Astro Picts.

[Jon Ruyle]

There is a huge difference in a Celestron CG5 GT Mount and an AP Mach 1 GTO. Even if you were to push the load limits it would still track better than mine.

Sure- well, there had better be a difference, anyway. []

Increasing the SNR you're also increasing the Dynamic range which might make it appear, or make you think that you have increased exposure length, when instead you're only revealing those fainter details because there is less noise blocking them. Does that make any sense?

Sure it does. In some sense, SNR is all that matters. That and quantization noise.

Anyways, I was one of those who thought multiple exposure added up to a greater exposure length, E.g 10 x 60 seconds would equal to 10 minutes exposure. I was wrong, through trial and error I have learned differently.

If there is a difference, it is due to read noise, and maybe thermal noise. With exposures that short, I believe it. But if you compare a single 100 minute exposure to 10 10-minute exposures, I doubt you would see a difference. (Assuming you overexpose in the 100 minute exposure).

If you really want to get those faint details you will need longer exposures.

Even read noise can be overcome with large samples. There is no limit to what you can resolve with 1 minute exposures, provided you take enough of them.


I agree with you- noise level apparent in a single frame is not important.