cheap DSLR

[happy-kat]

I like to add that the eye needs aperture to see the camera needs time. So the 200p could be swapped for a camera lens, as a future thought. I guess once you get going and the interest rises you'll do lots of reading.

[Ouroboros]

One thing to keep in mind using a camera with lens on a mount like that is that you can't balance it with the weights supplied. The camera is too light. So an lighter weight will be required. 

[dan_19991]

3 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

Better results will always be had by spending time polar aligning carefully. I wouldn't say weight is a severe problem in your case, though as with everyone, careful balancing is important. Imagers are often advised to make the eastern side of the RA axis ever so slightly heavy so the motors are always driving forwards against a weight. 

As for the DSLR I use a 450D, which does the job. I'm not going to enter into which of the several older DSLRs are better because I simply don't know. I just know the 450D was and is highly thought of. Something I might consider now is whether I could get a DSLR with a flip out screen. A flip out screen is most helpful when setting up the camera and for using 'live view' for focusing. It's not impossible without one, but sometimes the scope and camera get themselves into orientations that make seeing a fixed screen really difficult. 

I think you've got the right attitude. You're aware that you're going to find using this scope and mount a challenge. But there's no reason why you shouldn't produce some satisfying results.  Most importantly you'll learn a huge amount without a huge additional outlay. Plus you can continue  using the DSLR if at some time in the future you upgrade the mount.  

I suggest it would be useful to buy a DSLR with at least the standard canon kit lens. This will enable you to learn how the camera functions during the day. You'll also have a useful conventional camera. Plus you could attach it to your mount and take some quite long exposure wide field pictures. 

thanks for the response, ill start taking more time on the polar alignment, as far as the camera goes, i plan to hook it up to a laptop and control it from there as much as possible so i think im looking for more the pixel size and number of pixels. also ive heard of people using a sort of grate put on the front of the telescope and taking short exposures to focus it so i think i will look into that 

Daniel

 

[happy-kat]

it is called a bahtinov mask

[dan_19991]

1 hour ago, happy-kat said:

I like to add that the eye needs aperture to see the camera needs time. So the 200p could be swapped for a camera lens, as a future thought. I guess once you get going and the interest rises you'll do lots of reading.

i have looked at that a little but telephoto lenses are rather expensive and i already have the telescope which is the reason im thinking hooking it to the telescope

[Tommohawk]

1 hour ago, dan_19991 said:

 so i think im looking for more the pixel size and number of pixels.

Daniel

 

Hi. Dont get too fixated on the number of pixels. If you're going with an APS-C format the sensor size will obviously be the same for all of the camera types youre considering. In practice if you're viewing the image on a PC / laptop the image will be "reduced" to fit on the screen - so having a bazillion pixels wont really help, excepting that it allows you to crop a section if required without losing resolution.  Sorry if that may be obvious!

Couple of other thoughts. There's a good website for astromodded cameras here. He has a 1000D for £185. I know that's outside your stated budget, but maybe you could hang a while!

Also if you can get a Canon 550D cheaply that possibly an even better bet, because if you want to do planetary it has a videcrop mode which gives full resolution videos. I've has some very good results with this.

The problem is that if you budget too tightly, you may want to upgrade pretty soon and then it will have cost you more in the longer run. That said, if you buy carefully you can always sell on afterwards and only incur a slight loss, or even make a small gain. And you can definitely get some great pictures with any of the cameras you're considering.

One other thought for what its worth. The most exciting result i think I ever got was with an unguided 150PDS and an unmodded camera on an EQ3 - probably 60 second subs from memory. I captured the supernova in M82 at its best just by careful polar alignment and a bit of planning. Technically not my best pic, but probably the most rewarding. So don't be talked into overspending!

Good luck and have fun!

[happy-kat]

I was more thinking you might get to borrow a lens. Vintage lenses can be picked up cheap in charity shops and a canon can use old m42 (pentax) lenses with an adaptor cost about £8. Some old lenses are very good, some less so as chromatic aberration control can vary.

[MBJ]

20 hours ago, dan_19991 said:

Hi all,

Im living in a fairly light polluted area, and have a Skywatcher 200p on an eq5 pro mount. I've been using my phone to take pictures of varies objects with varying degrees of success ( mainly due to mounting my phone to the telescope) but ive decided id like to take imaging a little more seriously and am looking to get a DSLR with the interest of deep sky astrophotography. having said that i dont have £5k for blow on a camera and am looking to spend around the £100 mark, but dont know cameras and dont know what the best camera in my price range would be. I realize i wont be able to do too long a exposure because of my mount being unguided and it being a eq5 pro not a Heq5. any recommendations or advice would be greatly appreciated. 

Daniel  

just as an afterthought,i used to have exactly the same telescope you have and went the same route as a dslr for imaging.

i bought a canon 450d but found that when i set it all up i couldnt achieve focus.

i had to buy an adaptor from bernard at modern astronomy.

this extra adaptor was combined with a self centring adaptor aswell and cost me in the region of £80.

[dan_19991]

18 minutes ago, MBJ said:

just as an afterthought,i used to have exactly the same telescope you have and went the same route as a dslr for imaging.

i bought a canon 450d but found that when i set it all up i couldnt achieve focus.

i had to buy an adaptor from bernard at modern astronomy.

this extra adaptor was combined with a self centring adaptor aswell and cost me in the region of £80.

yeah i was also concerned with that, but my scope did come with a extender, i put it on when i first got the telescope by accident until i was later informed that its for a camera so im assuming that should be fine.

[Ouroboros]

21 minutes ago, MBJ said:

just as an afterthought,i used to have exactly the same telescope you have and went the same route as a dslr for imaging.

i bought a canon 450d but found that when i set it all up i couldnt achieve focus.

i had to buy an adaptor from bernard at modern astronomy.

this extra adaptor was combined with a self centring adaptor aswell and cost me in the region of £80.

That's interesting because I have a 200p and 450d and don't have any issue with focusing. There's plenty of leeway  either side. But I have heard reports of this problem but I thought it was with very early versions of the 200p. What vintage was yours? I bought mine about 7 years ago. 

[dan_19991]

3 hours ago, Tommohawk said:

Hi. Dont get too fixated on the number of pixels. If you're going with an APS-C format the sensor size will obviously be the same for all of the camera types youre considering. In practice if you're viewing the image on a PC / laptop the image will be "reduced" to fit on the screen - so having a bazillion pixels wont really help, excepting that it allows you to crop a section if required without losing resolution.  Sorry if that may be obvious!

Couple of other thoughts. There's a good website for astromodded cameras here. He has a 1000D for £185. I know that's outside your stated budget, but maybe you could hang a while!

Also if you can get a Canon 550D cheaply that possibly an even better bet, because if you want to do planetary it has a videcrop mode which gives full resolution videos. I've has some very good results with this.

The problem is that if you budget too tightly, you may want to upgrade pretty soon and then it will have cost you more in the longer run. That said, if you buy carefully you can always sell on afterwards and only incur a slight loss, or even make a small gain. And you can definitely get some great pictures with any of the cameras you're considering.

One other thought for what its worth. The most exciting result i think I ever got was with an unguided 150PDS and an unmodded camera on an EQ3 - probably 60 second subs from memory. I captured the supernova in M82 at its best just by careful polar alignment and a bit of planning. Technically not my best pic, but probably the most rewarding. So don't be talked into overspending!

Good luck and have fun!

thanks for the reply, i agree that my budget is tight, but i guess im trying to spread it out and upgrade incrementally as i cant to go out and buy a new ccd. also, i do now realise that a good polar alignment is more important than having an autoguider. 

[Ouroboros]

3 minutes ago, dan_19991 said:

yeah i was also concerned with that, but my scope did come with a extender, i put it on when i first got the telescope by accident until i was later informed that its for a camera so im assuming that should be fine.

OK sounds like you've got it covered if it is an issue. 

[MBJ]

1 hour ago, Ouroboros said:

That's interesting because I have a 200p and 450d and don't have any issue with focusing. There's plenty of leeway  either side. But I have heard reports of this problem but I thought it was with very early versions of the 200p. What vintage was yours? I bought mine about 7 years ago. 

i never had enough inward travel on the focuser to achieve focus,i actually ended up loosening the screws that hold the mirror cell in place and adjusting it as far up the tube as it would go to achive focus.mine was a year old when i  bought it in 2012

[Tommohawk]

It seems its the inward travel that some folk found to be a problem. I have a 200P - which I subsequently converted to DS  - but even as standard it would reach focus OK. BUT dont use the 1.25" nosepiece to connect otherwise you may not get close enough - the EOS converter connects directly to the 2" connector on the focuser.

[Tommohawk]

BTW just noticed there's a 550D for sale on ebay current bid £121 - ends in 1 hour 12 mins. No idea what its like though, but seller has good feedback.

[Ouroboros]

My 200p focuser looks like this ... The 450d reaches focus when the focuser is wound out about half an inch. 

 

[Tommohawk]

Mine is a black tube 200P, but focus is same as yours - need to be about 1/2" out when connected direct.

[dan_19991]

thanks for all the replies, im now looking at buying a canon 1000d dslr, and need t buy adapters, with my 8" telescope it can be used with 2" or 1.25" focusers, is it worth getting the 2" adapter over the 1.25" as i have another smaller scope that i may want to use in the future which only has a 1.25" focuser. will the 2" even be beneficial for a 1000d.

thanks

[geordie85]

With the 200p you'll only need to buy a t-ring as it comes with a t-adapter already.

You'll probably want to buy a coma corrector aswell though. And if you do then make sure you get the m48 t-ring 

[dan_19991]

7 minutes ago, geordie85 said:

With the 200p you'll only need to buy a t-ring as it comes with a t-adapter already.

You'll probably want to buy a coma corrector aswell though. And if you do then make sure you get the m48 t-ring 

i wasnt aware that it came with a t adapter, would that be to 2" or 1.25"?

[Tommohawk]

I think you want one of these. One side goes to your camera and the other has a female 42mm thread - your focuser should have a 42mm male thread to connect to that.

You can get one like this - which has a removalble 1.25" nosepiece which can go in same as your eyepiece would - BUT you may not reach focus as it brings the camera about 25mm further out. 

As has been said there is a 48mm version for use with a coma corrector, but maybe just get the 42mm version for now.

[tooth_dr]

2 hours ago, dan_19991 said:

thanks for all the replies, im now looking at buying a canon 1000d dslr, and need t buy adapters, with my 8" telescope it can be used with 2" or 1.25" focusers, is it worth getting the 2" adapter over the 1.25" as i have another smaller scope that i may want to use in the future which only has a 1.25" focuser. will the 2" even be beneficial for a 1000d.

thanks

This is what I'm using if that helps you?  The item on the left is an MPCC.  If you dont have it then the middle piece screws direcrtly onto the focuser (the correct adapter comes with the scope).

 

[dan_19991]

thanks to everyone who gave me advice, ive just ordered a 1000d and adapter, just got to wait for clear skies now. 

[geordie85]

3 hours ago, dan_19991 said:

i wasnt aware that it came with a t adapter, would that be to 2" or 1.25"?

It's a 2" adapter. You have to Unscrew the 1.25" adapter to reveal it