200p for imaging

[Kyuzumaki]

I've found a second hand 200p with a HEQ5 mount within my budget. I know that the 200PDS is designed for imaging and had been looking for it specifically. But the 200P is now affordable so is there much of a difference or would I be making a mistake not getting a PDS?

My camera is a Nikon D3200 + ccd webcam

[johngwheeler]

I have a 200P (f/5) and the only difference between this an the PDS (apart from the 2-speed focuser) is the position of the primary mirror (AFAIK), which is supposed to make it easier to reach focus.

I have no problem focussing my Canon EOS 100D using a t-ring to 2" nose-piece that goes straight into the focuser. I can reach focus with the focuser wound out about 10mm from its innermost position.

I think many people would say an HEQ5 is fairly marginal for imaging with an 8" f/5, and would recommend an EQ6. It should be fine for visual and getting started in imaging, without necessarily expecting top-quality results. I'm doing exactly the same with my 200P and a Celestron AVX mount.

[Kyuzumaki]

Brilliant thanks for the info not being able to get focus was my main fear. My locations not too windy and has some decent shelter so hopefully will get away with the mount.

[Pompey Monkey]

Bear in mind that although focus may be possible with a DSLR on the 200p, if you ever decide to go mono CCD with filters, there may not be sufficient back focus.

Also, the 200p has a single speed focuser which you may, or may not, find difficult to get an exact focus with your camera. The 200p-ds has a dual-speed focuser (hence the "ds") designed for astrophotography, which makes life a easier.

Believe me, anything that makes life a bit easier in AP is most welcome

[ultramol]

My 200p has about half an inch of inward travel left when focused to infinity with my canon 350D. My only bit of advice would be to get a Bahtinov mask . God bless him whoever he was.

[Astrosurf]

The only problem I have with my 200P and HEQ5 Pro mount it that any breeze you get and there'll be movement. But other than that I find it's a fine set-up. See my images in my link below. Some are taken with the frac but the galaxies are with my 200P. 

Buy this for focusing. It's great! http://www.firstlightoptics.com/astronomy-cables-leads-accessories/skywatcher-auto-focuser.html

Alexxx

[ultramol]

Some lovely images with your 200p Alexxx. I also have a focuser like the one in your link, it is brilliant to use. How long were your lights in the north american nebula its such a beautiful picture. I tried this last week and although I was happy for a first attempt yours has so much detail and mine did'nt

[Kyuzumaki]

So I got a box of assorted bits second hand and found this in there. It says focal reducer I was hopping this would help give me more play on the focuser with a CCD or DSLR?

Is there a correct direction for it? Looks roughly the same in both directions..

[Uranium235]

That reducer is only any good for EP's or guide cameras, you cant image through it because firstly - its 1.25" (will cause severe vignetting), and secondly - its not a corrector. In fact it will make your coma much, much worse. If you want any sort of reduction the Skywatcher coma corrector is what you need, it will flatten your field and give you a reduction factor of 0.9x.

[Tommohawk]

I have 200P and HEQ5 with Canon 550D and it works fine. The secondary position and diameter are both slightly different compared to 200PDS, + of course it isn't dual speed focuser - you can get Lacerta 2 speed conversion as I have for about £50.

The secondary on the 200P is 52mm, and on the 200PDS is I think 63mm. This seems a big difference but the 200P doesnt need such a big secondary because the tube is slightly longer so you're nearer the end of the light cone light - hope that makes sense. That said, although I havent done the maths, the PDS probably does have a slightly larger fully illuminated field.

The potential problem as others have said with the P is that you dont have so much back focus - but with my DSLR there is about 1 cm of back focus available even with the primary set as close to the tube end as possible (to maximise the fully illuminated field)

One advantage of the P is a smaller secondary gives less obstruction so potentially better contrast for planetary work - so there is a plus to this.

BTW the back focus for the Canon is 44mm, and for a CCD is 17.5 (ZWO) so yuo should have room for filter wheel if you go to CCD/newCMOS type. 

Oh - just noticed you have Nikon 3200. I started with that, and got some nice results, but its much easier to work with the Canon because there's much better software for camera control. There's no Liveview option for the Nikon, other than the HDMI output, which makes it more difficult to frame and to focus. If you're going to try and work without laptop control that's not an issue but ultimately for DSOs you'll need guiding which needs a laptop or tablet anyhow. Maybe start with the Nikon and go to Canon later as I did, or to CCD.

Sorry that but for me that's probably a much bigger issue than the P vs. the PDS. Whatever you do, I'm sure you'll get some great results, but bear in mind this is probably a journey with more than one stop. No bad thing I'd say.

[Astrosurf]

Some lovely images with your 200p Alexxx. I also have a focuser like the one in your link, it is brilliant to use. How long were your lights in the north american nebula its such a beautiful picture. I tried this last week and although I was happy for a first attempt yours has so much detail and mine did'nt

Sorry, I though I'd answered this! Thanks so much for the nice comment. which neb was it? There's one of the Wall and one in a widefield. Also one Ha!

[iapa]

I have a 200P (f/5) and the only difference between this an the PDS (apart from the 2-speed focuser) is the position of the primary mirror (AFAIK), which is supposed to make it easier to reach focus.

I have no problem focussing my Canon EOS 100D using a t-ring to 2" nose-piece that goes straight into the focuser. I can reach focus with the focuser wound out about 10mm from its innermost position.

I think many people would say an HEQ5 is fairly marginal for imaging with an 8" f/5, and would recommend an EQ6. It should be fine for visual and getting started in imaging, without necessarily expecting top-quality results. I'm doing exactly the same with my 200P and a Celestron AVX mount.

Hi, I just found this, and was wondering if you are guiding as well?

I have the AVX mount, max load quoted as 30lbs. The 200pDS is 19, or 75% of max load.

I have often seen that for astrophotography you should remain between 50 & 75% of max load for the mount.

The Canon is about another 1lb.

My skywatch 80 (basic no ED or anything) runs to a couple of lbs, and the CCD with filrer 2 more.

That is getting very close to max load.

Will all this work?

thanks

[Uranium235]

Im tempted to say it will be a "no", well for long exposures anyway (above 2min). You can give it a try, but its likely to be bit wobbly, difficult to guide, and your subs will get ruined even if a mouse breathes on it. Youre quite right in thinking that you need to stay within 50-75% of max load - but to reduce the current load you can try using a 9x50 finderguider instead of the ST80.

[saggiemaggie7]

The only problem I have with my 200P and HEQ5 Pro mount it that any breeze you get and there'll be movement. But other than that I find it's a fine set-up. See my images in my link below. Some are taken with the frac but the galaxies are with my 200P. 

Buy this for focusing. It's great! http://www.firstlightoptics.com/astronomy-cables-leads-accessories/skywatcher-auto-focuser.html

Alexxx

I also have a electonic focuser connected to my 200p (dob) does make life a lot easier getting focus i can echieve focus perfectly fine with my 1000d using the direct connection (just the T-Ring) however as mine is the Dob i suspect i will have a longer focal length 

[ollypenrice]

While a dual speed focuser is nice you can make a single speed easier to use for imaging by attaching a lever to it, sometimes known as a wand. The exended lever simply allows you to make finer adjustments.

Olly