Gearing Up for Beginner Lunar AP

[dfish]

Hello SGL -- Having lurked here for a couple of years and having been interested in celestial navigation, digital (terrestrial) photography, and binocular stargazing (in an orange zone), I'd like to begin to explore lunar imaging and to a lesser degree wide-field AP -- and am trying to sort out where to start and what the path forward from there might be.

As a beginner, I encounter these kinds of options and was hoping to get feedback on these and alternative recommendations (with apologies for the number of questions!):
 

1. SkyWatcher AllView alone or with Polarie tracker? -- This appeals to me for its dual use capability as a panning camera mount, but also I note that the AllViewhas lunar tracking, though as an Alt-AZ cannot handle rotation.  For lunar imaging with this can I simply shoot multiple frames and/or video and use post processing software to automatically handle rotation? 
   Does it make any sense to use the AllView (assuming I can justify the purchase based on terrestrial use) as a tripod to mount a tracker like the Polarie (in this case I'd use the motorized mount simply to polar align)?  Or would I be just stacking up less stability?
   
   http://www.skynews.ca/review-allview-mount/
    
2. iOptron SkyTracker vs. Vixen Polarie for Lunar -- The iOptron SkyTracker and Polarie both seem to get decent reviews up to moderate focal lengths, and the SkyTracker is significantly less expensive vs. Polarie with polar scope.  However, I notice that the Polarie has a lunar rate -- how important is this for lunar imaging and for what typeof lunar imaging?
    
3. iOptron SkyGuidier Alternative? -- This uses many of the components of the ZEQ25 mount and, while reviews are scarce, seems to have fewere reports of quality and tuning issues than the ZEQ25 (which I understand can be very good once any issues are resolved).  Pricing is not far off from a Polarie with full kit and tripod.  Curious to know what SGL folks might think of this option...
    
4. Other Tracker Options Available in the USA / SkyWatcher StarAdventurer, iOptron SmartEQ Pro, Polarie Advanced Polaris Photoguider, Losmandy Starlapse? -- Would welcome feedback and observations on these as well as additional tracker options..
    
5. Trackers vs.  EQ Mount Such as Orion Sirius EQ-G or Celestron AVX -- I'm also trying to sort out the merits of simply stepping up straight away to an EQ mount and skipping the trackers, reasonably light weight is a consideration but I don't find the Sirius or AVX too daunting in this regard.
    
6. Canon DSLR vs. Video, CMOS Planetary, or CCD Imagers?  -- At present my camera collection includes old school Pentax and Ricoh 35mm film SLRs, so I have a significant range of M42 fixed focal length lenses; also have some compact point and shoots, and several small-sensor 50X superzoom bridge cameras (e.g. Canon HS50 SX, Pana FZ70 Pana FZ47, Pana FZ30), some of which have night-oriented modes which i can mess about with using a remote or timer.  But I believe that for AP post processing software, I should be taking a hard look at Canon or perhaps Nikon DSLRs.
   
   I've been holding off on acquiring a Canon DSLR pending research into AP and am intrigued by some of the findings that Jerry Lodriguss discusses here -- particularly his success with movie crop mode.
   
   http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/EQ_TESTS/Canon_One_To_One_Pixel_Resolution.HTM
   
   I have a Win 7 laptop available for astro and do not mind messing about with post processing -- so I'm absolutely open to going the route of video, CMOS planetary, or CCD astro imagers -- but am unclear as to which path -- DSLR vs. dedicated AP cam makes the most sense.  I also wonder if I can use some of my existing digital video cams?
    
7. DSLR lenses vs. Telescope and Short Focal Length Refractor or What Type(s)? -- Another issue that I face as a beginner is the question of whether to go the DSLR route to take advantage of camera lenses that I have vs. going with a telescope and what type of telescope? 
   I must confess that I find the prospect of colimating an expensive SCT daunting so I've tended to mull short focal length refractors and Maksutov-Cassegrain alternatives.   Could use some perspective on the general guidance that i read -- along the lines of "start with a small refractor but when you really want to do detailed lunar and planetary imaging, go for a moderately large SCT in the 6-11" range?  
    
8. Skip the Beginner Visual Observing Telescopes? or Do Any of These Have a Somewhat Useful Lunar-AP Mount? -- When it comes to a telescope, given that I'm most interested in imaging, I'd like to test my assumption here that I should avoid what otherwise might be a typical beginner first scope such as a NextStar 4SE -- but I do wonder whether the NextStar 4SE mount which has a built-in wedge, might provide some level of utilitty for beginning AP, assuming lunar imaging primarily or exclusively... ... Or, is the polar alignment and tracking variability of something like the NextStar mount or the Orion Starblast/SkyWatcher Virtuios tabletop mounts, just too imprecise even for a bright object like the moon? 
   Alternatively, per the first inquiry above, would a small refractor on something like the dual-use AllView Alt-AZ mount be a reasonable starting point for lunar AP?  Are there other beginner-visual to lunar AP options that I should consider at the typically more modest price points?
   
   Cheers,
   -- David
   
    

[kalasinman]

1. Lunar rate is a marketting ploy.

2. See 1.

3. I was going to buy the skyguider, then realized I'd really be quickly into AP and bought a ZEQ25GT.

4. Star Adventurer is good.

5.Yes, that's where it leads.

6. DSLR

7. Most agree that SCT is not an ideal AP solution. A short, fast frac is most often recommended, although I personally favor Newtonians.At f/5 or above collimation is pretty easy.

8. Yes, skip them. Spending new money. Don't paint yourself in a corner.

The shortcomings of scopes is the FOV, Large targets like the Veil, Rosette, North America just won't fit without either cutting off the edges or making mosaics.

Shortcomings of lenses are the shortness , and problems caused by CA, coma, and others which are either non-existent or easily dealt with in a scope. Obviously scopes are better for nearly everything they can do. Seen any affordable 2000mm ed lenses around?

So think about FOV and what you might want to image.-Jack

[Joseki]

 field rotation isn't important for lunar imaging but if you want to do widefield DSO imaging then it is.  The  Orion Sirius EQ-G (otherwise known as HEQ5 here in the UK) is nice, but hasn't got the same functions as the AllView which you might want for terrestrial photography - e.g. shooting panoramas (but the EQ-G may be all the mount you ever need for astrophotography).

I'm not sure Kalasinman is completely correct in the above though (though I agree with a lot of it).  point 7 - SCT's are very good for lunar imaging, an 8" SCT is excellent (but harder work for DSO). - what he says is true for DSO though.

with regards camera lenses - it's just not right that they're unsuitable.  There's plenty of nice widefield imaging done with affordable, fast prime lenses in the range 50-300mm.  The Nikon 200mm f/4 he has is pretty good (I have one too).

point 6 - for lunar imaging, a lot of people would say get a dedicated planetary imager (mono).  For DSO Canon are better supported in astrophotography software and you can use the planetary imager as a guide camera.  It depends on your budget and you whether a dslr is a useful first step, all you ever need or a waste of time and money ( ) before you get a dedicated astro cooled ccd camera.

[dfish]

Kalasinman -- Thanks so much for the crisp and complete reply...

So for a first refractor and assuming that I'd be going for lunar imaging exclusively with that, is there a focal length / focal ratio sweet spot in the 60-120mm/127mm aperture range?

And what's the best way to think about the tradeoff between acro/apo and lens quality vs. aperture -- again assuming virtually dedicated lunar imaging -- do I go for a high quality 60-80mm ED triplet or more aperture?

Might these trade-offs depend on use of planetary imagers vs. DSLR and if so how would that choice tip things?

Also should probably note that my spouse will probably keel over if anything resembling a big lawn cannon shows up at the door... 

[dfish]

Joseki -- thank you very much as well... on the issue of dealing with rotation, I appreciate the need to deal with it for wide field, but am trying to tease apart exactly why it is such a non-issue for lunar AP -- is this primarily because we deal with rotation in post processing?... or simply an artifact of the fact that the moon is so bright that exposures are short enough to make it a non issue?... and on this latter point of brightness, if attempting to image say a detailed segment of the terminator vs. wider area of the moon, are we still ok ignoring rotation.

Kalasinman and Joseki --  I'm also trying to sort out the  question of whether lunar tracking rate in Alt-Az is relevant for any of the methods for lunar imaging -- if not why the heck do they bother providing it?...
... and whether the relevance of Alt-Az lunar tracking  is an independent consideration from lunar rate rotation (i.e. because post processing stackers can patch up the alignment for the rotation)?

 

[kalasinman]

There is no one size fits all solution.

One thing you haven't mentioned is budget.

Bright object like moon and planets show CA the most.

Moon and planets require very different FOV.

My ZEQ25GT has no lunar rate, yet the moon tracks perfectly. As I said it's just invented by the marketing crowd.

Although there may be a miniscule difference on paper, it doesn't manifest in reality.

I know there are SCT fans out there, fair enough. For DSO work the moving mirror adds complications which are somewhat awkward to deal with.

You seem to be quite focused on lunar. Depending on budget, you could consider the Skywatcher mount that combines Alt-Az and EQ. You'll want guiding for DSO, so get a nice apo frac with a fast FR and add a guide scope and something like the QHY5L-II color which is sensitive enough for guiding and would give good FOV alone for planetary. Then add your choice of DSLR to the scope for DSO

[kalasinman]

One advantage of Newtonians is that they don't have lenses, so are free from CA by nature.

[dfish]

Fair question re budget ~ $3000 / £1900 and I have a Win 7 laptop available for astro, so that need not come out of the budget.

And yes, I am indeed really focused on lunar primarily because I really have enjoyed lunar observing with binos, but also because it seems to make for a very approachable entry into AP, yet it appears that one can pursue lunar AP nuances rather extensively over time. 
So, I'm more interested for now  in pursuing lunar AP deeply rather than fanning out across other targets -- this could change but I'm comfortable investing in gear that's more specialized for lunar than generalized.

So it seems that I should be digging into dedicated planetary cams (I think I'd be comfortable with capture and post processing) and not bother with DLSR.

In the case of refractors, sounds like it's best to go for quality to avoid CA, but am still unclear on the aperture/focal ratio/fov sweet spot for lunar? 
Also, must admit to finding the concept of collimating a (to me) expensive scope a bit daunting, at least in the context of learning everything else, hence the reason for considering refractors (or Maks?) over SCT and Newtonian (though I do have fond memories of my first scope, a Newtonian, that I had as a kid).

[... Now if I only I could find a way to pack everything plus overnight camping gear on the back of my Ducati MTS... I could get away from my orange zone and have some fun riding out to dark sky areas...   ]
 

[kalasinman]

Seems to me, the issue with planetary cams for the moon is the FOV is narrow. This is do to the tiny chip size.

I've attached 2 pics (not too good BTW) just to illustrate.

First is with DSLR at prime focus with 150/750 Newtonian.

Second is with planetary camera at prime with same scope.

If you want to back pack it, why not something like the Ioptron Skyguider, DSLR and manual prime focus lens (Cheap on Ebay). You'd need a fair tripod like a Manfrotto .

Carry a super wide angle for Milky way shots. You can carry an empty milk jug and a string. Then when you set up. fill the jug with water and hang it from the tripod for stability.

[dfish]

kalasinman -- You hit on something I've been seriously looking at -- the iOptron Skyguider --  not a lot of info out there, so welcome any futher thoughts you might have.  My takeaway thus far  based on the few reviews I've found, is that it's one of the better and more versatile trackers, plus it's capable of auto guiding if I wanted to try that at some point.   At  $578 /  £370 with a 1.5" tripod, it's in the same ballbark as the Polarie or Skytracker with a solid photo tripod and a polar scope. 

In addition to the DSLR/prime possbilities, how realistic might it be to mount a small refractor  and planetary cam (staying well within the 5kg +3.5kg payload limits) on the SkyGuider -- to give that a try, before making the jump to a full EQ mount, a better scope, and CCD cam.  Again I'd be focusing on the moon, and was thinking I could trying things out with a modestly priced CMOS planetary cam or a modified webcam.  I am interested in moving from full disk to terminator detail AP, and am thinking of that as a natural part of the learning curve?

For examples of entry level lower cost refractors for use with a SkyGuider, I was looking at the Orion Shorttube-A and this Orion 62mm travel scope (which would serve dual purpose for terrestrial) -- however I've yet to succeed in finding a bracket/adapter/mount that might work for attaching a small refractor and am concerned that a ball mount might be way too unstable?

http://www.telescope.com/Orion-ShortTube-80-T-Refractor-Telescope/p/9946.uts?keyword=shorttube-a http://www.telescope.com/Orion-StarBlast-62mm-Compact-Travel-Refractor-Telescope/p/102818.uts?keyword=starblast

/Dave

[kalasinman]

Lunar is not a major interest for me, but....

very bright objects with sharply defined edges are more likely to show CA

If you shoot in B&W like with a mono planetary cam, CA is not a concern. If you choose to try a DSO like M42, color is pretty important.

If you don't have a DSLR now, taking regular daylight pictures is a plus. You can also use camera lenses for astro, especially wide field.

If you choose some sort of small scope which can take 1 1/4" EP, then you can use a planetary cam to get close views.

A small reflector will have no CA and give you the 2 camera option, DSLR and/or planetary cam. Check to see if back focus is sufficient for a DSLR however.

I modified mine to get enough BF for an OAG and DSLR.

If you find a refactor good enough not to be bothered by CA, the cost and/or weight may be an issue.

I've tried to touch on some of the issues. It all depends on where you see yourself going.

Find a local society and go to a star party.

[dfish]

Interesting point regarding mono planetary cams and CA not being an issue in that context.

And yes I've signed up for our local amateur astronomy society and am waiting for the next star party event.

[shirva]

hi all..i have recently bought the skywatcher allview mount and im delighted with its functions, I jump across various platforms,photography,video astronomy and astrophotography.. primarily video astronomy.. the allview was bought to use as a portable mount to head more to dark sites,,i have linked my canon 450d on it and hooked it up to my laptop via canon software and camera on live view.. wow ..great combination... the allwiew is a great all rounder I would recommend it...you can set a start point and end point and set how many images you wish to take between the points and exposure times via the hand set,,the video cruise has a similar function and can time lapse between the two points..this is the features on photography mode,,,the mount is also a goto mount as well..fantastic bit of kit....only downside was handset was configured to az mount...allview software had to be flashed to the handset ..no big deal...well worth the money..davy