keybaud

Your post has now made me wonder whether I reconsider an 80mm as the first scope and get the MN190 (I just saw some of the galaxy photos on Google!!!) and a EQ6. I can use this for viewing with my son until I get the rest of the AP act together and I could practise guiding with the 70mm.

Oooooooh, and FLO do the pair as a bundle...

It does if you buy the right box Olly

@keybaud, can you post some links to the kind of images you would like to capture yourself to give us an idea of what you are hoping for?

A way to make astroimaging even more expensive (if that is possible), is to buy the wrong things early on, and end up having to replace or upgrade them to do what you really want.

Honestly, if I was in your shoes, and if I knew that I was likely to get carried away with the hobby, and looking to take pics of galaxies with a DSLR (which is not a bad option as it goes), I'd be thinking EQ6 + MN190 + ED80 guidescope+ lodestar guidecam.

Or step up to a C9.25 edgeHD with 0.7 reducer and an Off Axis Guider (yum!)

If you want nice pics of galaxies with some detail, then look at scopes around 1000mm or more in focal length. The MN190 is as near to a decent 6" triplet as you will get at around 1/5 of the price. (i've used both!) It has great colour correction, and an almost perfect flatfield, just right for DSLRs, and at f5.3 it is no slouch. If you step up to a CCD, the MN190 is quality enough to warrant the expense.

Of course then you have to learn to collimate, and to guide and so on, but in the words of the curly haired oaf Jeremy Clarkson, "How hard can it be?"  

When I first started out, I was adamant that my budget was £1500 I think, the original post should still be here somewhere......but then I got carried away

If you are able, try and attend one of the star parties and see what folk are using, and the results they get.

Just a couple of ramblings on a wet n windy afternoon  

Tim

Thank for the reply. If I'm totally honest, I don't know what I will end up shooting, but I do like pictures of galaxies, such as M31 Andromeda. I am going to spend the next few months looking at my options and doing a lot of background reading, because that is what I'm like! (It's also why my wife refuses to buy me any presents, as she knows that it will be the wrong one for some tiny piece of detail she wasn't even aware of). Having said this, I am also aware that sometimes just getting something may be better than 'analysis paralysis', but there is a lot of information out there and I'm enjoying the research so far.

Factors I consider:

I am unlikely to buy a CCD camera (at least in the near future), as I don't have the funds, so the photos will be with a DSLR.

I may not be able to afford everything at the start, so I want to get the items in the order my son and I will get the most out of.

I could use my son's 70mm travelscope as the guidescope on the first telescope I get.

Your post has now made me wonder whether I reconsider an 80mm as the first scope and get the MN190 (I just saw some of the galaxy photos on Google!!!) and a EQ6. I can use this for viewing with my son until I get the rest of the AP act together and I could practise guiding with the 70mm.

Have a play with a FOV calc. http://www.12dstring.me.uk/fovcalc.php & see how your favourite targets look. As said, aside from a very few, most galaxies require a longer FL than the scopes you're considering, to do them justice.  This also brings with it a steeper learning curve as things like flexure & guiding accuracy become much more critical. It also means as mentioned before you will really need to go up to a higher spec mount, EQ6 at minimum.

So, going back to the original question, if you were to go for a refractor you would want good correction as you'll be shooting either LRGB (with maybe some Ha) or One Shot Colour (DSLR) for galaxies. Yes, you probably are looking at a triplet at the FL needed but it quickly starts to get expensive. However, refractors are regarded as more 'works out of the box'.

The 2 common pieces of advice for astroimagery appear to be:

1. Read 'Makin every photon count', which I'm going to read a second time.

2. It can get expensive!

What camera are you planning on using? Mono or colour? Chip size?

Preferred target type?

These are also factors that will help you determine your choice.

I have a Skywatcher Esprit triplet, and the optics are excellent, not a trace of CA. I haven't tried the whole range though.

Also, I hate to say it, but an EQ6 will give you better results than a HEQ5 pro. How "into it" do you think you will get? I ask because my single regret when buying my kit was not going for the EQ6 right from the start.

I only have a 70D DSLR at the moment, but I have managed to remove the IR filter on my old ESO 30D. I've read about CCDs, but wanted to wait until I had taken photos with the DSLR before I upgraded to something better.

As for targets, I'd like to photograph galaxies, as there's something special about seeing pictures of them, but I also know that I tend to get carried away once I start something.

If the rain stops I will post first light images from the GT-81. If it stops. Ever.

I'm off to go and start lots of fires in the vain hope that the sky will dry out for you...

When I find the option to edit posts, I'll add the missing words to my post above! In the mean time, add them as required!

I am a bit of a pedant and have a habit of micro-analysing things I do to a level that is beyond the comprehension of my wife and family, which has meant that I've spent far too long on Google looking at options for novice to astrophotography (yes, I've got and read 'that' book). I recognise that the mount is the most important piece for imagery and I'm probably going to get a HEQ5; however,  I am still looking at suitable telescopes and would be grateful if someone could clarify whether it is worth spending a bit extra on a triplet. It is a bit extra to get a WO GT-81 or a SW Esprit 80ED over a , but as I'll be buying a mount, guide scope and a plethora of other items in the coming months, it isn't an excessive increase on the total cost. On the assumption that I'll continue with the hobby, and get carried away with it, is the triplet worth purchasing or a doublet?