Second telescope need help

[jonzo]

Hi all, I'm looking for a second telescope for visual and also astrophotography. I want to be able to observe & capture images of the moon, bright stars like vega, some deep space objects ect..

I live in an area which is in greater London UK so the light pollution isn't too bad.

I'm thinking to get either the skywatcher 200P-DS with an EQ5 pro or the Skywatcher Equinox 80 APO PRO also with the EQ5 pro mount.

Portability isn't an issue, I'm just thinking will the Equinox show deep space objects (Does it have enough magnification).

If I get the 200PDS it would cost me roughly £820 if I get the Equinox it would cost me roughly £1000. I think I'm going to mainly use the scopes for astrophotography but also observing with my father.

Please help me decide whether the 200PDS will be a better all rounder for me or if the equinox would be better for its better optics and also if its good with observing most thing the moon, stars and maybe galaxies or nebulae.

Thanks for reading. 

[VigdisVZ]

Hi

As you might already have guessed from reading posts here, there is no setup telescope that does everything.

The EQ-5 is a bit weak for AP (thought it will work, but you will probably consider upgrading it pretty soon).

The 200p is a good alrounder, but bulky on an underpowered mount when you start loading up with cameras and guidetubes. But it will work.

The Equinox is a very good scope for photography and will probably be a bit less suited for visual due to smaller aperture. But it will work.

So do you want a setup that does everything, but not super-good?

If your main use is AP, I would recommend getting atleast an HEQ-5 (better yet a NEQ-6 but I realise there is a price difference). I also think that the 150PDS hits the sweet spot between visual and easy of photography. However: Personally I've been thinking about getting a 200p or 250p for visual use on my NEQ-6 but everytime I come up with the only answer: Get a dob for visual, and get a smaller frac (not unlike the equinox) for AP.

Instead of trying to cut corners and fit everything into one scope, perhaps its better to get a setup thats really good for one thing? Instead of bad at both?

Besides, if you decide to get a secondary scope will keep you occupied during those long hours the AP setup minds its own business collecting data.

Also, I've heard lots of stories where people try to use a bulky reflector on an EQ-mount for visual and always end up with the focuser in an awkward position when going for different areas of the sky.

My recommendation would in the end be to hold your horses a bit, and think long and hard to what you want to really do, and get a kit that you wont grow out of quickly. 

Also keep in mind that a scope that's good for capturing images of DSO, rarely does planetary very good.

To sum up, the equipment you've listed isnt bad by any means, but I think you do your wallet a favor by figuring out what really matters, and put all the eggs in that basket.

[jonzo]

Hello, thanks for the reply. Ok I have found this mount 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Skywatcher-EQ5-Deluxe-Equatorial-Mount-tripod-RA-Motor-Polar-Scope-/291238761330?pt=UK_Telescope_Mounts&hash=item43cf2ed372#shpCntId

I think It should hold up with the 150PDS, thanks for the idea of having a smaller scope for photography and visual use which isn't too expensive too. 

[Rossco72]

As already said, at least an HEQ5 for AstroPhotography.

The mount in your link will only lead to many frustrating nights wasted trying to get any results, then you will give up.

Whatever mount you get needs to be able to "easily" hold the weight of the scope plus all the extras, it must also be capable of being auto guided otherwise your images will just look like blurry messes. Equally, do you want goto or are you happy you can find all of the objects you want to image?

Buy the book called "making every photon count", read it, read it again, then make your purchase as an informed buyer. Otherwise you risk throwing your money away.

Regards

Stuart

[jonzo]

Hi rossco72 thanks for the reply, yes I'm looking for a GOTO mount. I should also be looking to read that book.

Thanks guys 

[VigdisVZ]

Yep, thats still an "EQ-5". Not a "HEQ-5". Like Stuart says, you will not get consistent data with a mount like the EQ-5 and will have to work uphill, risking frustration and burning yourself out, and dropping the hobby.

+1 for the book Stuart mentions. FLO has it via the sponsor link at the top of the page.

[ronin]

You might image constellations and things like clusters , nebula and galaxies but not generally specifically stars. You get a white "blob" and that is it.

If you are imaging then there is no magnification, that is only relevant to an eyepiece and an eye ball being part of the optical path. Actually with good eyesight you do not get an image from a scope, it doesn't produce one. Also a large dim objects magnified is larger but also dimmer. Half the time this hobby works back to front.

Look for a club in whatever area you are and pay them a visit. You will get a lot better idea that way. You may get some surprising answers also.

Imaging DSO's and the moon+planets tend to be different. Moon and planets can be done with a SCT/Mak on an Alt/Az mount with a webcam. DSO's need a fast scope on an equitorial and a DSLR or ccd type - some cmos devices will do long exposure. A good visual scope and mount is likely not a good imaging scope and mount.

[jonzo]

Ah I see, So If I'm going to use a 200PDS with a EQ-5 mount also with the DSLR it would be too heavy, I'm just thinking to get the 150PDS with the HEQ-5 so that when I do attach a DSLR the mount wont have as much strain on motors.

I've been doing some research, The lower the F number the faster a sensor can capture the image with less shutter time? So the smaller 80mm refractors are mainly for wide field views of things in the sky. I don't want that I want a scope 

that can provide good magnification while also retaining the lower F number for astro photography.

200PDS or 150PDS? That is the question now.

[VigdisVZ]

There is more to F-number than meets the eye. Just something to have in the back of your mind.

Well, I can recommend the 150PDS as a good allrounder. It provides roughly the same "power" (with 750mm fl) as a frac, but has a much larger light collection area for visual use. Not too bulky, cheap, and does an "ok" job visually... and remember you need a coma corrector unless you want fuzzy eggy stars in the corners. This also applies to the 200p.

Here are a few of my early examples with a 150PDS coupled with a DSLR (no guide, no coma corrector, 30sec subs), the processing is still off on these, but learning all takes a while

A HEQ-5 and a 150PDS is a pretty good starting combo once you know the limitations.

[jonzo]

Ahh I see, I'm going to try and find a used HEQ5 mount. These images are very good in my opinion I would be very happy if these were my images I thought the 200P would be enough but it looks like the 150P does the job of capturing DSO's very well.

Comma correctors are quite expensive actually, I'll think about them another time.

Thanks guys!

[jonzo]

Oh and one more thing, can you increase the magnification if you have a DSLR attached onto a scope (not using the DSLR's zoom) if you cant, what magnification will the overall set up be magnified at?

[VigdisVZ]

Thank you.

Oh and one more thing, can you increase the magnification if you have a DSLR attached onto a scope (not using the DSLR's zoom) if you cant, what magnification will the overall set up be magnified at?

No, you shoot at prime focus ie no magnification. Just the scope. It "magnifies" just as a camera lens would at the same focal length. In this case 750mm.

You can in theory attatch an eyepiece in between with an eyepiece projection adapter, but the focuser on a 150PDS lacks inwards travel to reach focus.

If you're curious as to how big certain DSO will look with a specific camera/scope combo, have a look here... 

http://www.12dstring.me.uk/fovcalc.php

And remember that a bigger higher focal length scope isnt always better, it depends on what you want to image. I chose the 150pds for its comparatively low focal length, allowing me to fit all the big popular DSO like M31, M33, M42, M45 within the FOV. If you want to go for pure planetary like Jupiter and Saturn, you want something else. And some people who like to image wide field emission nebulae go with smaller aperture lower focal length refractors that have superior optic quality.

[jonzo]

You're welcome, Ok thanks for all the information, I now understand that smaller refractors with expensive 3 lens optics capture wide field images with superior optic quality and larger newts can capture deeper space objects. Ok well its only a matter of time before I get the scope and mount. I'll check out the website and thanks once again.

[VigdisVZ]

Best of luck!

SCT's seem to dominate higher focal length. Newts kinda take the midfield.