Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Good photography scope < 300$ ?

Samibotss

Recommended Posts

Samibotss

Samibotss

Posted
Posted

Hi everyone,

It's time for me to upgrade my current scope (Skywatcher 100P) to something more substantial. I live under light polluted skies so I mostly stick to The Moon & Planets and very bright DSOs. I really enjoy astrophotography with my webcam so I'm looking to get a photography oriented scope. However due to my current budget I'm not interested in an expensive apo scope. I've been looking at the Skywatcher Skymax 90 EQ-1 due to the maksutov producing sharp crispy views with a long focal length. Can anyone suggest perhaps something better or give me opinions on the Skymax 90? I don't mind getting a dob but they are more for visual observing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Samibotss

Samibotss

Posted
  • Author
Posted
9 minutes ago, nightfisher said:

you might pick up a nice used 102 Maksutov on a AZ goto mount that might work well for imaging lunar and planets

Do you know of any place to purchase used telescopes other than ebay/craigslist? I'm located in switzerland and here the used telescope market is very small and prices usually ridiculous

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Samibotss

Samibotss

Posted
  • Author
Posted
12 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

Not at the price. Looks at a few pages of this thread, expecially @Uranium235's images.

 

Well I clearly was wrong about it's astrophotography potential. One last question, is there a difference between the 130 and the 130PDS? It seems like there is a motorized version of the 130 on an eq-2 mount which would be best for long exposures

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Tuomo

Guest Tuomo

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Samibotss said:

Well I clearly was wrong about it's astrophotography potential. One last question, is there a difference between the 130 and the 130PDS? It seems like there is a motorized version of the 130 on an eq-2 mount which would be best for long exposures

Yes. Pds is made for astrophotography. You are able to achieve focus with dslrs. Mind if I asked why would you think that reflectors are not par with refractors? 130pds is sometimes refered as apo killer. If not apo killer, then most certainly ed killer.

Remember, that you would need coma corrector with reflector if you are planning to use in astrophotography.

And you dont really need aperture in ap. Well, you do but its the fratio that is more important. Aperture gives you more resolution, but fratio speeds up the scope -> shorter exposures compared to slower scopes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rl

rl

Posted
Posted

First question should be "what's the mount?" That will determine what is possible. 

For deep sky the PDS variant is the better bet. The PDS is optimized for prime focus photography and has enough back focus for a SLR and a coma corrector (which you will need to budget for..). I think you can adjust the focuser to be plane-on as well. You might get a 150 PDS for not much more if you can mount it. 

If you're only interested in solar system stuff then any 6" f/8 Newt would be a good start, having a small secondary.  Just watch out for lack of back focus. You will probably need a *2 barlow or eyepiece projection to match the pixel size to the scope's resolution. Barlow lenses can be good for solving back focus issues with planetry photography.

OTOH Maksutovs have no diffraction spikes and more back focus adjustment, but the aperture for the money will be less. 

RL

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John78

John78

Posted
Posted

You don't need a coma corrector - it will work perfectly fine without - with coma - but that's fixable/cropable no problem anyway - its only a real issue if you want a flat field to the edges or if you're making panoramas.

 

The issue is with that or any scope is you need a decent enough mount to make it useable, a coma corrector is far less important than the mount.

 

The difference between a 130PDS and a 130P is the tube length and the focuser - to reach focus with a 130P and DSLR you have to either shorten the tube or move the mirror up the tube with longer collimation bolts - the focuser on a 130P isn't the greatest contraption in the world, the 130PDS is better but far from great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Samibotss

Samibotss

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, John78 said:

You don't need a coma corrector - it will work perfectly fine without - with coma - but that's fixable/cropable no problem anyway - its only a real issue if you want a flat field to the edges or if you're making panoramas.

 

The issue is with that or any scope is you need a decent enough mount to make it useable, a coma corrector is far less important than the mount.

 

The difference between a 130PDS and a 130P is the tube length and the focuser - to reach focus with a 130P and DSLR you have to either shorten the tube or move the mirror up the tube with longer collimation bolts - the focuser on a 130P isn't the greatest contraption in the world, the 130PDS is better but far from great.

If I'm using a webcam, will there be any noticable difference between the two?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John78

John78

Posted
Posted
Just now, Samibotss said:

If I'm using a webcam, will there be any noticable difference between the two?

No - the sensor is so small it wont have any noticable coma and you can reach focus with either as you can put the webcam down the 1.25" eyepiece holder generally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Samibotss

Samibotss

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, John78 said:

No - the sensor is so small it wont have any noticable coma and you can reach focus with either as you can put the webcam down the 1.25" eyepiece holder generally.

Ok thanks :) All things considered I think I'll go with the motorized 130 Skywatcher since I'll be using a webcam anyway

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John78

John78

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Samibotss said:

Ok thanks :) All things considered I think I'll go with the motorized 130 Skywatcher since I'll be using a webcam anyway

What a 130P SupaTrak?

There's another good thread here if you get a non-EQ mount...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Samibotss

Samibotss

Posted
  • Author
Posted
18 minutes ago, John78 said:

That's a 130M not 130P... I think if you're going to do planetary or lunar or DSO < 30 sec subs then ...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-130p-supatrak-auto.html

Its a few more pennies, but having a goto mount will mean you will use it more as a beginner.

I don't need goto but I do care about tracking that's why I went for the 130M. GoTo seems useless to me if you have a finder scope + stellarium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John78

John78

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, Samibotss said:

I don't need goto but I do care about tracking that's why I went for the 130M. GoTo seems useless to me if you have a finder scope + stellarium.

Ok that's good, so I'd agree with @Stub Mandrel you'd best be going with an EQ3-2 mount, that will get you a fairly decent shot at imaging a DSO.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.