Entry Astrophotography help. (Birthday 12th Jan)

[t0ny]

Hi,

I love watching and reading about space, but as far as stargazing goes the most I have done is go to my local observatory which was quite underwhelming (blame Brian Cox).

i have also tried photographing some stars and the moon with my dSLR on a tripod which did not go too well! biggest lens I have is 200mm.

So, it's my Birthday this Friday and my wife said I could have a telescope. Exciting as this sounds we don't have much disposable income right now until my son goes to School. Too much info yea? Sorry.

So my budget (and hours on this forum) has me looking at the Skywatcher 130 Explorer. I know I'm not going to see the Crab Nebula in all it's glory, but it looks like ill see the bigger planets and of course the moon? I went to local shop today and the guy said I could put my dSLR on it and take photos.

Questions are (that he was vague on)

1. Do I need a motor? (Long exposures?)

2. Do I need the parabolic version? (Does this help or hinder planet/moon photos)

3. Is it even possible to get a photo with this basic scope?

Also I have a Lumix, would that be as good as an dSLR?

Thanks for any direction

Tony

[nephilim]

Firstly, u probably could put a DSLR onto a 130 but I wouldnt recommend it, the mount is FAR to unsteady, ur best bet with that scope (I own one) is a webcam, u can get a cheap Xbox cam & modify it to capture the larger planets (ther's a thread on here about how to do it and plenty of people are), I took this

using the Skywatcher 130m 2x barlow & xbox cam . If ur wanting to do any decent imaging then I'd get the 130pm (yes mines not the parobolic version but a parobolic is slightly better than a spherical mirror, altho the 130m suits me well) a motor is a BIG help with tracking the object.I'd say, wait for a few more answers, ask as many questions as u can & do plenty of research, you'll get alot of help on here.

Btw, Welcome to SGL.

Steve.

PS salespeople tell porkies to sell their wares!!!! First light optics are very well respected here & you wouldnt do any harm emailing them with your requirements.........And queries.

[Capricorn]

Astrophotography is not something that you can just do.

You would need a fairly solid equitorial mount, a good little scope dual motors at least.

Part of the problem is that it is possible to do with say an EQ5, dual motors, small scope like a WO ZS70, polar scope and adaptors. that would empty say £1500 out of a bank account. However any upgrade means changing every bit eventually.

Have you been along to the Norwich Astro group, couple of people here are members so give it a search and pay them a visit if you haven't already. There will be imagers there who can supply information.

Consider it like this: If you want to do reasonable wildlife photography you get a lens costing £2000-4000, astrophotography is in the same price bracket.

[inedible_hulk]

Hi Tony, welcome to the forum. +1 for nephilim's comments.

[JamesF]

There are a lot of considerations regarding astrophotography and many ways to go about it, but I think pretty much everyone will tell you that if you want to use a telescope for astrophotography then you need to start with a decent mount.

Sadly, the mount that the 130P usually comes on (the EQ2) probably isn't it. Sure, you could potentially put a DSLR on the scope and take some images, but they may not be of a standard you'd be happy with. However, you don't necessarily have to use the telescope to do some imaging. I took this image just with my Canon 450D and 200mm lens directly on my EQ3-2 mount:

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/162867-a-better-wide-field-andromeda-galaxy/

That said, if your budget is tight I'd forget all about astro imaging for the time being. It has a tendency to be a bottomless money-pit. I'd suggest sticking with visual observing and going with something like the Heritage 130P dobsonian. It's good value for money and will show reasonable views of the planets, Moon and the Messier objects.

If you really want to be able to do some imaging then I'd recommend first getting a copy of Steve Richards "Making Every Photon Count" and think about what might suit your budget once you've read it.

James

[Catweazel]

The answer is that yes you can take pictures with a 130 Explorer, but probably not on the supplied mount, as it won't take the weight of the scope and all the AP gear. You will need at least RA & Dec motors for AP.

[gkec]

This is one of my first attempts I achieved using a unguided Mead 114eq and a webcam.

So I hope that helps answer questions 1 and 3.

[t0ny]

Thanks guys,

i know I'm not going to be getting any amazing photos with this set-up, but it's nice to know I should give up the hope of using a proper camera with such as basic telescope. I did see an adapter for a compact camera, is this worth considering?

i do have some fantastic Wildlife photography and never spent 2k on a lens, but I guess if I add it all up my photographic equipment is somewhere around that all together, although gathering dust!

So it looks like a webcam and a telescope is my only option for this kind of money for photographing the moon. Would you say a motorised 130 explorer is the best available around that price range? They had celestron which was a bit cheaper but my reading only seems to lead me to Skywatcher.

As a side note, here is a link to a moon video done through a 130 Explorer which I would be very happy with. Is there something he is not saying or is it likely he just has a very good mount?

[gkec]

This is one of my first attempts I achieved using a unguided Mead 114eq and a webcam.

So I hope that helps answer questions 1 and 3.

I meant undriven not unguided! I just videoed the object as it drifted across the field of view. An eq mount helps in regaining the image for subsequent shots.

[t0ny]

JamesF, that's a fantastic photo! Your f2.8 is a lot better than my 200mm and does the mount you mention move on a motor?

gkec, nice shot. Gets me excited to think I could see that with my eyes rather then a photo!

[gkec]

I got this shot of the moon using a webcam,small scope and undriven mount. Again just letting the moon drift across the field of view.

[t0ny]

Ok, another hour reading other's threads and I'm ready to abort the whole idea... just can't afford £600 for a mount!

Astrophotography looks to be out of reach without (most importantly) a good mount.

Is there a thread showing photos taken on a webcam with a 130m or similar?

[gkec]

Ok, another hour reading other's threads and I'm ready to abort the whole idea... just can't afford £600 for a mount!

Astrophotography looks to be out of reach without (most importantly) a good mount.

Is there a thread showing photos taken on a webcam with a 130m or similar?

What I was trying to point out earlier was that you won't be able to do long exposure imaging required for deep sky objects but photographing brighter objects like the moon and brighter planets is perfectly feasible with a modest scope. It is restrictive and a requires a bit of patience but doesn't require phenomenal outlay just to have a go.

I had a smaller scope than the 130 and was bored with just looking through it as it isn't very exciting once you have visited all the brighter planets. BTW although the image of Saturn looks big it doesn't look that big when you look at it through the eyepiece although you can see a bit of detail. Doing planetary photography gave an extra dimension and I learnt a lot from using very basic kit.

[nephilim]

Ok, another hour reading other's threads and I'm ready to abort the whole idea... just can't afford £600 for a mount!

Astrophotography looks to be out of reach without (most importantly) a good mount.

Is there a thread showing photos taken on a webcam with a 130m or similar?

the jupiter photo i posted above was with the xbox cam and the 130m.

[JamesF]

JamesF, that's a fantastic photo! Your f2.8 is a lot better than my 200mm and does the mount you mention move on a motor?

My EQ3-2 has aftermarket motors fitted and I was using them for that image. It doesn't do any guiding or anything like that so there's still a bit of trailing in the star images for those exposures.

It's quite possible to take wide field images of the constellations or Milky Way with lenses such as the kit 18-55mm or the 50mm f/2.8 on a fixed mount or tripod. You just need to keep the exposure time down to around thirty seconds (depending on the exact circumstances).

James

[Joseki]

And a 'simple' barn-door tracker can be built for use with the tripod for the wide field images

e.g.

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/93544-first-barn-door-tracker/

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/93716-2nd-shot-with-barn-door/#post1721448

[mikehab]

Ok, another hour reading other's threads and I'm ready to abort the whole idea... just can't afford £600 for a mount!

Astrophotography looks to be out of reach without (most importantly) a good mount.

Is there a thread showing photos taken on a webcam with a 130m or similar?

You don't necessarily need to spend huge amounts of money to get into astro photography ... you can certainly get into it with fairly 'entry-level' GoTo setup like a Celestron Nexstar4SE which you can get for under £400 including the motorised GoTo mount. It'll give you an opportunity to "learn the ropes" and start getting familiar with taking astro photos and stacking software etc. Most likely you will want to upgrade to something better at some point - but I certainly wouldn't count it out. As other people have pointed out - for planetary imaging a cheap ( < £5) xBox webcam can be used, and if you already have a DSLR then you only need a T-adapter to mount it onto the back of the 4SE (which costs ~ £12).

There are a few photos that I've taken with the 4SE, or with a DSLR mounted directly onto the 4SE tracking mount on my website...

https://picasaweb.google.com/107890224982691754426/Astro?noredirect=1

Regards,

Mike

[t0ny]

Thanks everyone,

I've been firing of questions everywhere to get my head round what I can get for my money! Still leaning towards the SW130 hopefully a 'p' and m'!

Seems my requirements are some planetary webcam shots like gkec and nephilim's. I'd be very happy with them! And then maybe some dso viewing only. Could a eq2 hold an slr without the scope like you have with the celestron mikhab?

[rowan46]

A 130 doesn't hold a dslr as it doesn't have enough inward focus. which is why they make the 130pds.

[JamesF]

Could a eq2 hold an slr without the scope like you have with the celestron mikhab?

Certainly. You might need a few bits to get it to fit, but it will do it. Several people have put cameras on the EQ1 with some success.

James

[t0ny]

Here's a curve ball.

what about a SW150p (eq3). That's no motor, but you think it's much better?