[ATM] Quirky idea

[georgea at cam.org (George Anderson)]

Hi Rob

A big part of the problem is that you will not be able to get the
imaging area of the chips side by side. Even with extension leads (if
the circuitry can tolerate them ) you will still have gaps as large (or
larger) as the imaging area of the chip itself.
The basic webcams are sort of limited to planetary work, this is not to
say that you can't do widefield but you are going to need to do a lot of
overlay work to fill in the gaps between your imaging areas, probably
eight to sixteen shots to get a smooth transition for stacking.

George Anderson
Montreal Canada

Clear skies and good health

Grey Coyote wrote:
> 
> Howdy
> 
> Call me Rob, please. ;O)
> 
> I may actually be using the wrong terminology here.
> What I am using for magnification is focal length of
> the telescope, in my case 750mm divided by the
> aperature of the eyepiece, say 12 mm. So that
> particular eyepiece delivers 62.5 power. A 5.1 mm
> eyepiece with the same scope yields 147 power. A 3mm
> eyepiece with the same scope yields 250 power
> 
> Commercial ccd's like starlight are at 3 mm and 5 mm
> aperatures. I have a spreadsheet a friend got off the
> web that shows optimal viewing for large nebulas is
> 48x. Optimal viewing for globulare clusters is 180x.
> That's a wide range. To go from 250x to 180x with 3mm
> one would need to use a focal reducer with the ccd.
> 
> My idea is if one could fashion an array of ccd chips
> say 2 across and 2 deep that would be around a 4mm
> aperature which would yield 187.5x with my scope of
> 750 mm focal length.
> 
> Some people out there have way more than 750 mm focal
> length ;O) Say 2100 and above. These people would be
> able to use a larger array say 4 across and 4 deep.
> That would be about 8mm maybe as much as 10mm in
> aperature. The sensitivity would be much greater
> allowing deeper than mag 13 objects. One would want
> focal reducers for stepping power lower.
> 
> This really may be out of step for small time scopes.
> *shrugs*. Just tossing this out and seeing if someone
> has thought of this or done it before.
> 
> Thanks!
> -Rob
> 
> --- Vladimir Galogaza <vladimir.galogaza@zg.tel.hr>
> wrote:
> > Gray,
> >
> > It seems that I do not understand well your idea.
> > Where exactly will you put CCDs in hypothetical
> > refractor.
> > At the focus or else?
> >
> > What do you mean by: "Magnification is still focal
> > length /
> > aperture."
> > Usually this is quoted as "power" or "f- ratio"
> > or "f number".
> >
> > Regards
> > Vladimir.
> >
> > Outgoing mail is checked by AVG anti-virus system
> >  (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release
> > Date: 2/01/04
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
> http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
> _______________________________________________
> ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/