Skywatcher Heritage 130P or somthing just a little bit pricier?

[happy-kat]

This has been shared on a different thread but you might find it helpful

http://www.wwnorton.com/college/astronomy/astro21/sandt/startright.html

[ianpwilliams]

That's a great link.

I like to think I've done a few of those things. I've got a couple of book from the library, and I definitely intent to get more. "Turn Left at Orion" will be going back, because you need to buy that, and it's for once you have a scope to set up with it seems. I do like "Stargazing for Dummies" though. It's a proper step by step book which really does assume you know absolutely nothing. I also intend to visit my local astronomical society too. I was going to go last night in fact, but it was very cloudy, so I'm going to go next week instead and hope for the best with the weather. I also need to do a bit of naked-eye looking as well, like identifying the Big Dipper and then Polaris, and learning the sky a bit. I'd also be keen on doing that with binoculars, except that I would feel like I would need to spend a lot of money on them, money which could be put towards the telescope instead when I do eventually get it.

One thing that does concern me in "Stargazing for Dummies" is how it talks about the "Bortle Scale" of sky brightness.  It recommends the method (which I'll try) of looking at the Orion constellation, and seeing how many of its starts are visible. But I reckon it'll only be one or two stars, so my backyard would be an 8 or 9 on that scale (i.e. as bad as it gets). But with no car, I'm limited to the yard. So how much of a problem is that going to be do you think? I wouldn't want to be buying a great scope and an expensive high-quality mount if it turned out that I'm just never going to be able to see and/or eventually photograph certain objects because of light pollution.

[happy-kat]

There is a current thread rolling on imaging in light pollution.

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/210762-taking-long-exposures-with-heavy-light-polloution/?fromsearch=1

As that is a good thought about all the gear but no opportunity to use it.

Better to take time now and buy wisely as nothing is going anywhere.

Even my old binns badly collimated show way more than my eyes so to see more than you do now shouldn't need to be expensive.

[ianpwilliams]

There are some amazing before and after shots in that light pollution thread. Although they tend to just be very wide angle shots at stars. I wonder what would be achievable with a light pollution filter and image-processing in relation to DSO photography?

Also, if I was going to "play it safe" with what equipment I bought to begin with due to not knowing how much of a problem light pollution was going to be, then I would have to work out what to buy instead. I suppose that with the HEQ5 mount causing the huge price jump, maybe I could buy the 200P EQ5 instead, and if all went well, then upgrade the mount. The only shame with that would be knowing that I would be losing money in the long run.

[happy-kat]

I think there is a balance somehow to be found.

I wonder how annoying those stairs and moving equipment all the time is going to be, hopefully when you get to meet your local group and their gear it will help size and weight understanding.

wasn't the 200p out as the weight potential with added camera etc. was over 100% of the mount capcity you worked out?

[ianpwilliams]

When it comes to the weights, as someone pointed out, the weight-loads that I listed for the EQ5 and HEQ5 (9kg and 14kg respectively) were for visual rather than for photography (which are actually 6kg and 11kg respectively), so it's actually even worse when it comes to the EQ5. I do that a 200 scope would have to be the PDS, and would have to be on an HEQ5, and it would have to be nothing more than a 150PDS if going for an EQ5.

And when it comes to carrying equipment up and down stairs, I do wonder if I would have to just leave the mount behind the stairs, and at least then I wouldn't have to carry it up and down each time. Then it would be a case of carrying the scope up and down for visual, and for photography I could attach the camera in the flat, and then carry that down with a small netbook. It will be a pain, but it will be a pain just for visual too.

[ianpwilliams]

I'm encouraged by that thread about light pollution though. They seemed to achieve some great results under orange skies with filters and processing.

[ianpwilliams]

I've had some bad news from work about my contract (it's staying temporary and ending in September as things stand, rather than going permanent), so unfortunately I won't be buying anything for a while. Thanks everyone for the advice anyway though, I hope it helped other people to make some decisions.

[happy-kat]

Hope you have promising forages into finding a replacement contract should you not go permanent.

[ianpwilliams]

Thanks Kat, hopefully I will find another job anyway, and then this'll all start up again

[purdo]

Hi Ian, sorry to hear that fingers crossed that you get a permanent job.   This thread has certainly helped me. Let us know how you get on.  Mary

[ianpwilliams]

Thanks Mary, I hope so too. It's definitely going to happen, it's just more a case of when rather than if.

[Russe]

Good luck with your job.

[ianpwilliams]

Ok, I've changed my mind. I've got some money saved up in the bank, and I'll probably find another job before September comes, and if not, then at least I'll be able to stay up late to use a scope because I won't need to get up the next morning for work...so I've ordered the Photon book, and I'm going to buy a scope, and soon.

So once again I'm back to the old mount/aperture and imaging/visual argument.

Straight away I've noticed that the Startravel 80, Explorer 130PDS, Explorer 150PDS and even the 200P/200PDS are all the same focal ratio, which would suggest that they would all be on a similar level imaging-wise, with each one being better than the last both visually and imaging-wise (allowing shorter subs?) as the aperture increased. But of course more aperture means more weight. I really think that the 130 and the 150 are a good compromise. 80 really should be if doing imaging and nothing else, and 200 you would really need an HEQ5 mount I think, despite this blog post about the 200P on an EQ5, which I would have loved to have gone for, but I just know I would need a lot of skill to achieve similar results to what he achieved:

http://astrocasto.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/heq5-versus-eq5-for-astrophotography.html

I'm also now not so sure about waiting for and then buying a second-hand HEQ5, not least because I wonder if I would actually be able to work out how to use the damn thing once I got one. So I'm starting to wonder if say, a 150PDS OTA on an EQ5 mount with dual axis motors might be the best way to start. The 150PDS seems hugely popular for imaging, and I imagine the 130 and 150 would be similar visually, with the 200 no doubt being a big improvement, but also a big increase in size and weight of course. It seems to me that the 150PDS on and EQ5 mount with dual axis drives would enable me to take some reasonable shots based on what I've seen and read, especially looking here, where this guy had a 150P (not PDS either) on an EQ3-2 with motors:

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/132888-starter-scope-for-astrophotography/?p=1324114

Of course the photon book might change all this, but it seems like a good starter setup to me.

So I'd be looking at £560 for:

150PDS

EQ5 mount

Dual axis motors

and then extra for a DSLR (Canon 1100D most likely), accessories etc.

Or I could go for the 150PDS with an EQ3-2 mount:

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-150p-ds-eq3-2-eq3-pro-goto.html

which would be £497 including EQ3-2 dual axis drives, plus camera, accessories etc.

Which is surprising actually. It's only £60 more to get the OTA and EQ5 mount separately than it is to get the 150PDS on an EQ3-2 mount together. And people rate the EQ5 a lot more than the EQ3-2, so maybe the separate options are the way to go.

[Russe]

Good luck!

[ianpwilliams]

Thanks! I'm sure the book will really help to give me some guidance.

[ianpwilliams]

Looks like there are various options for EQ5/HEQ5 on Astro:

EQ5 + dual motors + handset for £220

EQ5 Pro SynScan for £375 (presumably the GOTO could be moved to an HEQ5 SynTrek later)

HEQ5 Pro for £500

I'm guessing the 150PDS would be ok on the EQ5 or HEQ5, but I'm sure most people would say go for the HEQ5 for obvious reasons.

[happy-kat]

spending less might be prudent and not like any are shoddy (not that I have seen them) leaves more for scope and accessories

[Russe]

+1 HEQ5...

[purdo]

Hi Ian, just a matter of interest FLO have in their clearance section  Celestron CG5  5  GT GOTO. Could this be a consideration??? It say  it's essentially the EQ5 PRO but features a heavier duty tripod for £498.

[ianpwilliams]

Thanks purdo, but the CG5 imaging payload is only 7kg versus the HEQ5 11kg, and as I can get a second hand HEQ5 for the same price, I think I might as well go for one of those, and then new for the scope.

[purdo]

Oops , I see that now.

[Russe]

On eBay right now: http://bit.ly/1kKtpvh

[ianpwilliams]

Thanks but I want to go new for the OTA, and second hand for the mount. There's a £500 HEQ5 mount on Astro which I've enquired about, but I've not had a response, so it's just a case of playing the waiting game again, unless I go for an EQ5 instead, which doesn't seem worth doing if I'd upgrade later anyway.

In the meantime, the Photon book has arrived, and has reinforced just how complicated imaging is.

[Zuben Elgenubi]

There's no getting away from the fact that imaging is complicated and forces you to learn lots of new things. I felt just like that when I first received MEPC, and I decided that there was no point in spending any money on something I wouldn't be able to do.

After a few months the temptation proved too much to resist though and I am glad that I decided to give imaging a go. My images are not going to win any awards (by a long way!) but there is a lot of satisfaction in knowing that it is your image, and in improving your technique. So if imaging is what you want to do, use the advice from MEPC and SGL and give it a go. Yes, there will be frustrations along the way but also rewards when you see usable data coming in and an identifiable image at the end of the process.

Don't be too put off by the idea of buying second hand. Most astronomers/imagers take good care of their kit and you can save quite a bit of money. The 150PDS that Russe linked to looks like a decent buy.