- #1
Clever Penguin
- 74
- 20
Is the monetary savings in buying a cheap CCD (£10-£250) outweighed by the performance of an expensive CCD (£700+)?
You think maybe it depends on the application?Clever Penguin said:Is the monetary savings in buying a cheap CCD (£10-£250) outweighed by the performance of an expensive CCD (£700+)?
Clever Penguin said:Is the monetary savings in buying a cheap CCD (£10-£250) outweighed by the performance of an expensive CCD (£700+)?
Chronos said:Besides, the DSLR is a much easier sell if you are married given a CCD is only good for AP.
Drakkith said:But seriously, Chronos is probably right. A half-decent DSLR, once modified to attach to a telescope, should do very well for someone starting out in astrophotography. The large chip allows your to find your target easier and take pictures of large objects that even expensive CCD's would need a shorter focal length telescope to image.
Clever Penguin said:I don't have a telescope yet, but I'm looking at the Sky-Watcher Heritage 130P Table-top Dobsonian for £129. It got a good review in 'Astronomy Now' magazine.
Drakkith said:That will do just fine for a small, easy to use telescope, but you cannot really do astrophotography with it. You'll need some kind of motorized mount, preferably one with a built-in catalog of objects it can point itself to. And that's not cheap. Unfortunately this is not a hobby for the faint of heart (or wallet).
Clever Penguin said:Hopefully I can spend my student finance (all £3,881) on a good telescope and camera![]()
The main difference between a cheap and expensive CCD (Charge-Coupled Device) is the quality of the components and materials used in its construction. More expensive CCDs typically use higher-grade materials and have better quality control, resulting in better image quality and durability.
In general, yes, there is a significant difference in image quality between a cheap and expensive CCD. Expensive CCDs often have better sensors, more pixels, and advanced features such as noise reduction and wider dynamic range, resulting in clearer and more detailed images.
It depends on the specific needs of the professional. Cheap CCDs may be suitable for basic photography or amateur use, but for professional use, it is generally recommended to invest in a higher quality and more expensive CCD for better performance and reliability.
Generally, yes, cheap CCDs tend to have a shorter lifespan compared to expensive ones. This is because cheap CCDs may use lower quality materials and have less rigorous quality control, resulting in a higher likelihood of malfunction or failure over time.
The main advantage of using a cheap CCD is the lower cost, making it more accessible for those with a limited budget. Additionally, cheap CCDs may be suitable for basic photography needs or as a backup camera for professionals. However, the trade-off is often lower quality images and a shorter lifespan compared to expensive CCDs.