Help with First CCD for Beginner

[Snaxmuppet]

Having had my SW Evostar 80ED DS-Pro for a few weeks now I still haven't managed to get out and try it . I have a Canon 500D which I have had modded so obviously I am itching to try it out and to start imaging. I have not imaged before so this is my first adventure into imaging. My original plan was that I would introduce myself reasonably slowly... this was the original plan formed with the help of various helpful people here:

• try a bit of visual observing first, to get used to the mount (AZ-EQ5) and setting up, polar aligning, software etc (using Carte du Ciel)
• Add DSLR and do a bit of unguided imaging of easier objects to get used to collecting data and then using the various bit of software for post-processing
• Add a guide scope, possibly a ST80, with a guide camera, possibly ZWO ASI174MC (can also be used for solar system imaging). Get used to guiding imaging with the DSLR, either with ST4 port or PHD2.

Only then was I planning to get a CCD - mono with FW and broad and narrowband filter set.

An ambitious plan but sensibly thought through IMO.

All this is now up in the air!

I have come into a some funds that means I could dive straight in and get the CCD now if I wanted... and I do want! I realise that it is a big ask... starting out, having never imaged before, with a new scope, new mount and new CCD... but if I am patient and careful it should be OK... shouldn't it? Would you recommend against me doing this? Should I stick with my original plan? The thing is that the original plan may take me months to get to the final stage where I buy the CCD and I am a) impatient(!) and I don't get a lot of opportunity to get out so again, it might take months! I suppose I am looking for a bit of confidence that, although I am not going about it the traditional way, it is not out of the question. It would be easy to spend a couple of grand on completely the wrong thing.

My second issue then, once I have decided to get a CCD, is which one. I have done some sums to calculate FOV and pixel size for my 80ED with FF/FR (510mm, f/6.37) and I have decided that Atik 460EX is probably a good choice for my setup. The Atik 460EX gives1.83"/pixel and a biggish sensor and a nice FOV... am I wrong?

If I am going in at the deep end and starting out with the CCD I am also wondering if I might be better off not using a guide scope but instead getting the Atik OAG. I will need a filter wheel anyway so the OAG would mean I needn't buy a guide scope. Is an OAG a reasonable way to go?

You would not believe how much reading and research I have had to do to get to even be able to understand some  of this stuff and although I believe I have a reasonable, beginners, handle on it I feel I need a bit of confirmation that I am not going off on some stupid track before I shell out for a CCD and potentially waste my time and money.

So, in summary then (sorry for the long post!), the new plan is:

• get CCD, probably Atik 460EXM, EFW2 and broadband filters
• get Atik OAG (??? unless people talk me out of going OAG in which case get ST80)
• get ZWO ASI174MC for guiding, solar (I have a Lunt 60 on order), lunar and planets
• Start imaging with CCD and guiding straight away instead of starting unguided with the DSLR

I will still try with the DSLR I expect as I have it but my imaging will be done primarily with the CCD.

Assuming I can afford all this am I completely potty thinking I can do this in this way?

Any advice you can give would be much appreciated.

PS Just in case you wonder... I am a computer consultant so setting up the laptop and learning new software is not going to be the difficult bit. The challenging stuff for me is the astronomy and imaging... then post-processing. I wanted a challenge!

[MattJenko]

Go CCD straight away if you can. As to which one, I hear nothing bad about the 460, only good. The only real other consideration is if you want to get a bigger chip and get a 8300 kodak based camera instead.

As for OAG, I am guessing there is nothing wrong in using an OAG on a refractor, it just seems like more hassle than you need, as a guide scope combo is not very difficult to do.

[MattJenko]

also, I have a feeling you will want to consider a motorfocuser sooner rather than later as well seeing as you on a shopping spree

[mhard26339]

Hi, I agree with Matt, clearly CCD is where you want to be so jump straight in, I did although with a Starlight Xpress H9 recently upgraded to Trius 814 but Atik are good also. The learning curve is indeed steep and you will have many frustrations but you would get them anyway, there are many people on here that have gone through it and very willing to help you through it also.

Regards

Mike

[Thalestris24]

Hi

Personally, even though you might have the funds for a ccd, I'd still get up and running with a dslr first. There really is a lot to learn with imaging. I would go straight into guided imaging with a finder guider and PHD2 plus capture with APT, if you like.. Once you are confident with all that hardware, software, operation, stacking and post-processing then you can splash out on a mono ccd and filter wheel and filters. If you don't already have one, you'll need a field flattener. Just my opinion - others might disagree!

Louise

[kalasinman]

I agree with Louise. It's all a lot to take in. I started without guiding. I figured it would be easier to get consistent guiding if I had a clearer understanding of how tracking works first. This was my first telescope, and I don't regret that choice in the least. The stars will still be there long after we are gone.

[ollypenrice]

And I agree with Matt and Mike! I went straight into mono CCD with an Atik on Ian King's recommendation and I think he gave great advice. I can see no reason, other than financial, to start with DSLR and several guests of ours have said that they felt starting with DSLR was a blind alley. Bear in mind that when I went into all this I had only been using a PC for about 18 months and kenw almost nothing about them. I still took pictures on the first night. Mono and filters is not terribly difficult and in many ways, especially if you wnat a good result, it's easier.

There's no right or wrong answer to this but that's my opinion.

OAG is hard work when you don't need it and with a small refractor I don't believe you do need it. I only use them on big reflectors.

The 460 would be a very good choice with your scope. I'd capture in Artemis because it is nice and simple.

Olly

[lensman57]

If you have the funds, really itching to spend it and really want a CCD , who doesn't? I would then go for an Atik one with the on guider package. It really is a good deal with the 460 sensor, contained FW and guider and it also has better cooling which helps in the summer nights. There is no such thing as a beginner CCD, whatever you get the learning curve is steep but no worse than with a modded DSLR the only obstacle usually is the cost which in your case does not apply. Just don't expect to get images like Olly's and Sara's from the day go. Matt has managed to progress very quicly though. There is a hell of a lot to learn with AP so take your time.

A.G

[Thalestris24]

Hi again

I should add that I've no experience of imaging with a mono ccd as I can't afford one! I guess one could jump right in... However, my thinking was that if you have the funds for one then it still might be easier to start with a dslr whilst learning the rest of the basic ropes first. You can add the mono ccd as soon as you're ready / feel comfortable - that might only be in a matter of weeks. Many people have to save up for years first... Another factor might be your weather i.e. how frequently you have skies clear enough for imaging. There's something to be said for seeing what kind of imaging atmosphere you have first too. Where I am, it's terrible!! Generally a lot of water in the atmosphere even when it's clear (prevailing winds are from the west), a lot of turbulence, city thermals, light pollution and few clear nights. The end result is a lot of frustration!! So, if nothing else, it might be worth checking your own conditions out, maybe just with a dslr and lens, before going too far.

Louise

[Snaxmuppet]

Thanks for that Louise. It is good to get both sides of the picture.

Current thinking then...

Get the CCD. I could take the softly-softly-catchy-monkey approach and that does seem like a sound approach and perhaps more sensible that a dive-in approach but I know what I am like... I would probably be getting the CCD very soon just because I am impatient!!!

I am thinking the 460EX and EFW2 along with an ST80 and a guide camera rather than the Atik One 6. I prefer the more flexible setup of having separate bits rather than all-in-one. I realise that the One is a neat package but if one part goes wrong then the whole device is out of commission or requires repair. Just my preference and as they use the same chip it probably won't make a huge difference to the pics.

Just a point... perhaps one for Olly... what about the 490EX? It has smaller pixels but would still be in a good range for my scope? Any benefits to getting that instead of the 460?

[carastro]

I agree with getting the Atik460 and EFW2.  You can always cut your teeth doing mono images to start with and progress to colour as you get the hang of things.

I also agree with this - exactly my reasoning as well.  

 if one part goes wrong then the whole device is out of commission or requires repair.

I believe the 490EX is a good camera too and if you can afford that one, I'd have a chat with Ian King and check which is best for you.

Carole 

[kens]

I've found it helpful to start with mono images. There's enough to learn with focussing, flats and darks and post-processing just once let alone 3 or 4 times.

[kalasinman]

I agree with the CCD, but feel get the guide rig (good choice) , but try unguided for just a bit to learn tracking and mechanics of the mount.

[Snaxmuppet]

Thanks all

I agree with the CCD, but feel get the guide rig (good choice) , but try unguided for just a bit to learn tracking and mechanics of the mount.

This sounds like a good idea. It will also show up any fault in my polar alignment... something I am still getting used to as my mount does not have a polar scope and it is just done using the Synscan Procedure.

[Zakalwe]

Straight to CCD. No question.

No matter which way you look at it, astrophotography is so totally different to daytime terrestrial photography that you will have to relearn pretty much any DSLR skills that you have. So instead of learning DSLR skills that you will later discard, you might as well put the time and effort into learning CCD skills.

Secondly, processing DSLR shots is totally different than processing CCD images. Again, the time and energy learned will be, IMHO, wasted.

You are taking alot of learning on all at once. Be prepared to become disillusioned, especially if you are imaging under crummy UK skies.  The way i would approach it is this@

• Learn EQMOD and how to polar align.
• Learn how to connect your mount to CDC and control it from there.
• Learn PHD and autoguiding (autoguiding is the biggest improver of imaging that you can take IMHO)
• Capture some mono images and practise processing these.
• Then start to add in colour.

Its a steep learning curve, but that's where the fun is!

[ollypenrice]

Straight to CCD. No question.

No matter which way you look at it, astrophotography is so totally different to daytime terrestrial photography that you will have to relearn pretty much any DSLR skills that you have. So instead of learning DSLR skills that you will later discard, you might as well put the time and effort into learning CCD skills.

Secondly, processing DSLR shots is totally different than processing CCD images. Again, the time and energy learned will be, IMHO, wasted.

You are taking alot of learning on all at once. Be prepared to become disillusioned, especially if you are imaging under crummy UK skies.  The way i would approach it is this@

• Learn EQMOD and how to polar align.
• Learn how to connect your mount to CDC and control it from there.
• Learn PHD and autoguiding (autoguiding is the biggest improver of imaging that you can take IMHO)
• Capture some mono images and practise processing these.
• Then start to add in colour.

Its a steep learning curve, but that's where the fun is!

A characteristically forthright and, in my view, accurate post from Zakalwe! 

I'm not sure about the 'one thing goes wrong so you're out of action' principle, though. If one thing goes wrong you're still out of action till you get it back!

The tiny pixels of the 490 would give you 1.59 " per pixel as opposed to 1.95. You could make a case for either. Your guiding would need to be better in order to profit from the smaller pixels and you might find the star colour saturated out more easily. A lot would depend on your seeing. I'd be happey with either.

Olly

[Snaxmuppet]

A characteristically forthright and, in my view, accurate post from Zakalwe! 

I'm not sure about the 'one thing goes wrong so you're out of action' principle, though. If one thing goes wrong you're still out of action till you get it back!

The tiny pixels of the 490 would give you 1.59 " per pixel as opposed to 1.95. You could make a case for either. Your guiding would need to be better in order to profit from the smaller pixels and you might find the star colour saturated out more easily. A lot would depend on your seeing. I'd be happey with either.

Olly

Thanks to you both.

I think my point regarding the Atik One is that if, for example, the filter wheel component fails then the whole unit is out of action until repaired. However, with separate components, if the FW fails, then at least you can continue to image without filters or with single filters at a time (say for luminance). If the CCD fails and you have another CCD you could just swap CCDs. I like the integration of a single unit as it removes a lot of the uncertainty or complication in getting individual parts to work together but flexibility is compromised somewhat.

[kalasinman]

Thanks to you both.

I think my point regarding the Atik One is that if, for example, the filter wheel component fails then the whole unit is out of action until repaired. However, with separate components, if the FW fails, then at least you can continue to image without filters or with single filters at a time (say for luminance). If the CCD fails and you have another CCD you could just swap CCDs. I like the integration of a single unit as it removes a lot of the uncertainty or complication in getting individual parts to work together but flexibility is compromised somewhat.

Agreed. This is my take on the new "intellicams" being discussed elsewhere as well.

[DaveS]

Agreed, if you have the funds for CCD then don't faff around with a DSLR, modded or not. My imaging progressed in leaps and bounds after ditching the DSLR, though I'm still at the beginner stage. NB will also cut through modest amounts of moonlight which will wash out a DSLR. And with our weather you need all the imaging time you can get.

[Snaxmuppet]

OK then...

Starlight Xpress Trius SX-694m

or

Atik 460EXm

The Trius is £380 more!

[Zakalwe]

OK then...

Starlight Xpress Trius SX-694m

or

Atik 460EXm

The Trius is £380 more!

The SX has much better cooling and a 3 port USB hub. Whether that's worth £30 though I am not sure. 

[Snaxmuppet]

The SX has much better cooling and a 3 port USB hub. Whether that's worth £30 though I am not sure. 

May be to some... but not to me. £380 buys a lot of extra stuff when the basic camera is the same.

So I have tonight ordered a Atik 460EX, EFW2 and a set of LRGB parfocal 1.25" filters from FLO

I now think I will have the bailiffs on my back but what the heck... you only live once!

Thanks to all who contributed. Even if I didn't go with your way of thinking rest assured that you did help.

Placing the order is the easy bit... now I have to learn how to use it - can't wait