Sohonomura2020, thank you very much for your explanation. It seems to confirm that noise and banding does exist with the 464 modules (especially at higher gain values). I don't quite understand how the manufacturers of commercial astrocams can manage this. I tried a deep-sky- object and yes i was able to catch some details with the 464, but with the HQ cam (binned mode 2x2), which was supposed to be much noisier and much less sensitive (no "Starvis"), I was able to capture more details in low light.
I've been experimenting a bit over the week. Even though the HCG mode greatly reduces the banding compared to the LCG mode, I felt that there remains a stronger background noise.
A frame exposed as short as possible (lense cap on) shows this noise with the IMX477. Both frames Gain 16.:
For IMX462 this:
So maybe the commercial providers have a better tuned driver here to fully use the "Starvis" feature in long exposures with high gains. Or its me doing something the wrong way![;)]( "Wink")
.If anyone else has an idea, I'd be happy to try something out.
Best Regards,
Mat
I've been experimenting a bit over the week. Even though the HCG mode greatly reduces the banding compared to the LCG mode, I felt that there remains a stronger background noise.
A frame exposed as short as possible (lense cap on) shows this noise with the IMX477. Both frames Gain 16.:
So maybe the commercial providers have a better tuned driver here to fully use the "Starvis" feature in long exposures with high gains. Or its me doing something the wrong way
.If anyone else has an idea, I'd be happy to try something out.Best Regards,
Mat
Statistics: Posted by Mat_astro — Sat Jan 27, 2024 9:19 am