A guide for astro-images?

[Swithin StCleeve]

Riiight. I want to take my astrophotography to a new level. I need to invest in a guide for long exposures. Ideally, it would be able to guide my 8" Skywatcher, and also just my camera. Excuse my ignorance on the terminology - I can't think of a better term than 'guide'.

I bought an equatorial mount a couple of years ago, but I've been told that even with a motor, and with it aligned, that's not good enough for deep sky photography.

I'm quite serious about moving forward, (my photos up to now can be found on my blog), and I'd appreciate any advice on which mounts I could buy that would guid my scope/camera well enough to capture... well, spiral arms, basically.

 

[Davey-T]

Usual recommendation is the HEQ5 as a minimum spec for starting serious astrophotography.

Dave

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-heq5-pro-synscan.html

[Swithin StCleeve]

Ouch! I was hoping for a few quid less. But if it'll do the job...

 

Time for stupid questions then, (I'm a dobsonian user for the most part, so although I know the sky, I'm not too hot on mounts). How does the Mount know where it is? I mean, I'd have to set it up, point the scope at something, then 'tell the mount' what I'm looking at, right?
Although I bought an equatorial mount a couple of years ago, I'm ashamed to say I've been using it like my dobsonian. I've just been slackening the bolts, and hand-guiding it to what I want to look at. I've not even aligned it to Polaris.

Is it much of a faff setting it up? The review talks about a 'three star alignment'.  I assume that's to get a very precise tracking, good enough for astro photography?

[johnrt]

OK, stop!

If you are serious about setting up an imaging rig then you need to do some reading before you think about getting your cash out. I would recommend you purchase this book (link below) and give it a good read before you make any decisiions.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/books/making-every-photon-count-steve-richards.html

 

[PeterCPC]

As Johnrt says plus GOTO mounts need setting up with your location and time. Once set up with that, you then align them with known stars/planets but you will also need to Polar Align if you want to take long exposure images. Without Polar Alignment and guiding you will be limited to fairly short exposures.

Peter

[swag72]

John speaks sense!! Get hold of the book he's linked to before you spend a single penny.... then read it once, twice and thrice..... Then list what you need and why. If you don't know the answer after reading the book, then read it again.... seriously it's something of an imagers bible for those wanting to start out on Deep Sky imaging.

It's all about the mount..... mount ....mount. If you don't have a solid base from where to start then you will end up throwing out valuable data and perhaps even lose interest. 

[Swithin StCleeve]

I've got the book actually, I've lent it to a mate though. I'll get it back this weekend and have a read. And don't worry, I'd certainly do some research before shelling out. At this point though, I'd be happy with quite basic guided photography. As I say, if I can capture spiral arms, I'd consider that one giant leap for this man.

That mount Dave linked does look the biz though. But I also know throwing money at a hobby like astronomy isn't the way forward. I know a few people in local clubs that have thousands of pounds worth of gear, who haven't seen what I've seen through a pair of 10X50 bins. Because they've bought set-ups that are too complicated, and they don't know how to use them.

I've been taking some nice half-second exposures through my SLR, open clusters and the like. I got an 'image of M51', but only after a two second exposure, which gave me trails. So I'm actually right at that point where I need guidance, scope-wise and info-wise.

Appreciate all the responses guys!

[tomato]

Another +1 for the book and Sara's advice! Don't spend any more money until you have digested it's contents. When I got back into astrophotography after a long break a few years back I was going to spend a large chunk of my budget on a scope and camera with the mount coming third. After reading the book I reversed the priorities, and have not regretted it for a moment.

The HEQ5 is not bargain basement for sure, but you can take some first class images with this mount.

[ronin]

How "serious" is this new level ?

You have an eq mount - which one?

Seperate visual from AP, you have an 8" newtonian I suspect. That is not a great AP scope. To a fair extent forget aperture. StargazerTim is getting very good results from his scope and that is a WO Star 71, so 71mm aperture. Basically unlearn what you have more or less been told so far.

Years ago at Sidmouth the people there used EQ5 mounts and WO Megrez 72 scopes, and they got good results. To replicate that means around £1200 these days. That should give you exposures of around 40 to 60 seconds. You could add a small guide system to that and go for longer but the weight is getting added to, and if you decide on mono and filter wheels the EQ5 is likely to struggle.

The catch is that you can get up and running for £1,200 but it is easy to spend £12,000. Hence the question: How serious ?

You will need a goto as the motors are supposed to be better, and the goto is required for future guiding. You need to BOTH polar align a EQ goto AND perform the goto alignment. The manufacturers use the term "align" for both aspects and people can presume they are the same, they are not, and each requires to be done.

If you change mounts - not sure what you have then a lot depends on budget. HEQ5's are good, HEQ5's are damn heavy. Against all AP suggestions if you want it to be "fun" and you need to haul the mount any distance then be a little careful of the HEQ5. I have one, but I also have an EQ5. I bought the EQ5 as the HEQ5 was too big for easy general use.

[happy-kat]

You have an eq5 I think, you don't need to guide to take DSO it helps obviously but is not essential if it were I'd be dommed to never having a go and I don't even have an equatorial mount! Don't jump in to spending money until you know why you're spending it. Look at what you already own how many holes are there in what you have that is stopping you from starting. Don't be fixated with using a telescope (they add weight and increased mount demands) stunning DSO images can be taken using a camera and lens, you may already own such and that just means you are missing motors to provide the tracking on your mount.

[Swithin StCleeve]

"How serious" is a good question.

I'm VERY happy to take small steps. Sharp images of the Andromeda galaxy, M13, the Orion Nebula would please me greatly. I didn't own an DSLR till six months ago, so it's all new, (though I've been observing for 25 years!).

 

[Swithin StCleeve]

I can see what's happening here. I'm taking about getting "serious" in astrophotography, when I should have said "I want to start taking simple, guided astro-photographs". I'm not up to playing with the big boys yet!

[Galen Gilmore]

quite honestly if your only looking for simple stuff right now, then an eq5 and 130pds can get the job done. That is about $750, (not sure the equivalent in pounds) for something basic do all the simple stuff. Its what I did.

Now it is limited though, especially if your looking to upgrade the scope or add on lots of extra stuff. You won't be able to get 5+ minute exposures, even with guiding. 

[Swithin StCleeve]

34 minutes ago, ronin said:

How "serious" is this new level ?

You have an eq mount - which one?

 

The mount is a EQ5. Do you think I should just learn to align it properly, buy a motor and go for 30 second Andromeda shots?

[Galen Gilmore]

1 minute ago, Swithin StCleeve said:

The mount is a EQ5. Do you think I should just learn to align it properly, buy a motor and go for 30 second Andromeda shots?

Yes that sounds like a good idea. Andromeda might be a bit big for a 200p though, try photographing the dumbbell nebula, or the ring nebula.

[Swithin StCleeve]

17 minutes ago, Galen Gilmore said:

Yes that sounds like a good idea. Andromeda might be a bit big for a 200p though, try photographing the dumbbell nebula, or the ring nebula.

I'd be using a DSLR on a T-ring without an eyepiece, so I'd easily get it in the frame I think.

So 30 seconds with a motorised EQ mount would be okay? I wouldn't get too much trailing?

[Galen Gilmore]

10 minutes ago, Swithin StCleeve said:

I'd be using a DSLR on a T-ring without an eyepiece, so I'd easily get it in the frame I think.

So 30 seconds with a motorised EQ mount would be okay? I wouldn't get too much trailing?

the 200p focal length is a bit much for Andromeda. If you wanted to test how long your exposure times can get, then I would suggest just choosing a random patch of sky or perhaps a bright star and start taking exposures. Just as practice before you start getting into the nitty gritty. Then once you found your optimal exposure time, choose an easy object (you could do Andromeda if you wanted, but you would be cutting out the edges) and start snapping away.

It's all about testing to get the result you want. As somebody who is also just a beginner I have learned that, there is no definitive answer, it's just what happens to work best for you.

 

Edit: just to show you what the field of view with your particular scope is I'm going to attach this picture.

I didn't know what your camera was, but the 450D seemed like a pretty neutral camera in terms of sensor size.

[Swithin StCleeve]

Wow, you've taught me something. I never knew the Andromeda galaxy was so much bigger than the moon in apparent size. I'm actually amazed. What I've been looking at through the scope all these years was just the brightest part, in the centre. Wow. And wow again.

 

Can I just add... Wow!

What you need for Andromeda then, is a quality long lens for your camera and a solid guide. No scope required, almost!

[happy-kat]

If you take off the heavy wind sail 200p and bought an inexpensive 135 or 200mm vintage camera lens add mount adapter then you could be looking at 90 second exposures with a high keep rate. I use a flash hot shoe mount red dot finder on my dslr. To make focus easier as I don't have a laptop I use an android tablet using dslr controller.

[Galen Gilmore]

Just now, Swithin StCleeve said:

Wow, you've taught me something. I never knew the Andromeda galaxy was so much bigger than the moon in apparent size. I'm actually amazed. What I've been looking at through the scope all these years was just the brightest part, in the centre. Wow. And wow again.

 

Can I just add... Wow!

What you need for Andromeda then, is a quality zoom and a solid guide. No scope required, almost!

Yep, it's crazy the first time hearing it. It's the biggest DSO in the sky I think, despite it being several million light years away! Quite amazing really.

[happy-kat]

Here's the fov canon 1100d with a 50mm or 135mm camera lens.

 

 

[Swithin StCleeve]

9 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

If you take off the heavy wind sail 200p and bought an inexpensive 135 or 200mm vintage camera lens add mount adapter then you could be looking at 90 second exposures with a high keep rate. I use a flash hot shoe mount red dot finder on my dslr. To make focus easier as I don't have a laptop I use an android tablet using dslr controller.

I think I understand that, apart from the focus bit. What's a dslr controller? I don't use a laptop either, for astronomy, and the only tablets I've got are for my hay fever. Would I have trouble focussing without the controller thing?

I like the sound of an inexpensive vintage 200mm lens!

[happy-kat]

You'd be fine if your camera has an lcd all the easier particularly if it is a flip out one.

[Swithin StCleeve]

You've almost got to re-think astronomy with this lot. Astrophotography isn't necessarily about telescopes, is it? 

[happy-kat]

Aperture is about observing because the eyeball captures only so much light, imaging is about exposure time which is what gives the light.