Deep Sky Photography with EQ-5 mount

[Ant-33]

Folks, I have a Skywatcher 200p on an EQ-5 mount, and I want to do some guided deep sky astrophotography. As you will quickly tell me, the mount isn't up to it – so I have to decide what to do from here. The bottom line is I can't afford to upgrade to a more stable mount, so that's a non-starter (even second hand).

What I'm thinking of doing is to sell the 200p and get a 150p-DS instead. That saves me enough weight that I can put it on the EQ-5 with my EOS1100D camera, a small guide-scope and guide camera, and still be almost 1kg within the payload limit for the EQ-5.

The numbers go something like this (all in KG):

Skywatcher 150p-DS OTA   6.0

EOS 1100D                         0.6

Orion Mini 50 guide scope  0.5

Webcam guide camera       0.2

Other bits                            1.0

Total weight                         8.3

Payload limit for EQ-5         9.1

(The Skywatcher 200p on my scales weighs in at 9.2 kg. That's too heavy before I even put a camera on it)

So, my questions are:

Is it okay (i.e. stable enough) to be within 1kg of the payload limit?

Is there a better configuration for DS observing/photography that I can use on this mount without a noticeably higher budget?

The bottom line is I'm working with a constrained budget and I'm a beginner, so I'm looking to do what I can to get a reasonably versatile deep sky AP setup with modest outlay.

Thanks in advance for your wisdom, advice and opinions.

Ant

[Helite]

How about selling the 200p and getting yourself an 80ED?

[Dave_D]

I'm using a Vixen GP which is apparently almost identical to an EQ5 and it's currently running with 11kg of kit on it (10" f4.8 newt and EOS 1100D). Yes, it isn't ideal but i'm getting some good pics so all is not lost. Obviously not as rigid as eq6 class mounts which is what i plan to upgrade to at some point, but as long as i don't shuffle round near the scope when it's exposing, it seems to handle the weight reasonably well.

[Ant-33]

Helite, Would you say the 80 ED is a better scope for Deep Sky AP than the reflector?

[Dave_D]

Here's a few pics using the equipment i just mentioned http://www.flickr.com/photos/108709876@N05/sets/72157638094033203/

[Ant-33]

I'm using a Vixen GP which is apparently almost identical to an EQ5 and it's currently running with 11kg of kit on it (10" f4.8 newt and EOS 1100D). Yes, it isn't ideal but i'm getting some good pics so all is not lost. Obviously not as rigid as eq6 class mounts which is what i plan to upgrade to at some point, but as long as i don't shuffle round near the scope when it's exposing, it seems to handle the weight reasonably well.

Yes, I've tried a little bit with the 200p, and it does okay, but with the camera it soon starts to sway about a little too much - I don't think it'll take it if I add a guide scope too! Maybe I'm being too careful?

[poogle]

Have a look at some of Quatermass images here: astrocasto.blogspot.com

The mount is up for it if you're up for it That being said, it's not easy and requires lots of hard work and dedication.

But since you already have the gear, why not give it a try with what you've got? I started out with a EQ3-2 with a 150p and added tracking motors and a small finderguider. That got me going with this hobby for the first two years. Sure, I were limited by the mount but it was still very rewarding knowing that I got some results I could be proud of.

Is your EQ5 equipped with motors? In that case you only need to invest in a finderguider, which can then be reused when upgrading your mount.

/Patrik

[Ant-33]

Here's a few pics using the equipment i just mentioned http://www.flickr.com/photos/108709876@N05/sets/72157638094033203/

Dave, Those are awesome photos! Thanks for the link. Are you using autoguiding, or just tracking? I'm just curious, because my 8" 200p comes out heavier than that with a guide scope, but lighter without. To be honest, if I can take photos like the ones you've just shown, I'd be jumping with joy.

[Dave_D]

Dave, Those are awesome photos! Thanks for the link. Are you using autoguiding, or just tracking? I'm just curious, because my 8" 200p comes out heavier than that with a guide scope, but lighter without. To be honest, if I can take photos like the ones you've just shown, I'd be jumping with joy.

these are all unguided using subs between 30 and 40 seconds from my back garden with 2 streetlights in direct view.  light pollution is bad here just south of manchester so i can't go much above 40 seconds

[Ant-33]

Have a look at some of Quatermass images here: astrocasto.blogspot.com

The mount is up for it if you're up for it That being said, it's not easy and requires lots of hard work and dedication.

But since you already have the gear, why not give it a try with what you've got? I started out with a EQ3-2 with a 150p and added tracking motors and a small finderguider. That got me going with this hobby for the first two years. Sure, I were limited by the mount but it was still very rewarding knowing that I got some results I could be proud of.

Is your EQ5 equipped with motors? In that case you only need to invest in a finderguider, which can then be reused when upgrading your mount.

/Patrik

Patrik, Thanks for the encouragement I don't mind a bit of hard work - I just don't want to be flogging a dead horse. I've tried a bit of photography with the 200p on the EQ-5 mount, but maybe I haven't given it enough time. I certainly need to acquire some skills to be proficient at this. At the moment I have a RA motor, but I'm planning to upgrade to two axis motors and convert the handset with an ST4 interface so I can use PHD (with the usb interface, of course). That's next on the list. I guess now you come to mention it, when I can control the mount from the computer, any instability becomes easier to handle, so maybe I should get to that point before I commit to selling the 200p.

[Ant-33]

these are all unguided using subs between 30 and 40 seconds from my back garden with 2 streetlights in direct view.  light pollution is bad here just south of manchester so i can't go much above 40 seconds

Dave, Dude, I'm seriously impressed with your skills! What you're saying is I could be doing photos like those with the gear I already have (but without these darned clouds). You've inspired me to try a lot more with the gear I've got before I start thinking of exchanging it. Thank you.

[Dave_D]

Have a look at some of Quatermass images here: astrocasto.blogspot.com

The mount is up for it if you're up for it That being said, it's not easy and requires lots of hard work and dedication.

But since you already have the gear, why not give it a try with what you've got? I started out with a EQ3-2 with a 150p and added tracking motors and a small finderguider. That got me going with this hobby for the first two years. Sure, I were limited by the mount but it was still very rewarding knowing that I got some results I could be proud of.

Is your EQ5 equipped with motors? In that case you only need to invest in a finderguider, which can then be reused when upgrading your mount.

/Patrik

I wish i'd seen the video on that site before i splashed out on the eq5 synscan upgrade as i already had dual axis drives which are now just sat in a box under my bed 

[Dave_D]

Dave, Dude, I'm seriously impressed with your skills! What you're saying is I could be doing photos like those with the gear I already have (but without these darned clouds). You've inspired me to try a lot more with the gear I've got before I start thinking of exchanging it. Thank you.

I've only been doing astrophotography since the beginning of this month so i'm nowhere near 'skilled' yet 

[Ant-33]

I wish i'd seen the video on that site before i splashed out on the eq5 synscan upgrade as i already had dual axis drives which are now just sat in a box under my bed 

I'm dropping you a pm about those motors

[Ant-33]

I've only been doing astrophotography since the beginning of this month so i'm nowhere near 'skilled' yet 

Now you're impressing me even more!!

[Helite]

Helite, Would you say the 80 ED is a better scope for Deep Sky AP than the reflector?

I haven't actually managed to get any imaging done with the 80ED yet, but have had a dry run with all my kit (ST-80, synguider, Camera) mounted on the EQ5 and the mount handles it better than the 200p. I have had the 200p and whole guiding set-up loaded on the EQ5, it is possible as Dave_D says.

Quatermass was also an encouraging factor in me choosing the EQ5, I seen the images he was pulling and that convinced me, at the time I was looking for the biggest scope I could get with a GOTO mount, I then realised once more kit started getting stuck on it was putting a lot of load on the mount.

I chose to get the 80ED knowing it would be easier on the mount, I will be getting a HEQ5 eventually but figured I could have another scope to use on the EQ5. It seemed like a highly rated scope for the money and I seen a lot of images from folk on here taken with one that blew my socks off, I would definitely reccomend getting one if you are sticking with the EQ5 for a bit. But that's just my opinion. 

[Ant-33]

I haven't actually managed to get any imaging done with the 80ED yet, but have had a dry run with all my kit (ST-80, synguider, Camera) mounted on the EQ5 and the mount handles it better than the 200p. I have had the 200p and whole guiding set-up loaded on the EQ5, it is possible as Dave_D says.

Quatermass was also an encouraging factor in me choosing the EQ5, I seen the images he was pulling and that convinced me, at the time I was looking for the biggest scope I could get with a GOTO mount, I then realised once more kit started getting stuck on it was putting a lot of load on the mount.

I chose to get the 80ED knowing it would be easier on the mount, I will be getting a HEQ5 eventually but figured I could have another scope to use on the EQ5. It seemed like a highly rated scope for the money and I seen a lot of images from folk on here taken with one that blew my socks off, I would definitely reccomend getting one if you are sticking with the EQ5 for a bit. But that's just my opinion. 

Thanks, Helite, yes, I've seen a lot of good things said about the scope and I've seen some pretty good images taken using one. It's definitely a good option if I'm going to trade in for a different scope.

[lensman57]

Folks, I have a Skywatcher 200p on an EQ-5 mount, and I want to do some guided deep sky astrophotography. As you will quickly tell me, the mount isn't up to it – so I have to decide what to do from here. The bottom line is I can't afford to upgrade to a more stable mount, so that's a non-starter (even second hand).

What I'm thinking of doing is to sell the 200p and get a 150p-DS instead. That saves me enough weight that I can put it on the EQ-5 with my EOS1100D camera, a small guide-scope and guide camera, and still be almost 1kg within the payload limit for the EQ-5.

The numbers go something like this (all in KG):

Skywatcher 150p-DS OTA   6.0

EOS 1100D                         0.6

Orion Mini 50 guide scope  0.5

Webcam guide camera       0.2

Other bits                            1.0

Total weight                         8.3

Payload limit for EQ-5         9.1

(The Skywatcher 200p on my scales weighs in at 9.2 kg. That's too heavy before I even put a camera on it)

So, my questions are:

Is it okay (i.e. stable enough) to be within 1kg of the payload limit?

Is there a better configuration for DS observing/photography that I can use on this mount without a noticeably higher budget?

The bottom line is I'm working with a constrained budget and I'm a beginner, so I'm looking to do what I can to get a reasonably versatile deep sky AP setup with modest outlay.

Thanks in advance for your wisdom, advice and opinions.

Ant

I suggest you try it first before thinking of changing. The crucial points are first as accurate a polar alignment as you can do, you will have to do this even if you bought a mount with £3000.00 price tag, and then  having the scope perfectly balanced in both RA and DEC and this is the deal breaker if your scope is on the mounts weight  limit. You will also have to watch out for even the slightest breeze as it will deflect the scope. There are a couple of guys in the imaging section that use a 200p with an EQ5 with good success. I used to have an EQ5 up untill 3 months ago and I managed 900s subs with an SW 100 ED DS pro, a 90 mm guidescope and camera mounted. I think the total weight  was about 8kg, the 100 ED is physically quite a long scope with an FL of 900mm.

Regards,

A.G

[sidelight]

Hi,

A 200P on an EQ5 is what got me started.  If you have the patience you can get images.  I'm only a novice at this but I have attached a copy of the Horsehead Nebula I did with that kit, using a dual motor kit with a shoestring controller, guided using the finderscope with a QHY5 plugged into it.  These were taken with an unmodified canon EOS 450d a LP filter and a coma corrector and if I recall were probably 5 minute subs.  

Cheers
Ross

[Ant-33]

I suggest you try it first before thinking of changing. The crucial points are first as accurate a polar alignment as you can do, you will have to do this even if you bought a mount with £3000.00 price tag, and then  having the scope perfectly balanced in both RA and DEC and this is the deal breaker if your scope is on the mounts weight  limit. You will also have to watch out for even the slightest breeze as it will deflect the scope. There are a couple of guys in the imaging section that use a 200p with an EQ5 with good success. I used to have an EQ5 up untill 3 months ago and I managed 900s subs with an SW 100 ED DS pro, a 90 mm guidescope and camera mounted. I think the total weight  was about 8kg, the 100 ED is physically quite a long scope with an FL of 900mm.

Regards,

A.G

That's pretty encouraging. I do most of my observing in the back garden, and we're pretty sheltered from the wind here, so most of the time I think that's manageable. I'm getting better at polar alignment, but it does take a little practice to get an accurate allignment. The polarscope is well centred, and with the help of polarfinder I don't do too badly unless I can't see Polaris - but on nights like that there's a limit to what I'll see anyway. Clear skies and good seeing are big limiting factors here, but I'm stuck with that, so I just work with what I've got.

I think if you were managing 600s exposures with a 200p plus guidance etc. on an EQ-5, then I should be able to do the same - as you say, it's down to getting the balance good, polar alignment accurate, and stand well back so as not to cause any movement. All achievable.

Thanks for the feedback

[Ant-33]

Hi,

A 200P on an EQ5 is what got me started.  If you have the patience you can get images.  I'm only a novice at this but I have attached a copy of the Horsehead Nebula I did with that kit, using a dual motor kit with a shoestring controller, guided using the finderscope with a QHY5 plugged into it.  These were taken with an unmodified canon EOS 450d a LP filter and a coma corrector and if I recall were probably 5 minute subs.  

Cheers

Ross

Ross, that's a really nice image. I think if I keep the weight as low as possible - interesting idea to use the finderscope for guiding - that saves weight straight away.

Thanks for the encouragement

[lensman57]

That's pretty encouraging. I do most of my observing in the back garden, and we're pretty sheltered from the wind here, so most of the time I think that's manageable. I'm getting better at polar alignment, but it does take a little practice to get an accurate allignment. The polarscope is well centred, and with the help of polarfinder I don't do too badly unless I can't see Polaris - but on nights like that there's a limit to what I'll see anyway. Clear skies and good seeing are big limiting factors here, but I'm stuck with that, so I just work with what I've got.

I think if you were managing 600s exposures with a 200p plus guidance etc. on an EQ-5, then I should be able to do the same - as you say, it's down to getting the balance good, polar alignment accurate, and stand well back so as not to cause any movement. All achievable.

Thanks for the feedback

I think that you have to try it before thinking of either upgrading the mount or changing the scope, the question for you is wether the FL of the 200P is suitable with the targets you have in mind, for widefield DSO imaging you need to use a DSLR to give you a decent FOV but the good point is that with an SW CC@ F0.9 you'd have a scope with an effective F ratio of 4.5 which is pretty fast in anyone's book. Most people including myself using an 80 ED will have to contend with either F7.5 or F6.4 , which is over a stop slower than F4.5.

Regards,

A.G

[PorkyB]

I have had some very pleasing results using my unguided 200P/EQ5 combo (see signature for Flickr link).  I know this setup has its limitations, but like so much in life there is lot you can do to work with what you've got.  I also have a 130PDS which i find easier to work with - the shorter focal length, lighter weight and reduced effects of wind all add up to make it a very capable scope, but I have no plans to retire my 200P anytime soon.

Obviously, with an unlimited budget I would like something better, but in the real world it's going to do fine for now.

[Ant-33]

I think that you have to try it before thinking of either upgrading the mount or changing the scope, the question for you is wether the FL of the 200P is suitable with the targets you have in mind, for widefield DSO imaging you need to use a DSLR to give you a decent FOV but the good point is that with an SW CC@ F0.9 you'd have a scope with an effective F ratio of 4.5 which is pretty fast in anyone's book. Most people including myself using an 80 ED will have to contend with either F7.5 or F6.4 , which is over a stop slower than F4.5.

Regards,

A.G

Hi, A.G. I guess I'll find out whether the FL is suitable, so I'll see what I can achieve with it. I confess, at the moment I didn't have a coma corrector on my shopping list, but now you come to mention it, once I'm getting good enough results to see the coma I'll probably want one I hadn't thought about the possibility of it making the scope faster, but that's a good point - I think f/5 is a pretty good starting point, but the faster the better up to a point.

The 80 ED looks a nice scope, and would be perfect on this mount, so maybe one day... I've already asked my wife for gear for this Christmas, so maybe next year

[Ant-33]

I have had some very pleasing results using my unguided 200P/EQ5 combo (see signature for Flickr link).  I know this setup has its limitations, but like so much in life there is lot you can do to work with what you've got.  I also have a 130PDS which i find easier to work with - the shorter focal length, lighter weight and reduced effects of wind all add up to make it a very capable scope, but I have no plans to retire my 200P anytime soon.

Obviously, with an unlimited budget I would like something better, but in the real world it's going to do fine for now.

There's some really nice photos there in your flickr feed. I'm finding it really encouraging to see so many people using a 200p on an EQ5 and getting good AP results. I think I've been a bit too easily put off by the obvious instability with the weight of a camera on it and the numerous posts saying the minimum for AP is the HEQ5 or the EQ6.