Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II

[Marsu42]

What I won't do is head over to a forum dedicated to the other tech and say that its weaknesses mean it's a worse system just because it doesn't suit me personally. Which oddly is what a number of people do here.

You are making a false assumption that most of those bringing up low ISO DR are Nikon/Sony/etc. users when most are actually long time Canon users. So there is no going over to the 'other' forum since they are posting in their own brand's forum to begin with.

+1 - I'd speculate that most posters discussing possible future improvements (this is a rumors forum, after all) are long time Canon brand users and have an attachment to their brand or made major investments. Except from (few?) real trolls, people just wanting the optimal tool for low iso dr or high res simply dump Canon and switch to Nikon and accompanying forums.

Given how much time has passed since the release of the high-res d800 and Canon (afaik) not issuing any official statements how they're going to proceed, I find there's a surprisingly large number of people still left hoping for the best.

Imho Canon should give some indication what's it going to be - are they only planing to do a high-res €5000+ camera, or is the Canon system adapting higher res in all price regions? Everything's fine as people are free to buy what they want, and I personally don't need/want more mp - but it's unfortunate to be left in the dark about the future of this system.

 

[jrista]

game changing, game changing, game changing, blah blah..

But show photos from 7d1 and 7d2 to people, and they' won't recognize what camera is where.

What is really game changing, sony A7 or a7s. Or new 5-axis sensor stabilization in A7 II. Btw it cost as much as 7d2.

Until you shoot indoor sports, or indoor anything for that matter. Some people couldn't tell my iphone photos from a Nikon D700 or 5D Mark II outdoors on a sunny day. Is that supposed to NOT be game changing? And then the rest of your post is Sony blah blah blah, which costs as much as everything else that people can freely choose to purchase for their needs.

While I think the 7D II is definitely better for indoor sports, I don't think it is necessarily game changing from the standpoint of frame rate or high ISO noise levels or anything like that. The 1D X has been used for indoor sports plenty, and it offers a better feature set than the 7D II in most cases. The 7D II is cheaper, which can be important for the amateur sports photographer, but I don't know that that is necessarily "game changing". The feature of the 7D II that is game changing for indoor sports is the light oscillation detection...now THAT is a pretty awesome feature, and from what I've seen, it works extremely well.

 

[raptor3x]

Interesting. Any chance you have the margin of error as you get up into the higher ISO settings? I'm curious to try this method out on some of the cameras I am interested in buying. I've heard from other astrophotographers that dark current on Sony Exmor sensors is the lowest they have ever seen, and they no longer bother with dark frames as a result. Some don't even bother with dithering, as they haven't seen reason to.

How do they deal with the amp noise at the frame edges? The A7 and both A7Rs I've owned all had pretty severe purple glow when you start pushing up the ISO and it seems like this would be a major problem without dark frames.

I've seen a faint amount of purplish noise in A7r images...across the whole frame though, and only when you stretch really heavily. I haven't seen much in the way of what I would call amp glow, though. Nothing like the amp glow I get with the 5D III anyway. I am not sure about the A7, I've heard it's worse with that camera. If it is amp glow or some other thermal signal, then yes, you would need darks to handle it. In the case of the 5D III, if it presents badly, I just crop a little tighter and exclude the worst of it (because its primarily along the right edge o the frame)...without regulating sensor temp, creating and integrating with darks becomes a major pain.

That's really interesting. All three A7/A7R bodies I've owned have had significantly worse amp glow (the purple glow near the borders) than my 5D3.

 

[jrista]

What I won't do is head over to a forum dedicated to the other tech and say that its weaknesses mean it's a worse system just because it doesn't suit me personally. Which oddly is what a number of people do here.

You are making a false assumption that most of those bringing up low ISO DR are Nikon/Sony/etc. users when most are actually long time Canon users. So there is no going over to the 'other' forum since they are posting in their own brand's forum to begin with.

+1 - I'd speculate that most posters discussing possible future improvements (this is a rumors forum, after all) are long time Canon brand users and have an attachment to their brand or made major investments. Except from (few?) real trolls, people just wanting the optimal tool for low iso dr or high res simply dump Canon and switch to Nikon and accompanying forums.

Given how much time has passed since the release of the high-res d800 and Canon (afaik) not issuing any official statements how they're going to proceed, I find there's a surprisingly large number of people still left hoping for the best.

Imho Canon should give some indication what's it going to be - are they only planing to do a high-res €5000+ camera, or is the Canon system adapting higher res in all price regions? Everything's fine as people are free to buy what they want, and I personally don't need/want more mp - but it's unfortunate to be left in the dark about the future of this system.

+10


The lack of information coming from Canon about their future direction is certainly frustrating for those of us who want non-Canon level IQ (i.e. NX1/Exmor/Toshiba HEZ1) in a Canon body. There are so many benefits and zero drawbacks to having a sensor with better IQ, it would be really nice to have another couple of stops DR in Canon's future products. It would be even nicer to know that Canon is actually doing something about it, working on something for the next products, that will actually bring better IQ/lower DR to the table.


Not knowing, and knowing only the past where Canon has trickled out minor improvements in overall sensor IQ (lower dark current is nice for AP, but it doesn't really mean anything for regular photography) for so many years now, and hoping that doesn't remain their policy, is very frustrating.

 

[jrista]

Interesting. Any chance you have the margin of error as you get up into the higher ISO settings? I'm curious to try this method out on some of the cameras I am interested in buying. I've heard from other astrophotographers that dark current on Sony Exmor sensors is the lowest they have ever seen, and they no longer bother with dark frames as a result. Some don't even bother with dithering, as they haven't seen reason to.

How do they deal with the amp noise at the frame edges? The A7 and both A7Rs I've owned all had pretty severe purple glow when you start pushing up the ISO and it seems like this would be a major problem without dark frames.

I've seen a faint amount of purplish noise in A7r images...across the whole frame though, and only when you stretch really heavily. I haven't seen much in the way of what I would call amp glow, though. Nothing like the amp glow I get with the 5D III anyway. I am not sure about the A7, I've heard it's worse with that camera. If it is amp glow or some other thermal signal, then yes, you would need darks to handle it. In the case of the 5D III, if it presents badly, I just crop a little tighter and exclude the worst of it (because its primarily along the right edge o the frame)...without regulating sensor temp, creating and integrating with darks becomes a major pain.

That's really interesting. All three A7/A7R bodies I've owned have had significantly worse amp glow (the purple glow near the borders) than my 5D3.

Is this an issue with regular short-exposure photos, or only with longer exposures? I never did longer exposures with the A7r, and I had to dig REALLY deep to start finding color noise in the images I did take. I did not do astrophotography with it (did not have the opportunity, I really wanted to.) If there is amp glow, then yes, you would need to use darks to combat that. That can be tough, getting temp-aligned darks with non-temp regulated cameras is very difficult. You also have to be careful with images from low-noise electronics, as calibrating with darks can actually INCREASE the amount of random noise, even while it removes hot pixels and amp glow and other thermal signals. Sony sensors do have extremely low noise, so if you DO want to calibrate with darks, you are probably going to need to get at least 50-80 dark frames to integrate into a master, so that the noise levels in the dark are low enough to avoid increasing noise in each calibrated light.


One way to manage DSLR sensor temps is with a cold box. These are peltier-cooled, insulated enclosures for cameras. I've built myself a cold box for my Canon DSLRs, but without direct contact on the camera body, it's been difficult to get the inside of the box cold enough (at least with a single peltier...I have a second one that I need to try adding, to double the cooling and effectiveness), or regulated well enough, to help me maintain an even temperature for both lights and darks...so I still don't bother with darks (and I just deal with the 5D III amp glow.)


It should be noted, just for clarity sake, that amp glow is not dark current. Amplifier glow can be caused by heat conducted to the sensor or infrared radiation (~750-1100nm) from electronics or another source reaching the sensor, behaving like light, and releasing electrons in pixels. It's usually due to inadequate shielding or heat removal, although for IR to be a problem, the IR cut filter would have to be removed (i.e. as in a AP modded camera). That is a separate and additive thing that goes along with dark current. You can have both simultaneously. Dark current is a pretty constant thing (while amp glow can very frame to frame as the temp of off-die heat sources like ADC units or DSPs increase in temperature), leakage current flowing through the photodiode and pixel circuitry at a pretty constant rate. The release of electrons is related to temperature and the design of the pixel/photodiode, so the doubling temp is not the same across all sensors (dark current doubling temp can range from ~4.xe- to over 6e-). Higher temperatures can actually increase the sensitivity of the photodiodes to light as well...it doesn't just increase dark current, although the change in Q.E. tends to be non-linear...it increases much faster with temperature in the infrared spectrum than in the visible light spectrum. So, as temperatures in the electronics increase, both in the sensors and in off-die electronics, the chance that you will experience amplifier glow starts to increase exponentially (you get more heat/IR and increased sensitivity to it all). (When I image during the summer, long exposures, say five minutes and longer, usually result in a fairly strong amp glow to the right side of my sensor. Imaging during winter, I usually don't experience any amp glow at all.)


I'd love to find some official specs about the 7D II sensor, to see what the engineering spec on dark current is. I don't think Canon has ever released such information though. Sony releases spec sheets on their ICX CCD sensors, but I haven't seen many spec sheets for CMOS sensors. There is an article by Craig Stark where he tested an Atik 314+ CCD camera, which exhibited 0.0005e-/s/px dark current at I believe -10C...which is the best I've ever heard of.

 

[fragilesi]

What I won't do is head over to a forum dedicated to the other tech and say that its weaknesses mean it's a worse system just because it doesn't suit me personally. Which oddly is what a number of people do here.

You are making a false assumption that most of those bringing up low ISO DR are Nikon/Sony/etc. users when most are actually long time Canon users. So there is no going over to the 'other' forum since they are posting in their own brand's forum to begin with.

And it's interesting that some improvements for astro photography are awesome (and they are) but then if say some landscape (not that only landscape shooters can benefit) shooter is looking for a 3 stops improvement, that's just minor nonsense and it's all on the photographer, people have made great pics forever so why should they even care, it just says something about the photographer doesn't it.

Well yeah how about we say the same and ask Roger to go back to shooting astro on D30 then? After all if he can't make due with shooting his pics on a D30 even though thousands of amazing pics have been taken with a D30 I guess that just says something about him and not the D30 right? Come on! Why doesn't he just use a pinhole camera for his work? People have made awesome pics with those right? If he can't then I guess that just really says a lot about him right?

Just sick of all the nonsense where people just put down anyone who dares want to push things forward regarding something that someone else doesn't need/do or regarding something their pet brand that they worship doesn't do the best.

Gotta love it, 14% better this and much better dark current that and it's a game changer (fine enough) but then if someone brings up 3 stops DR at low ISO it just says something bad about them, who could care about such nonsense as that. :

That's odd, how did you extrapolate "a number" to mean "most"? I don't think it's me making the biggest assumptions.

I think I've been perfectly clear in many posts. I *do* understand for example the points made by the likes of jrista about DR. He's presented his evidence, I've seen it, agreed with it and fully understand why it's important to him. I would also like my 70D to have Exmoor-like recovery capability. It would be nice and I'm sure on occasion I'd use it.

Unfortunately there isn't a camera system with the advantages I do have like the glass, the reliability, the AF, the toughness, the ergonomics and so on plus Exmoor at the price. So, unless you want to tell me otherwise I don't see good enough reasons for me to switch and learn a new system. Oddly, as you've said neither do most of the people who are writing about how unhappy they are because they are still using Canon. Ergo it cannot be THAT bad using Canon because the positives outweigh the negatives.

So,in summary. I am not claiming anything about 14% improvements. I am not putting you down. I do not worship any kind of camera system or indeed any other electrical gadget. I am not claiming that the things I need from my camera are the most important for all photography or more important than the ones that you want.

In short I'm trying my best to take a balanced approach and appealing for others to do the same. What I won't do is sit here and agree with people who take one or two aspects of other camera system or raw specs and try to make out that it makes those systems better than the one I use and like.

 

[dtaylor]

And it's interesting that some improvements for astro photography are awesome (and they are) but then if say some landscape (not that only landscape shooters can benefit) shooter is looking for a 3 stops improvement, that's just minor nonsense and it's all on the photographer, people have made great pics forever so why should they even care, it just says something about the photographer doesn't it.

If a competitor had a >20 stop sensor that eliminated GND filters and HDR, that would be a "game changer" and would warrant the endless discussion and hand wringing we see here.

As is there are a couple stops of difference, which can be useful at times, but which simply cannot replace the techniques landscape photographers have used for years and decades. jrista's own interior shot demo that was here a while back showed two things. One, the Sony had more shadow latitude and the shadows were of higher quality. Two, even the Sony could not be stretched to retain the highlights and at the same time yield shadow quality that would be acceptable for publication. With a paying client you would be bracketing on either camera.

If you're into sports, the 7D II's AF and buffer make a real difference. If you're into astro, it's sensor characteristics apparently make a notable difference. If you're into landscapes...well...for all the words spilled on the Internet over DR and DxO I'm not sure it has ever actually resulted in a print that's observably better then another print. It's hard to even make the tripod/hand held argument when you can easily hand hold 2-3 frame brackets with no IS, and 5-7 with the latest IS lenses.

As I've said before, Sony FF Exmor will sometimes save you time and effort. And that's nothing to sneeze at. I would fault no one for buying a D810 or A7 for the sole purpose of saving time and effort. But you're not going to miss the shot on Canon. Canon's lenses, AF, UI, build quality, etc, etc...for many people these are more important then a few extra minutes spent on a blend or adjusting a GND filter, especially since you often have to do the same with the competition.

Just sick of all the nonsense where people just put down anyone who dares want to push things forward regarding something that someone else doesn't need/do or regarding something their pet brand that they worship doesn't do the best.

You are not pushing anything forward by posting here. A coordinated email campaign might get Canon's attention. A letter with a copy of your receipt for a D810 or A7R might get Canon's attention. Posts in these forums...or on any forums...are not going to get Canon's attention.

I am curious as to what Canon's management thinks of DxO and DR, if anything. And for the record I would love to see this improved. I just don't understand the obsession with it.

There's less difference today between the "weakest" sensor in an entry level, small format (m43, APS-C, FF) ILC and the best sensors in the most expensive small format ILCs then ever before. Yet some how we are spending more time talking about those differences, and people (not you specifically, nor jrista) on the Internet are becoming more arrogant about the performance of "their" sensor. It gets annoying, which is why you see the push back you are complaining about.

 

[AvTvM]

I don't see any reason to be "balanced" if my current supplier delivers subpar product. As in every other business i give them clear warning and tell them what i want. I want the best value for every euro/dollar spent.
14% improvements are ridiculous and utterly meaningless to me (u am not into astro photography).
And What other customers want is totally irrelevant to me as well.

If canon does not deliver FULLY COMPETITIVE products and will stop buying (measure is in effect).
And i will criticize them (measure is in effect).
And buy competitors product. Measure not yet in effect. But will be as soon as somebody meets my requirements. getting closer by the day. Maybe sony a9.

 

[Lee Jay]

I don't see any reason to be "balanced" if my current supplier delivers subpar product. As in every other business i give them clear warning and tell them what i want. I want the best value for every euro/dollar spent.
14% improvements are ridiculous and utterly meaningless to me (u am not into astro photography).
And What other customers want is totally irrelevant to me as well.

If canon does not deliver FULLY COMPETITIVE products and will stop buying (measure is in effect).
And i will criticize them (measure is in effect).
And buy competitors product. Measure not yet in effect. But will be as soon as somebody meets my requirements. getting closer by the day. Maybe sony a9.

Good for you. Right now no one makes any system more well suited to my needs than Canon, and second place isn't even close. And Sony isn't in second or third (and fourth is questionable)!

 

[Monchoon]

I don't see any reason to be "balanced" if my current supplier delivers subpar product. As in every other business i give them clear warning and tell them what i want. I want the best value for every euro/dollar spent.
14% improvements are ridiculous and utterly meaningless to me (u am not into astro photography).
And What other customers want is totally irrelevant to me as well.

If canon does not deliver FULLY COMPETITIVE products and will stop buying (measure is in effect).
And i will criticize them (measure is in effect).
And buy competitors product. Measure not yet in effect. But will be as soon as somebody meets my requirements. getting closer by the day. Maybe sony a9.

I don't think anyone any day will meet your requirements, but please buy into another system then proceed to whine on their forums, I am sure that will be the only thing that will please you.

 

[DominoDude]

I don't see any reason to be "balanced" if my current supplier delivers subpar product. As in every other business i give them clear warning and tell them what i want. I want the best value for every euro/dollar spent.
14% improvements are ridiculous and utterly meaningless to me (u am not into astro photography).
And What other customers want is totally irrelevant to me as well.

If canon does not deliver FULLY COMPETITIVE products and will stop buying (measure is in effect).
And i will criticize them (measure is in effect).
And buy competitors product. Measure not yet in effect. But will be as soon as somebody meets my requirements. getting closer by the day. Maybe sony a9.

No one's forcing you to buy anything you don't want. I'm guessing you are either a very good pro, or very bad photographer if Canons 7D Mark II doesn't suit you.
I will search through your posted photos to make up my mind on that.

Hmm, couldn't find any photos. But I did find this:

To me this rumor is not credible at all.

Canon has every reason to follow up on the enormously successful 7D with another top-level APS-C camera.

There are so many enthusiasts who own or are willing to buy "the good" EF-S lenses (17-55, 15-85, 10-22, 60 Macro). Majority of them are not willing/financially able to step up to big $ fullframe. The 5D II successor(s) will most likely be more expensive than the 5D II launch - probably around 3k $ for the body. Plus immediate major upgrade cost for expensive, FF-capable wide-angle lenses ... 24-70 II, 16-35 II, 24 II, 14 II, 35/1.4 or the new 24/2.8, 28/2.8.

At the same time anybody who has used a 7D for a while will most likely not want to step down to the consumer-style bodies 60D or rebels with poor AF.

From my perspective it would make most sense to continue with the 2-tiered rebel series with a cheap end (currently 1100D) and a mid-level offering (currently 600D) plus a top-tier 7D II and discontinue the former xxD line altogether.

I will upgrade to a 7D II if it can fully match an upcoming Nikon D400. In terms of sensor/IQ, electronics, performance/responsiveness, and especially AF ... most likely that would mean the 7D II should "inherit" the current 1D IV AF system (45 pt). In addition I would like it to get a tilt-swivel display (like the 60D). If they offer such a camera at $ 1800 launch price it will sell extremely well again and will leave hardly ny room or need for a 70D.

I can't say that I know how good or bad the Nikon D400 is (if it exists), but your statement above indicates that the 7D Mark II should be good enough for your standards. You even guessed correct on the price.

 

[Roger N Clark]

Interesting. Any chance you have the margin of error as you get up into the higher ISO settings? I'm curious to try this method out on some of the cameras I am interested in buying. I've heard from other astrophotographers that dark current on Sony Exmor sensors is the lowest they have ever seen, and they no longer bother with dark frames as a result. Some don't even bother with dithering, as they haven't seen reason to.

For the most part, I've just relied on manufacturer spec sheets to get dark current values. I've seen some tests from the likes of Craig Stark and a few others that indicate at least for the Sony ICX sensors that dark current is around 0.003-0.002e-/s/px at -10C, which is low enough that you have to expose for 30 minutes before dark current levels even reach the RN level of those sensors. You have to expose for 2h 42m before dark current noise reaches the RN level of those sensors. Hence the reason it's usually considered a non-factor.

Anyway, I'm curious what you use to process the data and get your results? I haven't had a chance to see if I can open the RAW images in PixInsight without debayering. I am pretty sure Iris software can do that, though, so at the very least, I could fall back on that. I'm curious now to see what the dark current of the 5D III is in practice...just for my own benefit, so I can determine how long I should be exposing to avoid excessive DCN levels.

Hi Jon,
I'm not sure what you mean by margin of error. You can see the scatter in my data in figure 3.

You cite the Sony ICX sensors in the 0.003 raneg at -10C,; the 7D2 reaches the 0.002 range at -2 C.

I use several programs for my analyses. DCRAW and RAWDIGGER for decoding the raw data without changing values. then my own custom code written mostly in Davinci from asu.edu (developed for spacecraft mission imaging data analysis).

Roger

 

[Roger N Clark]

It should be noted, just for clarity sake, that amp glow is not dark current. Amplifier glow is caused by infrared radiation (radiated heat) from electronics reaching the sensor, behaving like light, and releasing electrons in pixels. It's usually due to inadequate shielding.

Jon, that really isn't plausible. For Black Body (thermal) radiation at 30 C, the Black Body peak is around 10 microns, and the radiation where the silicon sensor is sensitive (less than 1.1 microns) the radiation is down by a factor of 10^13. There is also an IR blocking filter over the sensor, blocking another thousand or so. Thus there simply are not any photons from heat at a wavelength where the sensor is sensitive. At wavelengths longer than 1.1 microns, silicon becomes transparent and insensitive to light.

Amp glow is due to thermal heating of the sensor, by conduction of heat into the sensor.

Roger

 

[Loswr]

Roger, I'd like to add my thanks to those of others for your participation here!

—John

 

[jrista]

It should be noted, just for clarity sake, that amp glow is not dark current. Amplifier glow is caused by infrared radiation (radiated heat) from electronics reaching the sensor, behaving like light, and releasing electrons in pixels. It's usually due to inadequate shielding.

Jon, that really isn't plausible. For Black Body (thermal) radiation at 30 C, the Black Body peak is around 10 microns, and the radiation where the silicon sensor is sensitive (less than 1.1 microns) the radiation is down by a factor of 10^13. There is also an IR blocking filter over the sensor, blocking another thousand or so. Thus there simply are not any photons from heat at a wavelength where the sensor is sensitive. At wavelengths longer than 1.1 microns, silicon becomes transparent and insensitive to light.

Amp glow is due to thermal heating of the sensor, by conduction of heat into the sensor.

Roger

Well, yes, the IR filter would have to be removed, I agree. There was a fairly extensive thread on CN forums a while ago about a 6D self mod that experienced a new source of glow from an external source, but still inside the camera. The assumption was that it was an IR radiation source (as the issue increased with temp), and that the removal of LPF1 and LPF2 allowed radiation from this source to illuminate the sensor, as tests were performed in a pitch dark room, and the sensor was still getting glow from this one source. I actually do not know what wavelength the radiation was...there was no mention, and I guess there were no final concrete conclusions. Whatever it was, restoration of one of the low pass filters eliminated the problem...so perhaps not infrared heat...but infrared light of some wavelength.

 

[Lee Jay]

With all the astro talk and the full moon, I thought I'd mention my favorite new astro accessory - the Canon 10x42L IS. Those things are way better than I ever expected them to be.

 

[jrista]

You cite the Sony ICX sensors in the 0.003 raneg at -10C,; the 7D2 reaches the 0.002 range at -2 C.

That is what the spec usually say on cooled CCD cameras from Atik, QSI, FLI. However, there is anarticle from Craig Stark where he tests an Atik 314L+, and experiences considerably lower dark current of 0.00076e-/s/px:


http://www.stark-labs.com/craig/articles/assets/CCD_SNR3.pdf


At this point, I haven't slept since Monday, so I am not making snense of what he said after that, or why he was measuring 0.0005e-/s/px. Regardles, these are the lowest dark current noise levels I've ever heard of.


The 314L+ uses the Sony ICX285AL, and it has a limited maximum cooling of -27C below ambient. The standard cooling temp of Sony ICX CCDs is usually -10 however unless the ambient temperature was ~62F/17C, I on't even think the temperature of the snesor during his testing would have been that cold...at 65F ambient the sensor would reach it's minimum temperature of around -8C, and at 70 F ambient the sensor would reach a minimum temperature of -6C..

anyway...whatever I was sayind.....I don't know if the newer ICX674/694/834 sensors can reach that level of dark current...but regardless, when cooled to -10C, the dark current noise is a trivial factor for most common exposure time I think for an hour long exposure, which you shouldn;t need outside of narrow band oiii filter exposures on certain targets, dark current noise barely tops 3e- at a rate of 0.003e-/s/px. So none of the apers who use the Sony sensors ever bother with any dark frames...many don;t even bother to dither I don't think.

KAF sensors (Now owned by ON semiconductor? Once Truesense, previously owned by Kodak) are definitely not as good. Its really old technology...fdamentaly I dont think it has changed in a very long time, a decade?...it's had minimal improvements, addition of microlenses, maybe a switch to AR glass and really small things like that...but it;s really old tech. So it is not surprising that it does nto have low dark current, and they don't have low read noise either (at best, around 7e- or so, most of the time it;s 10e- or higher) . The reason people still buy them is the sensors can be huge. The KAF-8300 is slightly smaller than APS-C. The KAF-11002 is FF size. The KAF-16803 is a monster 37x37mm square sensor. FLI just released a new camera with the KAF-50100, wich is a 49x37mm 50.1mp behemoth sensor. FLI and On Semiconductor apparently took the old 50100 sensor design, which used to have a mere 25% Q.E., added microlenses and apparently got the Q.E up to around 62%. That puppy is over $20k...so not exactly your hobby camera/

Anyway...yeah, KAF sensors are very old...old tech, but they are monsters. You could fit 30 of the Atik 314L+ sensors into the area of a single KAF-50100. So, maybe not as efficient andg enerally not as goo dfor narrow band imaging...but they make the most beautiful LRGB images tou will ever see.

Ok, sorry...I think that was really sloppy writing, but I am too tired to go back and fix everything... :\

I use several programs for my analyses. DCRAW and RAWDIGGER for decoding the raw data without changing values. then my own custom code written mostly in Davinci from asu.edu (developed for spacecraft mission imaging data analysis).

I know of RAWDIGGEr, anf I think IRIS uses DCRAW. I was figuring I'd use iris to examin the raw data anyway.

 

[jrista]

With all the astro talk and the full moon, I thought I'd mention my favorite new astro accessory - the Canon 10x42L IS. Those things are way better than I ever expected them to be.

Binoculars? That reminds me...I ordered a pair of Oberwerk fully multicoated (even the prisms) 20x80's a while ago...I was hoping they would be here by now...I don't know where they are, or if they were ever shipped. I guess I chould check on that...


IS binoculars must be pretty nice, though.

 

[jrista]

Sory guys. I'm being really sloppy tinight. Tonight. I have had very servere chronic insomnia for countless years...well over a decade. I go through periods where I just don't sleep for days, and I'm going through one now. After a while, you kind of feel like your drunk, even though your not... The nafter that, if you still haven't slept...yeahhh.......things get really really werid..............

 

[AlanF]

Sory guys. I'm being really sloppy tinight. Tonight. I have had very servere chronic insomnia for countless years...well over a decade. I go through periods where I just don't sleep for days, and I'm going through one now. After a while, you kind of feel like your drunk, even though your not... The nafter that, if you still haven't slept...yeahhh.......things get really really werid..............

So that's how you have time to do astrophotography?