty for oversampling. And so-
> called "oversampling" is very useful for extracting the maximal
> resolution from the virtual image:
> http://www.stanmooreastro.com/pixel_size.htm
>
> Stan
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SBIG/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SBIG/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:SBIG-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:SBIG-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
SBIG-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar