Can you recommend a telescope for astrophotography?

[jay2jay99]

Ok, I see now, the webcams are modded to fit on the eyepieces and the main candidate is the philips SPC900NC.

I think this will probably be my final question for now, between the SW 10" dob (250px) and the mak 127, without taking into account the mount on the mak, so just on the tube, both using a webcam for imaging, what would you say are the better qualities of each?

In regards to what I am using it for, say, for general observing of DSO's and mainly planets and for photographing the moon and some planets.

I've tried searching for comparissons but I guess being quite different telescopes then not many people would compare them. I'm quite torn between the two.

Thanks for all your help, answered a lot of questions... although created many as well

[brantuk]

Between the two ota's and not considering the mounts - you'll see a lot more dso's with the 10" - it'll be a whole world of difference. But imaging planets with a dob and webcam is very limited unless you get one with tracking motors

[RikM]

It's not a fair comparison unfortunately, because it all hinges on the mount. There is little point discussing the OTA without considering something to put it on. FYI, the 'Dob' part of the Skyliner 250PX Dob is the mount.

For visual observing the Skyliner 250PX Dob beats the Skymax 127 hands down every time on both planets and DSO's. I have one of each

For imaging the planets, a 250PX would be the better scope, but NOT the manual Dob version. It would have to be either an auto/goto Dob or an EQ6 mounted OTA.

[jay2jay99]

Ok thanks, one VERY last question sorry, I see the webcam doesn't actually attach to the eyepiece, it just goes into the eyepieve slot and the eyepiece is not used. So where does it get the extra magnification from? I understood earlier when RikMcRae said the reason the dslr can't really be used is because it doesn't use eyepieced so can't magnify the image, but if the webcams don't either....... I'm all cuffuzled! lol

[DoctorD]

Just a note - AZ GOTO mounts can be used to photograph brighter DSOs - 15 to 30 seconds seems to be the maximum exposure before field rotation becomes an issue.

It's more about setting your expectations - you are not going to get stunning wide field photos of extended faint nebula with an AZ but brighter nebula and globular clusters will be within your reach.

The trick is to take lots of images and stack them. DSS will compensate for any field rotation between images.

Clear skies

Paul

[jay2jay99]

It's not a fair comparison unfortunately, because it all hinges on the mount. There is little point discussing the OTA without considering something to put it on. FYI, the 'Dob' part of the Skyliner 250PX Dob is the mount.

For visual observing the Skyliner 250PX Dob beats the Skymax 127 hands down every time on both planets and DSO's. I have one of each

For imaging the planets, a 250PX would be the better scope, but NOT the manual Dob version. It would have to be either an auto/goto Dob or an EQ6 mounted OTA.

Thanks Rik.

[brantuk]

The webcam produces equivalent magnification to (approx) a 6mm eyepiece. In appropriate seeing and the right scope a barlow can be used with it.

[RikM]

The webcam produces equivalent magnification to (approx) a 6mm eyepiece. In appropriate seeing and the right scope a barlow can be used with it.

That's right. My Saturn shot used a Skymax 127 + 2x Barlow + extension tube. I reckon the focal length was something like 4,500mm (f/35). In an ideal world I would have liked even more but then the image would have been too dim.

[Cornelius Varley]

Ok thanks, one VERY last question sorry, I see the webcam doesn't actually attach to the eyepiece, it just goes into the eyepieve slot and the eyepiece is not used. So where does it get the extra magnification from? I understood earlier when RikMcRae said the reason the dslr can't really be used is because it doesn't use eyepieced so can't magnify the image, but if the webcams don't either....... I'm all cuffuzled! lol

Cameras, either DSLR or webcam, don't have any magnification, only a field of view. The field of view of a webcam is similar to that of a 6mm eyepiece. A typical webcam has a sensor of about 3.6mm x 2.7mm in size, a DSLR sensor is about 22mm x 15mm. For any focal length a DSLR sensor is going to give a greater field of view than a webcam. For imaging the planets a webcam is the better camera as you can take several hundred / thousand images very quickly and process them is Registax. A DSLR sensor is wasted on planetary imaging to the size of the sensor. The number of pixels illuminated by the planet's disc will be about the same for each camera.

For lunar imaging the difference in the sensor size is not so bad. You can use webcam to take a number of overlapping images to create a mosaic that will be equal to or greater than in resolution than a single image taken with a DSLR at the same focal length.

To get a closer more detailed view you can increase the telescopes focal length with a barlow lens.

Peter

[jay2jay99]

Cool, thank you all, I think that is everything, just some mulling over the data and counting of pennies is all I need now!!

[ollypenrice]

To shoot the planets I'd suggest webcam (cheap), long focal length scope (fairly cheap) and a tracking mount. The good news is that you can get going with an alt-az mount. I thnk this is just about possible in budget.

But first I'd do some serious reading up on imagers' websites. Don't read adverts. In adverts everything works.

Olly