Upgrading Astrophotography Camera

Agreed Anthony.
You get very slightly better resolution using the 350, as it has finer pixels, but you loose out on field of view.
I'd rather have the bigger field of view.

It seems like they went one step forward and two steps back. :lol:

20D and 20Da Cannon's are compared in November Sky & Telescope, pages 84-88

Anthony once again congratulations on your 300D Star Clusters and Dark Nebulae photograph on page 124 of the same issue.

Deirdre Kelleghan
IAS
www.irishastrosoc.org

The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.F.Scott Fitzgerald

Agreed Anthony.
You get very slightly better resolution using the 350, as it has finer pixels, but you loose out on field of view.
I'd rather have the bigger field of view.

Astronomers complaining about better resolution of an imaging device. I've heard it all now

The correct solution of course is to get the 350D _and_ a difference scope

Cheers,
~Al

:lol: I was thinking the same, but with that amount resolution gain, would you notice any differance??

Figuring out what image scale (in arcsecs per pixel) will give you optimum results is a tricky business.

It is recommended that beginners start at 2.5 to 3.5 arcsec per pixel. Experienced planetary imagers will go as far as they can - down to 0.25 arcsec per pixel. But you need a solid mount and steady skies to get decent images at this scale. These guys recollimate their scopes every 30 minutes.

As Anthony points out, the difference between 1.25 and 1.1 arcsec per pixel is marginal. And I suspect it might be marginal in recognising the difference in resolution.

Al - at first glance it might appear that the more resolution you can get, the better. But at some point you will start hitting other practical considerations like seeing, tracking ability etc etc. So sometimes a better resolution imager is *not* the best choice. Of course, as you rightly point out, to squeeze the best performance out of an imager/scope system, you really have to match them up. You shouldn't choose them in isolation...

Dave

It seems like they went one step forward and two steps back. :lol:

Dave, precisely! They went +10% on the pixel array and -15% on the pixel size ... the net effect is negative.

As noted above, I am sticking with my EOS 300d and without the slightest hesitation!

Anthony.