Relatively new starter looking for advice

[indigo_dc]

Hey

Quick background, I've been into astronomy for a number of years and have gotten by on a decent set of binoculars. I've not bought a telescope yet, but have recently decided to take the plunge and invest a lot more time, money and effort into the hobby

As well as observing, I'm wanting to get seriously into astrophotography side - I know it's not easy and I'm setting my expectations low at first, but I want to make the best start I can, so have held off on making any purchases until I've done as much research as I can!

Considering I live just outside central London (Croydon) the light pollution is pretty bad, so I figured I'd be better to start with brighter objects rather than fainter deep sky stuff perhaps? Having said that, my first attempts at astrophotography using my dslr were immensely satisfying, so was wondering about trying to digitally remove the light pollution etc. and see what I can get at home.

One of my first images is below

All sizes | Milky Way (partial) from Mauna Kea, Hawaii | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I know I'm not going to get conditions anywhere near that in London, but I've seen photos where the digital light pollution removal was quite effective.

However, it's got me thinking...

1) I have a Canon 550D dslr with the kit lens and a 55-250mm lens. After reading some extremely useful posts on here it seems I should be able to manage good lunar photos using the telephoto, and was wondering if I could stack multiple exposures using the wide angle lens to get some larger deep sky views? Advice on how to remove as much light pollution from images would be great.

2) Next steps. I've bought the dslr for more than just astrophotography and know it's probably not as well suited as say a CCD or even a webcam for planetary astrophotography. However, I still think there is a lot I can do with it. I guess my next question is...

For a mainly city based observer, having to contend with light pollution, what would be a good 'scope to start with? I'd assumed a decent quality refractor, figuring it might be the best bet for planetary observing? How do they would it compare to the other options? Will the dslr I own be any good for taking photos of planets, or would I really need to get a ccd or webcam for something half decent?

Is it worth me simply investing in a motorised equatorial mount for mounting my camera on, for longer duration exposures? Very (very!) quick searches suggest equatorial mounts are thousands of pounds, so I was wondering if it's worth getting that or saving more and getting a telescope + mount?

As you can probably tell I'm in the position of knowing a bit abut the theory, but paralysed with indecision when it comes to putting it into practice and making my first steps beyond the camera!

What might be a good first telescope (and mount?) considering my location and early modest ambitions perhaps?

Thanks!

[malc-c]

welcome to the forum.

what is your budget, and are you looking for something that is portable or just for use in your garden

[Nova]

my scope and eq3-2 mount was only £300 but its only really entry level but I have still managed to use it very well for observing. I'm also looking to get into imaging but only at a basic planetery and lunar level. As mentioned your budget will be the crucial factor. If its planetery and lunar imaging your interested in it may be worth looking at a scope with a high f/ ratio. A good webcam can be picked up for around £40 which is the route I'm going down

Buy Philips Pre flashed SPC880 CCD webcam bundle at Morgan Computers

[indigo_dc]

Apologies, the budget was in my head but never made it into the post

I'm thinking approximately £1400 or so, with some potential to increase that to £2000 (though delaying the purchase date a little, always a trade off!).

Portable would be good to have, giving me the option of taking it away when I go up north to visit family with their clearer skies, but not essential. I am looking into ways to sabotage nearby streetlights

Thanks for the welcome and the advice

[ollypenrice]

We need to distinguish between solar system and deep sky imaging. The former is best done with a webcam or fast frame camera and a long focal length. A slow f ratio is fine because the objects are bright. The mount can be so-so because the frames are aligned and stacked after capture in free software like Registax. A cheap webcam will out perform any DSLR.

Deep sky requires pretty much the reverse, unfortunately. Here the mount is quite certainly the number one priority because you will be taking long exposures during which precise tracking is essential. Such precision is realized by using an inherently decent mount and an autoguider, a parallel camera-scope which sends a stellar position on the chip to the mount, which then recentres this star in the right place in a fast feedback loop. There is no other way.

Elementary imaging can be done unguided by taking short sub exposures and rejecting the worst ones. Since you say 'seriously into astrophotography' then your minimum mount is the HEQ5 Syntrek which is not thousands but £597. It can be had with GoTo, which I would recommend, for a bit more. In imaging, GoTo is not what it is in visual use, it is a tool that can save you precious time when that is always at a premium.

Deep sky optics are again different from planetary. You need;

Fast f ratio, F8 as an absolute max and F6 or faster, ideally. Deep sky objects are dim.

Focal length to suit the target, but (big but) long FLs need demon guiding so I would keep it short, certainly at first.

Flat field.

Personally I would always recommend a small apo refractor like the ED80, an imaging giant killer, or even something smaller.

In imaging, certainly amateur imaging, aperture is absolutely not king.

Lastly, if you really want to do deep sky from light polluted sites then a monochrome CCD with narrowband filters will make top class results possible. However, you can make a start with an LP filter on your DSLR.

Olly

ollypenrice's Photos

[RikM]

Textbook advice from Mr Penrice as always.

With your stated budget, HEQ5 + ED80 / imaging camera + ST80/guide cam is great intro kit and will give you the tools for really good images.

[malc-c]

My only comment to Olly's post is that everyone on here states that the mount is the most important part of the equation for imaging. With 2K to spend the EQ6 should be well within your budget, and would cater for future expansion.

[RikM]

EQ6 is more stable and more future proof, but it's a big lump. The HEQ5 is still a good mount and the OP suggested portability would be desirable.

[ollypenrice]

5 or 6, both have the same accuracy. True, though, some scopes that one might fancy do need the 6 but as Rik says there is really a big difference in portability.

Olly