Nikon D300 sensor question

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by adm, Apr 15, 2008.

  1. adm

    adm Guest

    Hi,

    Does anyone know the exact sensor (pixel area part) dimensions and pixel
    sizes of the sensor used in the Nikon D300? I want to try and work out the
    field of view I will get if I attach it to my telescope. (It's effectively a
    2500mm f/10 lens....)
     
    adm, Apr 15, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. adm

    Norm Dresner Guest

    | Hi,
    |
    | Does anyone know the exact sensor (pixel area part) dimensions and pixel
    | sizes of the sensor used in the Nikon D300? I want to try and work out the
    | field of view I will get if I attach it to my telescope. (It's effectively
    a
    | 2500mm f/10 lens....)
    |

    It's 2/3 the size of a 35mm film frame which is nominally 24x36mm. The
    dimensions of the array are 4288x2848 which your camera would tell you if
    you asked it to.

    Norm
     
    Norm Dresner, Apr 15, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. adm

    OldBoy Guest


    Read this first:
    http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/nikon_test/test.htm
     
    OldBoy, Apr 15, 2008
    #3
  4. adm

    Focus Guest

    Focus, Apr 15, 2008
    #4
  5. adm

    frederick Guest

    Only for casual users I think. I had thought that a dslr might be an
    appealing and relatively low-cost option. I went to an open day where
    back-yard stargazers brought their private gear along to display. Not
    one dslr in sight. Standard gear seemed to be liquid or peltier cooled
    CCD imagers, with comments made to me that all dslr sensors are way too
    noisy for astronomical use.
     
    frederick, Apr 15, 2008
    #5
  6. Yes, always the dreamer. LOL!




    Rita
     
    Rita Berkowitz, Apr 16, 2008
    #6
  7. adm

    Steve Guest

    One thing I noticed with my D200 is that normally, I have a pretty bad
    problem with hot pixels in low light. But when I was taking pictures
    of the eclipse, not a single hot pixel in a totally black area of the
    image that's usually full of them. I mean, it was dead black where
    normally it would look like a bunch of little white, red and blue
    stars.

    I'm pretty sure it's because the camera was outside for over an hour
    and it was like 25 degrees out that night. Back inside the hot pixels
    returned.

    As far as atronomical use, a book I have says you can get good results
    with many different imagers all the way from P&S to webcams to DSLRs
    if you do image stacking.

    One thing that article in the link above doesn't tell you (but a link
    to another article in there does say) is that you can get an
    un-touched (non-signal processed) RAW sensor image from Nikon DSLRs
    like the D200 and I'm guessing the D300 also. The trick is to use the
    Long Exposure NR function where it takes a picture with a long
    exposure (over 8 seconds) and then automatically takes a dark frame
    exposure afterwards to subtract from the first one. If you turn the
    camera off during that dark frame exposure and then back on, the
    original RAW picture is saved as an unaltered NEF without any kind of
    noise reduction processing applied. Doing that negates the objection
    to astronomical use for Nikon DSLRs in that article.

    Steve
     
    Steve, Apr 16, 2008
    #7
  8. adm

    adm Guest

    That's quite right - I have a specialist, cooled CCD for deep sky astro
    stuff - I just want to use the D300 for "pretty" things - like the moon and
    various large dright nebulae. No serious stuff.....
     
    adm, Apr 16, 2008
    #8
  9. adm

    adm Guest

    Thanks. But I already know that. I want to know the actual pixel size in
    microns though, as well as the true available imaging area size of the
    sensor, not just the nominal size and pixel count.
     
    adm, Apr 16, 2008
    #9
  10. adm

    adm Guest

    Thanks. I had read his D70 page some time ago, but good to see it's updated
    for the D300 and D3.

    However - I'm not really interested in "serious" astrophotography with the
    D300 - just "pretty" stuff. I already have a more specialist cooled CCD
    camera for serious stuff. It has a much smaller sensor though and I want to
    play with the D300.
     
    adm, Apr 16, 2008
    #10
  11. adm

    Norm Dresner Guest

    |
    | | > | > | Hi,
    | > |
    | > | Does anyone know the exact sensor (pixel area part) dimensions and
    pixel
    | > | sizes of the sensor used in the Nikon D300? I want to try and work out
    | > the
    | > | field of view I will get if I attach it to my telescope. (It's
    | > effectively
    | > a
    | > | 2500mm f/10 lens....)
    | > |
    | >
    | > It's 2/3 the size of a 35mm film frame which is nominally 24x36mm. The
    | > dimensions of the array are 4288x2848 which your camera would tell you
    if
    | > you asked it to.
    | >
    | > Norm
    |
    | Thanks. But I already know that. I want to know the actual pixel size in
    | microns though, as well as the true available imaging area size of the
    | sensor, not just the nominal size and pixel count.

    You can't do simple arithmetic?

    2/3 x 24mm / 2848 is the vertical dimension of the pixel.

    Norm
     
    Norm Dresner, Apr 16, 2008
    #11
  12. adm

    Guest Guest

    it's easy to calculate.

    the sensor is 23.6 x 15.8mm and produces an image of 4288 x 2848
    pixels. dividing, you get 5.5 micron pixels.
     
    Guest, Apr 16, 2008
    #12
  13. adm

    adm Guest

    What about the gaps between the individual photosites - what size are they?

    The actual individual photosite size is going to be somewhat smaller than
    simply taking the sensor size and dividing it by resolutiuon.

    As an example, if I look at a Sony ExView HAD CCD (ICX285AQ) chip, the
    sensor dimension is 10.2 x 8.3mm with a resolution of 1434 x 1050 pixels to
    give a resolution of c.1.5M, yet the pixel size is 6.45u x 6.45u

    If I just divide the size of the sensor by the resolution, it gives me 1581
    pixels x 1286 pixels, or conversely a 7.11u x 7.9u pixel.

    So in reality, the actual photosite size is significantly smaller than the
    result obtained by dividing the outside dimension of the sensor by the
    number of pixels.

    Anyway, no big deal and I don't want to argue about it.....I was interested
    in the actual size of the photosites for the sakes of comparison and maybe
    using the terminology pixel wasn't the best way to go about it. I can get my
    FOV and arcsec/pixel number with the simple arithmetic approach (0.46
    arcsec/pixel, 32.4 x 21.7 arcmin FOV)
     
    adm, Apr 16, 2008
    #13
  14. adm

    Guest Guest

    the microlenses give you close to a 100% fill factor. it's not really
    significant.
     
    Guest, Apr 16, 2008
    #14
  15. adm

    Robert Coe Guest

    : : |
    : | : | > : | > | Hi,
    : | > |
    : | > | Does anyone know the exact sensor (pixel area part) dimensions and pixel
    : | > | sizes of the sensor used in the Nikon D300? I want to try and work out
    : | > | the field of view I will get if I attach it to my telescope. (It's
    : | > effectively
    : | > a
    : | > | 2500mm f/10 lens....)
    : | > |
    : | >
    : | > It's 2/3 the size of a 35mm film frame which is nominally 24x36mm. The
    : | > dimensions of the array are 4288x2848 which your camera would tell you
    : | > if you asked it to.
    : | >
    : | > Norm
    : |
    : | Thanks. But I already know that. I want to know the actual pixel size in
    : | microns though, as well as the true available imaging area size of the
    : | sensor, not just the nominal size and pixel count.
    :
    : You can't do simple arithmetic?
    :
    : 2/3 x 24mm / 2848 is the vertical dimension of the pixel.

    If you don't know the answer, why don't you just say so, instead of insulting
    the questioner? There's no shame in being ignorant, unless you are and pretend
    you're not.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Apr 17, 2008
    #15
  16. adm

    Norm Dresner Guest

    | : | : |
    | : | | : | > | : | > | Hi,
    | : | > |
    | : | > | Does anyone know the exact sensor (pixel area part) dimensions and
    pixel
    | : | > | sizes of the sensor used in the Nikon D300? I want to try and work
    out
    | : | > | the field of view I will get if I attach it to my telescope. (It's
    | : | > effectively
    | : | > a
    | : | > | 2500mm f/10 lens....)
    | : | > |
    | : | >
    | : | > It's 2/3 the size of a 35mm film frame which is nominally 24x36mm.
    The
    | : | > dimensions of the array are 4288x2848 which your camera would tell
    you
    | : | > if you asked it to.
    | : | >
    | : | > Norm
    | : |
    | : | Thanks. But I already know that. I want to know the actual pixel size
    in
    | : | microns though, as well as the true available imaging area size of the
    | : | sensor, not just the nominal size and pixel count.
    | :
    | : You can't do simple arithmetic?
    | :
    | : 2/3 x 24mm / 2848 is the vertical dimension of the pixel.
    |
    | If you don't know the answer, why don't you just say so, instead of
    insulting
    | the questioner? There's no shame in being ignorant, unless you are and
    pretend
    | you're not.
    |
    | Bob

    The size of the pixel is given by the formula I presented!
    Norm
     
    Norm Dresner, Apr 17, 2008
    #16
  17. Ah, yes, Nikons' "RAW", nicely "de-starred".
    And how they can!
    Found 10 planets in 6 months, too! (And I am quite sure they
    repair these delaminating lenses avery half hour, Rita!)

    http://www.superwasp.org/

    Beat that, Nikon! :->

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Apr 17, 2008
    #17
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.