Help on first setup please

[Z3roCool]

Hi everyone - first time post.

I am brand new to this but have been looking into all the information and gear for a good while. In the next 6 months will be looking at getting my gear together to start my adventure.

I am looking at Deep Space Photography mainly (Blows my Mind!)

My background in photography is Motorsport and Aircraft (Military) which I love. I have a Canon 7D which I am looking to use and will look to move up to a CCD at some point in the future. I am pretty okay with Post Processing and have watched many videos on getting tips on what to capture and how to process the images to get good results.

The main question is what scope and mount to go for?

I am looking at spending around £1500-£1800 (GBP). Would push the boat out a little if it was worth it for a better setup!

I keep going between different scopes and getting a bit overcome with information about which is better for Deep Space Photography. Think it sometimes comes down to a lot of them have a few pros and cons but will do the job well.

Have been looking at the Orion Atlas 10 EQ-G GoTo Reflector Orion Atlas 10" 

Have read that Refractors can be better options for Deep Space Photography but others saying Reflectors are the way to go (Better speed etc.) Will also go with guiding with simple guide scope and CCD.

• Would love to know others opinions on this. Other combinations of scopes etc.
• Should I be going smaller, am I taking on too much for a beginner in Astrophotography?

Many thanks for any help on this!

Z3roCool

[happy-kat]

Welcome

As you've got a window for reading before choosing it would be read the book 'making every photon count' before spending any serious money so you can buy wisely and understand why choosing what you choose.

Reflectors will show refraction spikes (curved vanes apparently can remove then) refractors don't. You might find that's enough of a driver. 

[Galen Gilmore]

For a beginner, a 10" newtonian will be way too much trouble. Personally I would get a skywatcher EQ-6, and an skywatcher triplet Espirit 80.

The problem with big scopes like the 10" newtonian is that it is heavy, which means the mount has to work harder than if you use a small 80mm. the 10" is also a wind sail, which could potentially ruin long exposure photos. The 10" also needs collimating (tuning) every once in a while, or if its fast, almost before every imaging session. Bad collimation results in awkwardly shaped stars, and slightly fuzzy images.

This is advise from a fellow beginner who is working on a budget 1/3 of yours.

[Z3roCool]

2 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

Welcome

As you've got a window for reading before choosing it would be read the book 'making every photon count' before spending any serious money so you can buy wisely and understand why choosing what you choose.

Thanks for the info. Will take a look.

[Z3roCool]

2 minutes ago, Galen Gilmore said:

For a beginner, a 10" newtonian will be way too much trouble. Personally I would get a skywatcher EQ-6, and an skywatcher triplet Espirit 80.

The problem with big scopes like the 10" newtonian is that it is heavy, which means the mount has to work harder than if you use a small 80mm. the 10" is also a wind sail, which could potentially ruin long exposure photos. The 10" also needs collimating (tuning) every once in a while, or if its fast, almost before every imaging session. Bad collimation results in awkwardly shaped stars, and slightly fuzzy images.

This is advise from a fellow beginner who is working on a budget 1/3 of yours.

Thanks for info.  I am thinking that going big to begin with is a mistake and starting on something more manageable maybe the way to go. 

[ronin]

Astrophotography is a "big" mount and a "small" scope. Visual is the other way round. Basically do not buy a visual setup and expect to find it performs well as an AP rig.

Likely the mainstream is something like an HEQ5 and an 80mm apo, other then the 80mm apo people use the 130PDS reflector. Be aware of the subtle difference between apo and ED. Many will say apo and refer to an ED doublet which strictly is not an apo. Equally oddly is ES have an 80mm ED that is an apo triplet. So confusion all round. The ES 80 FCD-100 is a good option - ES kind of aim their refractors to doing AP.

Mount will depend on you. The EQ6 is better but also a big lump to transport, the HEQ5 is still a fairly big lump. You want a big mount as the path is usually mount+scope+DSLR+bits then off you go getting say 60 second images to stack. Later people usualluy add guiding and that is more weight, but yoiu can get 300 sec exposures (or more), so buy a big enough mount the first time.

Photography is fine but sort of consider this. In photography you take a single shot at say f/8, ISO 200, 1/100 sec and that is it. In AP you take say 30 exposures of what is a moving object, each exposure is 60 seconds long and to get an image you have to stack one on the other before anything useful appears. And you do EVERYTHING as in set ISO, set exposure, set focus. And the best are RAW file types not jpeg. Later peoiple add a mono camera, filter wheel and filters and take exposures i R and G and B and L then stack. It is a bit different.

Ignoring the 10" idea a good imaging scope that a number of people use is the William Optics Star 71. As said above "small scope". Don't mix the 2 areas up.

http://www.astronomyclubs.co.uk/Clubs/Counties.aspx

List of clubs, suggest you visit one or two.

[M Astronomy]

Hey! Welcome to SGL and I hope you've had a great Christmas. Let's be real here. £1500 is a lot of money. Especially if you are not sure you are committed to the hobby yet. Read "Making Every Photon Count". Great book and it really did help me understand the mumbo jumbo people talk about here. However...

If you are ready to jump into the deep end, the mount always comes first. You can have the best camera and best telescope, but if you have a shakey mount, your picture will always leave you disappointed, throwing away hard earned subs left and right. The Skywatcher mounts are very popular and for good reason. Consider how much you want to move your set up. Do you want it to be portable? If not, an EQ6 is a good option. 

For a scope, an apochromatic refractor is often recommended. More expensive scopes will be triplets but doublets can also perform well. Large reflectors are often cumbersome to set up and by the time you've done that, well the clouds have probably rolled in. 

Then there are other things to consider, like autoguiding. But don't worry yourself too much about other things. Too steep of a learning curve and it won't be fun for you. 

I'm a beginner, like you. I'd start simple and learn as you go. Make sure you don't get so obsessed by information and never actually buy anything. Hope this helps! Merry Christmas!

[alanjgreen]

32 minutes ago, Z3roCool said:

Thanks for the info. Will take a look.

As said above, start here

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

Otherwise you will be wasting your money. Read the book & understand what you are trying to do THEN SPEND THE MONEY!

Alan

[JemC]

Welcome to SGL,

A lot of good advice has been given, and that's a good budget to have getting started 

Another consideration to take into account,

Is this going to be permanently sited (if so no problem)
or
are you going to have lug all this big and heavy kit in /out to set up and dismantle after every session? (will soon become a chore and will not get used as much)

Research, Research, and ask questions on here, 

[Z3roCool]

Thanks for all the info! Will for sure buy the book and get reading. Got a week in Morocco in Febso will be doing a lot of research/learning then (Ironically under the stars).

Will for sure get a bigger mount (so I can grow into if need be) and then look at the glass and build from there as I progress.

The challenge of long exposure and getting good shots then processing is what is attracting me to this, as well as the whole thing just blowing my mind every time I look at a photo of a nebula or cluster.

I will mostly use on the Isle of Wight where family live so spend a lot of time there. Family are in very dark area with very little light pollution (Cannot see hand in front of face when the moon is not out!) so would not have to move too much. Nothing worse than something becoming a chore!

Again, thanks so much for the info, really got my mind thinking, and Merry Christmas!

[newbie alert]

I'd recommend a 80mm refractor  (80ed) with a eq5 or avx sized mount for deep sky nebulae,some will fill your frame in your 7d...galaxies tend to be small in such scopes,so I'd look up astro tools and play about with different scopes on different targets to get a feel for what you want to do before you part with your cash..

[Z3roCool]

1 hour ago, newbie alert said:

I'd recommend a 80mm refractor  (80ed) with a eq5 or avx sized mount for deep sky nebulae,some will fill your frame in your 7d...galaxies tend to be small in such scopes,so I'd look up astro tools and play about with different scopes on different targets to get a feel for what you want to do before you part with your cash..

Brilliant - this is just what I have been looking for. Thanks

Did not realise how much more closer a CCD gets you! 

[Owmuchonomy]

What lenses do you already own for use with your 7D?

[newbie alert]

10 hours ago, Z3roCool said:

Brilliant - this is just what I have been looking for. Thanks

Did not realise how much more closer a CCD gets you! 

Just as a caution..just remember the longer the focal length the more taxing on the mount and it the mount that keeps the target on the sensor of the camera..shorter fl,wider fov are far easier on the mount

[Andyk93]

On your budget I would be buying an heq5 and a skywatcher ed80. This gives you money for a guide scope and camera and all the little bits you will need. Refractors just work, no messing around. 

[Z3roCool]

4 hours ago, Owmuchonomy said:

What lenses do you already own for use with your 7D?

I have a Canon 400L f5.6, 500L f4 and 70-200L f2.8 Have heard good and bad reports on using lenses for DSP..

[Z3roCool]

3 hours ago, Andyk93 said:

On your budget I would be buying an heq5 and a skywatcher ed80. This gives you money for a guide scope and camera and all the little bits you will need. Refractors just work, no messing around. 

Yeah, need to look at the accessories I will need to make sure I do not go over budget. Can see that being a very easy thing in this area! For sure going with a Refractor. 

[Davey-T]

3 minutes ago, Z3roCool said:

I have a Canon 400L f5.6, 500L f4 and 70-200L f2.8 Have heard good and bad reports on using lenses for DSP..

That'll do for starters, you can mount your camera and lenses on an HEQ5 and get everything working before you need a scope.

Dave

[Z3roCool]

3 hours ago, newbie alert said:

Just as a caution..just remember the longer the focal length the more taxing on the mount and it the mount that keeps the target on the sensor of the camera..shorter fl,wider fov are far easier on the mount

Think I will be going with a good mount that I can upgrade on later (scope wise). Put something wider on for now and see how I go. Get into tracking at some point and then build up from there. Cheers. 

[Z3roCool]

1 minute ago, Davey-T said:

That'll do for starters, you can mount your camera and lenses on an HEQ5 and get everything working before you need a scope.

Dave

Cheere Dave, is there much difference between using camera lens and say an 80mm Regractor? What can a tele do over say a 500mm Canon L? Presume they are aimed at different uses being the main one? For sure worth a go though as a starting point to see how I go. Good call ?

[happy-kat]

Lenses can be good or bad just like telescopes, primes are generally better. It's gear you already own may as well start with using it. Chromatic aberration and coma are the likely suspects on less good lenses, though both can be minimised with a little stopping down.

[Davey-T]

Best just to get started with stuff you already have, lot's of mathematical calculations involved with working out field of view and resolution of various combinations to achieve a reasonable arc seconds per pixel but best not to get to obsessed with it to start with.

You can achieve some very nice images using camera lenses, they have their short comings being optimised for " normal " photography but it's nice to have some first images to look back on and see your progress and you probably won't notice the faults until you get hooked and start pouring money into the astro' imaging pit to achieve incremental improvements

Dave

[Davey-T]

Have a look at some of Stuarts images all done with camera lens.

Dave

 

[Z3roCool]

48 minutes ago, Davey-T said:

Have a look at some of Stuarts images all done with camera lens.

Dave

 

Wow, stunning. I have the same lens so if I could get something half as good after some learning would be chuffed! Let the learning begin!

Thanks again. 

[mystyco]

I have a Celestron Skyprodigy 130 SLT. Cheap, self aligning, and can be used with a digital camera or video camera for imaging. If you want to save an alt-az mount is your best option! For me my setup is perfect.