[Aavso-photometry] In defense of the ST-9 & CCD choice Considerations

[mlfleenor at charter.net]

Yes that was a private communication however I stand by my assessment- The ST8xe is better than the ST9xe for photometry applications for the reasons I mentioned and yes that is an opinion… based in part on experience.  I never said it was a bad camera! I am glad you like your camera-you paid a lot of money for it and should be happy.


I actually borrowed an ST9XE when I was looking for a  second camera for “serious” science a few years ago. Why? Time and time again I was directed to the ST-9xe as it was described to me as “SBIG’s scientific workhorse.” No doubt- much good science has been done with that sensor. 

I performed  CCD characterization (Berry and Burnel,l  AIP4Win )  and I found it nearly twice as noisy as an engineering grade KAF1602E I had installed in a Genesis diy camera system. I might have considered it further however I was less than impressed with its performance on my scope when compared with the 1602E chip. My skies are most often in the 3-3.5” range which I would consider typical for amateurs in the US. 

 I also have found that I can get great results while not paying too much attention to the silly 2”/pixel requirement. I certainly wouldn’t consider that as the primary factor for selecting a sensor. ( I run 0.62”/pix or 1.24”/pix with my ST10xme and 14” SCT )  You can easily deviate from this and achieve superb results. QE, noise and FOV are much more important to me.

Finally- I would gladly use an ST-9 cam…till I found someone who would trade it for an ST8  ;-)

Mike











--
Mike Fleenor
Volunteer Observatory
Knoxville, TN
www.mikefleenor.com