Blowing in the wind?!

[dabiscuit]

I have a Skywatcher 130MM, focal length is 650mm. I was quite surprised last night as I got a good look at the Orion Nebula, which made me pretty chuffed as my skies aren't great around here.

I really want to take astro images and after being surprised by the telescope was wondering am I better off spending a few extra pounds on a good CCD camera or should I just try out something cheap first like a Celestron NexImage (Would that capture Orion?!)

I'm not very experienced (but love astronomy) so any help would be appreciated.

[Anweniel]

maybe it would be better if you tried a cheap webcam to learn the ropes a bit first. These are quite popular and will save you a lot of money compared to say the Neximage. Not used the celestron webcam but I understand there is not much dofference in the quality of these two

Buy Philips Pre flashed SPC880 CCD webcam bundle at Morgan Computers

[Gina]

For wider DSOs a Canon DSLR body is much cheaper than a larger chip astro camera. I recommend the EOS 1100D body at around £300 I'm very pleased with mine as I've posted in other threads on SGL.

[dabiscuit]

Thanks people, I think a webcam to start with then was always thinking of a EOS type DSLR for when I get better.

It seems to be the way of most star gazers, I just have a habbit of jumping in at the deep end!

[ollypenrice]

The order of importance in imaging gear, in my view and that of many others, is mount-camera-telescope. The mount has to track the sky and keep the telescope stable. If it doesn't then it won't matter whether you have a Takahashi or a Tasco, you'll get blurred images. And the reason why modern amateur images of the Orion Nebula are better than those of the Anglo Australian Telescope 25 years ago is not that amateurs now have three hundred tonne telescopes. They don't, but they do have remarkable cameras.

You'd get a great introduction to imaging by reading Steve Richards' book Making Every Photon Count available from FLO.

Olly

[Ant]

I started off many years ago with a SC1 modded webcam. I managed to get the orion nebula, M13 and a couple of small galaxies.

The SC1 modified webcam was modded to take long exposures. Where as the SPC880 flashed to 900 isn't (unless it's been modded to do so). For DSO imaging avoid the Morgans cameras. For planetary imaging then they are fine.

If you want quick results without wasting too much money then maybe the 1100D (or even a 300D - you can pick them up for about a 100 quid) would be a good start.

It is also semi future proof.

Olly is right a decent mount is of massive importance. It really it the most vital part of the whole rig. By suggesting the above camera first, though, I only suggest that it will enable you to start down the path of imaging without losing much (if any) money.

You'll get the majority of your money back if you decided to sell on the 1100d/300D in a few months.

When the bug has bitten you (after the first night ) you can decide which mount you want to upgrade to, and then which scope...

A dSLR will keep you going for some time.

Just my 2p worth.

Cheers

Ant

[dabiscuit]

Thanks for that, last post, very helpful indeed.

Just got a SPC900NC web cam not modded for DSO, but I am going to use it for stuff in the solor system. Probably got ripped off at £85, but it comes ready to go straight into the scope has filters and comes with imaging software and the flash has been modded for colour optimisaton.

[ollypenrice]

^^ The bug in question is what despairing NHS hospital officials call a 'superbug' I believe...

Olly

[Anweniel]

£85! ??? wow

[Ant]

To be honest the 1.25" nose piece is about £15 quid. If it has a decent IR/Cut filter you could be looking at around £40... so that only leaves £30 for the camera.

What do you get for £30 nowadays?

Ant

[Anweniel]

You are right Ant, being a bit tight I got round some of these costs when building mine, probably still spent a fair whack when you add up the components for lx mod, case etc.