It looks like, for AFGL 4029 combined images, ds1 and ds5 agree to within 5% in the Dec2010 data. This implies that the offset is a result of the individual scans instead of coadds, though for the individual observations ds1>ds5 pretty uniformly.
It looks like, for AFGL 4029 combined images, ds1 and ds5 agree to within 5% in the Dec2010 data. This implies that the offset is a result of the individual scans instead of coadds, though for the individual observations ds1>ds5 pretty uniformly.