What to upgrade first?

[dmahon]

Lets say you had a decent but basic astrophotography setup (as per signature), but wanted something really good in future. Unfortunately you can't afford everything at once as you've just spent a small fortune on a new observatory. What would you upgrade first (the plan would be to upgrade them all in time)?

Takahasi FSQ 106

10 Micron 1000 HPS

Large CCD camera (? type)

[Stephen]

Without a shadow of doubt, the mount

[Tinker1947]

A mount, some like a 10 Micron, not cheap but everything you do will revolve around what does the tracking....

http://www.iankingimaging.com/show_product.php?id=1287

[Steve 1962]

I'm in the same situation as you at the moment Dave.

I've decided that it's got to be the mount first, then the scope, then one of the forthcoming large CCDs.

Steve

[ronin]

From the items you have I would upgrade the scope.

The NEQ6 is not under any pressure to handle the bits on it. I assume that the tracking etc are not driving you to distraction, so are OK.

The scope is specified as a a doublet, agreed FPL-53, but at f/6.25 it is getting fast enough that I would expect some CA to be coming through.

[emadmoussa]

Why upgrade the mount? NEQ6 is an excellent mount...

[Tinker1947]

Why upgrade the mount? NEQ6 is an excellent mount...

It is indeed a excellent mount but for long exposures it requires PHD and a Guide Scope, upgrading to Mesu/Micron does away with the guiding requirement...it depends i surpose how deep a persons pockets are and how much the astro bug has bitten....

[emadmoussa]

Ah, I see. I think I missed the point since I had a guiding system. Which explains why I didn't have any issues

[recceranger]

I think the HEQ6 Guided is all that is needed.  I have the HEQ5 with the SW ED80 guided using a stand alone.  If anything I would upgrade the camera (Im a DSLR man).  I imagine your guiding would be spot on.

As for what camera, thats another story.  If I were to select it would be the one with the largest CCD at the lowest cost without compromising on quality.  Something perhaps at the mid/upper end of the Atik range (without the bells and whistles!).  The weather conditions in the UK are an equaliser when it comes to AP in my opinion.  I think we can all splash out left right and Chelsea on guide systems, scopes etc but realistically if your not living in La Palma/Arizona etc your at the mercy of our beautiful elements (as is all the fancy gear!).

In short, protect the wallet!

Rick 

[ollypenrice]

There is no need to put an FSQ106 on a 10 Micron. It would be nice, and with careful attention to your sky model you could go unguided. You do need the sky model though, to allow for differential atmospheric refraction. I doubt that a Mesu would work unguided, though guided they work like a dream.

It would be kind of extravagent to buy an FSQ106 and not use a large format camera in it. You are paying a fortune for an 88mm image circle. This is utterly gigantic and can cover all the largest chips in captivity, including the 36x36. 

Why the 106? It needs robotic focus or it will probably drive you mad. Velvet doesn't find this but I know a large number of 106ED owners who have found it essential. Tom and I use the older FSQ 106N Fluorites which are less fussy thermally and hold focus reasonably well. What about the FSQ85ED and a medium format, small pixel camera like the 8300?

The 85 won't quite cover full frame.

Which camera? If going for the 106 then the Atik 11000 is tremendous in terms of size and speed. Smaller pixels would get more out of the optics, though. Atik are rumbling about a 29 meg full frame which, if it comes to pass, would be a dream in the 106. The big Atiks have two stage cooling, a chip window heater and an easily replaced dessicant. The SX cameras don't cool as well, don't have the chip window heater and don't have a dessicant. Maybe the new ones will have a gas purged chamber. They need to fix these issues though.  If going for an FSQ85 I'd be looking at the QSI. It's a very classy incarnation of the 8300 chip.

The 'mount first' mantra isn't daft but like any mantra it shouldn't be taken as the universal truth. For short focal lengths (or, more precisely, high pixel resolution) the mount does leap to the top of the list. However, my Tak 106 with Atik 11000 and 3.5 arcseconds per pixel does not need a high precision mount. Yves' ODK 14 at 0.6 arcseconds per pixel most certainly does.

My own choice of upgrade was second hand FSQ106N Fluorite and new Atik 11000. Beware of the 2 inch filter prices, though. Yikes!! Baby Q and QSI with 1.25 fiters makes a serious alternative and one making minimal demands on the mount. An HEQ5 would be fine.

Olly