Re: TASS - PSFs

[droege@wwa.com]

Mike and all,

My problem with the V may be that I have a completely different
lens in V.  I have run out of the Aubel lenses.  I have some 
Canon and Nikon coming.  It will be interesting to see how they
look.

Tom 

On Wed, 27 Aug 1997, Michael Gutzwiller <deepsky@fuse.net> wrote:
>droege@wwa.com wrote:
>> 
>> I have been focusing and adjusting the VCO.  The best I can do is:
>>   Camera                      PSF
>> V  (Camera O)                 3X9
>> R  (Camera 1)                 5x7
>> I  (Camera 2)                 7x7
>> 
>> The PSF seems to stretch out much more than can be explained by the
>> VCO setting.  I can get numbers like 3x5 for V with the optimum VCO
>> setting for V, but then the R and I numbers get much worse.  I assume
>> that the minimum area for all three is what I want to work for??  What
>> say Mike?
>
>Minimal area is correct.  The smaller the area of the PSF the better the
>separation from other stars and the better the statistics.
>> 
>> The PSF above is what comes out of Star in the star list.
>> 
>> How do these numbers compare with what the rest of you are seeing?
>>
>
>They arre comparable.  I have had great difficulty getting the I
>filtered PSFs to be smaller than 7x7 though I usually can get V to 5x5
>at the same time.  I don't seem to be seeing as much disparity in focal
>length between the two as you are getting.
>