Tyler, Since you are a far more accomplished imager than I am, all I can provide you is my best reasoning as to what would be the better selection. Use the Lumenera Infinity 2-1 monochrome camera. I have not used one, but it is the gold-standard among advanced amateur imagers who make publish the best lunar images on the web.  If a high effective focal length is used as I suggest, you will have wasted space on the large chip size provided by the Lumenera 2-1, but you can simply crop the image during processing or use its region-of-interest feature as you purpose. As background materials related to me answering the why of your question, please see See Sinnott's Effective Focal Length to Pixel Size nomogram, url - http://media.skyandtelescope.com/images/Linked.gif - and the more detailed discussion in another message in the LCROSS Observation newsgroup regarding the difference between the lucky imaging strategy used by lunar and planetary imagers and the larger seeing disk based strategy employeed in traditional DSO imagers - Post by K. Fisher 9-8-2009 LCROSS Observation Group Efls for imaging the LCROSS impact http://groups.google.com/group/lcross_observation/msg/764ceeede969207a http://tinyurl.com/owkdf7 Additionally, please review slides 28, 46 and 50 of my revised slide presentation.  Slides 28 and 50 show a line profile histogram bisecting the shadowed and light portions of Cabeus A1 and Cabeus A taken 9-10-2009.  Slide 50 concerns TFOV and lunar glare.  You may need to redownload the presentation that grabbed this morning.  For lurkers, the Freid parameter is mentioned below.  The Freid parameter numerically estimates the maximum diameter aperature that can be supported given good seeing conditions at a given wavelenght.  The poorer the seeing, the larger the arcsec size of the seeing disk, and the lower maximum aperature that can be effectively used.  The imaging strategies should focus on the profile line histogram across the shadowed floor of Cabeus A1.  The imaging objective is to record the smallest pixel value changes in that line profile that your gear and circumstances permit. It is qualitatively true that smaller aperatures have relatively better Freid parameter than larger aperatures, but here we purpose to use small sized pixel elements, extra long focal lengths, and fast camera frame rates to beat both a 1 or 2 arcsec seeing limit and the Freid parameter.  Therefore, in this "lucky lunar" imaging strategy, smaller aperatures (130mm) lose their inherent Freid parameter advantage over larger aperatures above 254mm.  "Beating the seeing" by using lucky imaging, you access the greater resolution and smaller arcsec Airy disks (0.6 arcsecs at 254mm at 254mm of aperature vs 1.1 arcsecs for 130mm of aperature) that Dawes limit describes for larger, as opposed to smaller aperatures. The larger size of the Airy disk inherent to smaller aperatures also works against you in the instant context. The target is a linear object 5.6 arcsecs long by 1.7 arcsecs high.  If you use a smaller aperature with an Airy disk size of 1.1 arcsecs, odds are that the brighter value pixels related to the adjacent sunlit surface area outside of the crater rim of Cabeus A1 will be blended in and averaged with the pixel values in the shadowed portion of the crater.  This will reduce the lowest pixel value that you will be able to extract out of the shadowed portion of Cabeus A1.  By using a larger aperature and lucky imaging, you should be able to grab 0.6 arcsec Airy disks and the pixels of the surrounding surface area will be cleanly separated from the pixels of the dark shadowed area. With respect to the large chip size of the Lumerina 2-1, in the instant case you want to use  effective focal length to match pixel element size to telescope resolution.  Do not use an effective focal length to match chip size to an asthetic image scale to better "frame" the target.  The reason for this is lunar glare, as illustrated in Slide 58 of the slide presentation. Lunar glare is directly proportional to the fraction of the lunar disk captured on your telescope's TFOV.  Lunar glare pervasively floods the entire TFOV.  Flocking, aperature masking or a Lyott mask is not going to make it go away.  The only remedy is to use a high efl to reduce the fraction of the sunlit portion of the Moon's disk that goes through your optical system. The effect of a relatively higher lunar glare is to raise the minimum pixel value that you can record from the shadowed portion of Cabeus A1. Finally, the extra aperature gives you some extra insurance against the ejecta plume being fainter than the pre-impact prediction model that has been issued by the LCROSS Team. If it looks like the plume is not reaching its expected brightness over the 30 second post-impact time frame, you can up the gain on your camera and utilize the superior light gathering power of the 254mm mirror as compared to a 130mm lens. All of this being said, the test imaging that I have done was using a Meade ETX at 125mm of aperature. My 254mm GEM mounted Newt would have been the better technical tool to use, but most of the test imaging times were during the work week and in the early morning hours.  It was simply easier to setup the Meade ETX and make some images under those work day constraints than to setup and use the 254mm GEM-mounted scope. On the impact day,  I intend to set up two scopes - an imaging 254mm GEM - and use the Meade ETX 125mm for visual observing under conditions of good seeing.  I found the Meade ETX 125mm with a 4mm TMB eyepiece more than adequate for seeing into the shadowed portion of Cabeus A1 with good resolution.  If I have a particular rough work week and don't have the personal energy to cart the 10" Newt around, I will happily arrive and setup only the Meade ETX 125mm.  However, other club members should understand that I'm a pretty big guy and this will give me a comparative ex-football player advantage over Patrick when it comes to elbowing other club members away from the Grimm's eyepiece. -:) I hope that outlines the applicable considerations and helps you make your final imaging gear choice. A final disclaimer - my opinions on the optimal imaging strategy differ from those published by the LCROSS Team on their Citizen Science About page.  You should compare my minority opinion to their recommendations.  http://apps.nasa.gov/lcross/about/ Clear Skies - Kurt     Author: Tyler Allred Date: 2009-09-16 10:40 -600 To: 'Utah Astronomy' Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] LCROSS Guide to observing and imaging Kurt, Thanks. This pdf was excellent and very informative. I am thinking about setting up my AP130 with a 5X Barlow to record the event. I also have a Lumenera Infinity 2-1 monochrome camera that is capable of very high frame rates. The camera has a 1.4 megapixel (1392 X 1040) sensor with 4.65um pixels. I think this camera may be excellent for recording the event. It is possible to select a smaller portion of the sensor for recording to the computer, if using the full sensor does not add any meaningful data. I could set up my own equipment, but perhaps the Lumenera would better utilized by attaching it to a scope that is larger than my AP. I know that the AP is capable of incredible resolution, but still the camera may be better used on a really large aperture scope. What are your thoughts on the matter? Do you have any ideas for how best to take advantage of this exquisite little camera? Is there a really good scope that is in need of an equally great camera? Let me know. Thanks, Tyler Allred PS - I know that sometimes smaller aperture scopes are less susceptable to atmospheric conditions than larger scopes, because of the scale of the turbulent structures in the atmosphere. Is it possible that the little AP is the best choice? Maybe??? I am interested in your opinion.