Who is using Nikon 1V3? Success?

[EmberSkyMedia]

I'm really enjoying BYN with my Z6 which is FF but sometimes I wish I could get a bit more reach with my scope, I saw that the Nikon 1 V3 (CX Sensor Size 2.7x Crop) was supported and I'm wondering if anyone has had any luck with it.

Thoughts on the J5? (It has the IMX183 chip).

If someone has used this camera it would be nice to see what photos they managed to capture from it.

[astroman133]

Not sure what you mean by "more reach". Do you mean wider FOV"? more sensitivity? more resolution? Can you explain?

I do not believe that anyone has brought up the J5 before you. It is not currently supported, according to the Supported Cameras grid.
 

[EmberSkyMedia]

Rick,

By more reach I'm referring to smaller pixel size and sensor (2.7x crop)
The Z6 is FX at 24MP, the V3 is CX at 18MP
Z6 Pixel Pitch is 5.92um
V3 Pixel Pitch is 2.51um

So it effective doubles your visual resolution (yes you will be taking more noise for that benefit).
F-Stop of your lens stays the same but the apparent magnification is 2.7x (so a RedCat51 goes from 250mm f/3.9 to 675mm f/3.9)

Given that Nikon Abandoned the CX sensor, I can pick up this camera cheaper than another telescope.

I hope that explains it.

[s3igell]

This description of "apparent magnification" is really only applicable for Cameras and Camera Lenses - where the Focal Length of the Lens has been "Standardized" based on the old 35mm Film Frame Size.

For a Telescope, the Focal Length is a simple product of the Optics, and is as-labelled on the Scope regardless of the Sensor being used.

However, the combination of Scope Focal Length and Sensor Dimensions (Frame Dimensions and Pixel Size) do define two Important Parameters:  Resolution and Field of View (the latter actually corresponding to the "Magnification" described in previous post).

There are formulas for these Parameters, but it is often most instructive to use an Astronomical FOV Calculator such as:  https://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/

Feeding the Sensor Dimensions for the two NIKON DSLRs in question and using the 250mm FL and 51mm Aperture of the Williams RedCat51, you get:

NIKON Z6:  Resolution of 4.88 arcsec/pixel and FOV of 8.18x5.47 Degrees

NIKON 1 v3:  Resolution of 2.08 as/pixel and FOV of 3.02x2.01 Degrees

Note:  The Dawes Limit of the RedCat51 is 2.27 arcsec, so the last bit of the added Pixel Resolution of the 1v3 is lost on this Scope (in even the Steadiest of Skies). (Dawes/Rayleigh Limit is the maximum resolving power of a Scope for a point-source such as a Star.)

[EmberSkyMedia]

I guess what you are saying is that while I'd get a tight FOV I wouldn't be getting any actually increase in resolution for the REDCAT51? So using the V3 wouldn't really anything to the image that I couldn't crop and then digitally expand to match the FOV from the Z6.

[s3igell]

10 hours ago, EmberSkyMedia said:

I guess what you are saying is that while I'd get a tight FOV I wouldn't be getting any actually increase in resolution for the REDCAT51? So using the V3 wouldn't really anything to the image that I couldn't crop and then digitally expand to match the FOV from the Z6.

You can do most Anything in Digital Post Processing - but there will come a point where Resizing or Cropping will run short of the original Native Resolution of the Image Captured.  Minor Defects captured in the Original will become Glaring Issues, or Desired Detail will Disappear.  These Issues happen Sooner and are More Apparent in AP Images because of the Dearth of Original Signal Captured - Daytime Photos have absolute Floods of Photons while in Nighttime Images Every Photon Captured becomes Important.

Yes, as I showed above:  The RedCat51/1v3 combo will have greater Optical Resolution (realistically with decent Skies about 3as/pixel) than the RedCat51/Z6 combo at ~5as/pixel.

And:  That added Resolution will work both with you - to capture greater Depth of Detail - and against you - to capture evidence of any Start Trailing or Vibration.

[EmberSkyMedia]

On 1/23/2020 at 7:52 AM, s3igell said:

You can do most Anything in Digital Post Processing - but there will come a point where Resizing or Cropping will run short of the original Native Resolution of the Image Captured.  Minor Defects captured in the Original will become Glaring Issues, or Desired Detail will Disappear.  These Issues happen Sooner and are More Apparent in AP Images because of the Dearth of Original Signal Captured - Daytime Photos have absolute Floods of Photons while in Nighttime Images Every Photon Captured becomes Important.

Yes, as I showed above:  The RedCat51/1v3 combo will have greater Optical Resolution (realistically with decent Skies about 3as/pixel) than the RedCat51/Z6 combo at ~5as/pixel.

And:  That added Resolution will work both with you - to capture greater Depth of Detail - and against you - to capture evidence of any Start Trailing or Vibration.

Basically looking at “doubling” resolution without buying another scope, and a small compact sensor camera has other uses (basically replace some other camera gear I have that doesn’t work well for Astro).

[admin]

I was just able to fix this for the 1V3.

A big thank you to "vidrazor" for lending me his Nikon 1V3 camera for testing.