10 X and noise suppression

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by les, Mar 22, 2005.

  1. les

    les Guest

    A friend is using his old Oly 2100 for researching the optics of 300
    year old telescopes. The required exposures are long enough to cause
    quite a bit of noise in his images. He has rigged an adapter of his own
    design to give him a reasonable image size on the 2100 and thinks he
    needs to stay with 10X. What camera would you recommend??
    les, Mar 22, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. les

    werdan Guest

    "egb" <> wrote in message
    > Canon 1Ds Mk II

    Pentax K1000 & T-max 100. ;-)
    werdan, Mar 24, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. "werdan" <> wrote:
    > "egb" <> wrote:
    > >
    > > Canon 1Ds Mk II

    > Pentax K1000 & T-max 100. ;-)

    I'd take the Canon (well, if they'd come out with a version I can lift). I
    just put a couple of rolls of TMAX 100 through my Mamiya 7, and despite the
    MTF curves in the data sheets, it's no better than Provia 100F in terms of
    pictorially significant detail rendition when scanned at 4000 dpi. And
    looking at the film with a 60x microscope, I don't see much there that the
    scan isn't getting.

    So, as before, it looks to me that 35mm and 8MP digital are very similar
    beasts. And 16.7 is a much bigger number than 8.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Mar 24, 2005
  4. les

    mike regish Guest

    Minolta SRT101 has a mirror lockup that's handy at the focal lengths of

    "werdan" <> wrote in message
    > "egb" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Canon 1Ds Mk II

    > Pentax K1000 & T-max 100. ;-)
    mike regish, Mar 24, 2005
  5. les

    werdan Guest

    "mike regish" <> wrote in message
    > Minolta SRT101 has a mirror lockup that's handy at the focal lengths of
    > telelscopes.

    And probably a tad cheaper than the Canon Godzilla :)
    werdan, Mar 24, 2005
  6. les

    les Guest

    > Cannon 20D with a t-ring and a 2" focuser adapter
    > I don't understant the "researching the optics of" part. Is your
    > friend using the camera to take pictures of the diffraction pattern
    > to deduce how good/bad the optics are? Or just using the scope
    > to deliver images to the camera instead of the eye?
    > I don't understand about the 10X part. Is your friend using eyepiece
    > projection into the camera? If so, you get a better image and wider
    > fields of view with prime focus operation.
    > Google Christian Buil for a comparison of 10D, 20D and D70 cameras
    > and for insights into astro image postprocessing.
    > Mitch

    He and another Physicist have a small humanities grant that is funding a
    "What did it look like to them" investigation. They've already done
    lots of optical bench work on the optics so this is a new field for them
    and, as one might imagine, poorly funded. These instruments are so old
    that only the curator is touching them!
    So, are prime focus methods only recommended or could they get adequate
    images with their present setup.
    BTW the curator won't even let them remove, or have removed, the 300
    years of dust, etc. on the lenses so are they just beating a dead horse?
    les, Mar 24, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Alan Browne

    Ping JPS: Luminance noise v. RGB noise

    Alan Browne, Jan 2, 2006, in forum: Digital SLR
    Alan Browne
    Jan 3, 2006
  2. RichA
    Oct 14, 2006
  3. Cymbal Man Freq.
    Cymbal Man Freq.
    Sep 27, 2007
  4. .
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    Apr 30, 2008
  5. Stacey

    Noise about noise...

    Stacey, Feb 16, 2005, in forum: Digital Cameras
    Feb 18, 2005