What EQ telescope should I get for AP?

[ph0t0gr4ph3r]

I've been interested in astronomy/astrophotography ever since I held up my camera to my Toys-R-Us telescope's eyepiece 11 years ago, but I've never seriously gotten into it. But today I was looking at observatories in my area, which sparked something inside me and made me look at telescopes. So some of what I've gathered from a days worth of browsing the internet is this:

What dobsonian means

What an equatorial mount is

The difference between refractors, reflectors, and SCTs

Don't buy a PowerSeeker

EQ mounts are better for AP than Dobs

Yeah, not too much, but enough for me to have some (very) rough ideas of what to buy. I spent most of my time looking at dobs though, so I really only know what to buy in terms of those. I was considering getting the Orion SkyWatcher XT6, but learning about how EQs are better for AP, I turned away from it and am now looking for a nice EQ, but I really have no idea what to buy since I spent most of my time looking at dobs. I have a budget of $500; yes, very limited, but I am really only looking for starter gear. I have a Nikon D90 for pictures and a Sony a5000 for pictures and/or if I need to do the video stacking thing.

 

I'm looking to do some planetary/DSO stuff, if that helps any.

[swag72]

If you are looking at DSO imaging then can I make a suggestion of buying the book 'Making Every Photon Count' available from the FLO website in the book section. It is something of an imagers bible and explains everything that you will need and why. Read it once, twice and thrice before spending a penny.... then you will have an idea of what you need and why. It will save you making expensive mistakes and get it right from the start

[ph0t0gr4ph3r]

5 minutes ago, swag72 said:

If you are looking at DSO imaging then can I make a suggestion of buying the book 'Making Every Photon Count' available from the FLO website in the book section. It is something of an imagers bible and explains everything that you will need and why. Read it once, twice and thrice before spending a penny.... then you will have an idea of what you need and why. It will save you making expensive mistakes and get it right from the start

Thanks! I've heard that name mentioned around here a few times. Cash levels aren't too high for me at the moment, so I will for sure look into buying it so I don't do something financially stupid, ha ha. I definitely do not expect to get good images right off the start, but I'm sure some good reading material will at least help a little.

[Stu]

Welcome to the forum  

To take your last point first, planetary and DSO imaging are very different disciplines so make sure you understand the differences.

Planetary imaging is all about taking thousands of very short frames, often with a larger scope such as a C8 or C9.25, and then stacking the best of these to overcome the seeing effects in the atmosphere.

DSOs require stacking of frames too, but in this instance you need much longer frames, anything from say 30 seconds up to 30 mins or more. This allows sufficient signal to be collected so that when stacked you are able to process the image and pull out the detail. For this you don’t necessarily need a large scope, camera lenses are quite suitable for widefield objects.

Definitely read the book suggested!

I wonder whether a good start would be widefield DSO imaging using the camera and lenses you have, on a Skywatcher StarAdventurer Mount. That would allow you to get some decent results within budget before moving on to a scope on larger mount.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-star-adventurer/skywatcher-star-adventurer-astronomy-bundle.html

Stu

[ph0t0gr4ph3r]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Welcome to the forum  

To take your last point first, planetary and DSO imaging are very different disciplines so make sure you understand the differences.

Planetary imaging is all about taking thousands of very short frames, often with a larger scope such as a C8 or C9.25, and then stacking the best of these to overcome the seeing effects in the atmosphere.

DSOs require stacking of frames too, but in this instance you need much longer frames, anything from say 30 seconds up to 30 mins or more. This allows sufficient signal to be collected so that when stacked you are able to process the image and pull out the detail. For this you don’t necessarily need a large scope, camera lenses are quite suitable for widefield objects.

Definitely read the book suggested!

I wonder whether a good start would be widefield DSO imaging using the camera and lenses you have, on a Skywatcher StarAdventurer Mount. That would allow you to get some decent results within budget before moving on to a scope on larger mount.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-star-adventurer/skywatcher-star-adventurer-astronomy-bundle.html

Stu

Thanks for the welcome!

Also, thanks for the info about the differences between planetary and DSO imagery. I knew there was some difference, but didn't know there was that much. Based on the amazing images I've seen on this site, honestly I'd much rather do DSO instead of planetary; there's just something so intriguing about nebulas and galaxies that doesn't really compare to planets IMO.

The telephoto lenses I have aren't too great (I don't really do any photography that involves tele lenses) but I would like to make the most out of what I have now. Do you think a 55-200 f/4-5.6 would be good enough for widefield DSOs? Also, as tempting as the StarAdventurer mount is, I would much prefer a scope so I'm set for the future; I'm one of those people who like to buy one thing that'll last a good while and only upgrade when the time comes. And to me, looking through a telescope is easier than looking through a camera's viewfinder.

Thanks for your help!

[ollypenrice]

A good introductory DS imaging system which will actually work and work at a level to keep you happy for many years might be like this.

Skywatcher (Orion US) HEQ5 EQ mount.

Skywatcher ED80 refractor with flattener-reducer.

Finder guider and autoguide camera compatible with free PHD2 guiding software.

You already have a DSLR? This would get you started, after which a dedicated cooled astro camera would be the first upgrade. In California the cooling is going to matter! The camera could be the new and interesting CMOS kind or it could be CCD.

Stacking and calibrating software. Deep Sky Stacker is free but AstroArt is much better and reasonably priced.

Photoshop's my main choice for post processing because there are lots of dedicated astro plug ins. But APP is good, and there's GIMP, Star Tools, Pixinsight (difficult) and many more.

To be perfectly honest the incredibly expensive widefield rig we run here is better than the above in terms of the field of view we can cover and in terms of speed but, in other respects, its advantages are marginal.

Olly

 

[ph0t0gr4ph3r]

3 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

A good introductory DS imaging system which will actually work and work at a level to keep you happy for many years might be like this.

Skywatcher (Orion US) HEQ5 EQ mount.

Skywatcher ED80 refractor with flattener-reducer.

Finder guider and autoguide camera compatible with free PHD2 guiding software.

You already have a DSLR? This would get you started, after which a dedicated cooled astro camera would be the first upgrade. In California the cooling is going to matter! The camera could be the new and interesting CMOS kind or it could be CCD.

Stacking and calibrating software. Deep Sky Stacker is free but AstroArt is much better and reasonably priced.

Photoshop's my main choice for post processing because there are lots of dedicated astro plug ins. But APP is good, and there's GIMP, Star Tools, Pixinsight (difficult) and many more.

To be perfectly honest the incredibly expensive widefield rig we run here is better than the above in terms of the field of view we can cover and in terms of speed but, in other respects, it's advantages are marginal.

Olly

 

Thanks for the amount of effort put into helping a noob like me; it definitely makes a lasting impression on a new member!

As much as I would like to have the setup you listed, it is definitely out of my budget by a lot. Honestly, I just want a setup I can take out on clear nights and mess around with until 1 a.m. I get that I probably won't get much of a scope and an EQ mount for $500, but at least it'll be something that can keep me satisfied until I feel the need to upgrade. And yes, once/if I get a scope, a cooled camera is going to be the first upgrade I'll make; California is one hell of a desert! As for post processing, I already have DSS installed for the Milky Way/widefield landscape AP I do every once in a while, so I'm pretty familiar with stacking. I also sometimes use Photoshop and Lightroom for stacking, so I'm familiar with that software as well.

Again, thanks for your help!

[Stu]

32 minutes ago, ph0t0gr4ph3r said:

DSOs? Also, as tempting as the StarAdventurer mount is, I would much prefer a scope so I'm set for the future;

First thing to say is listen to Olly’s advice above anything I say, he actually does this stuff every night!

Second point is to remember that with long exposure imaging, the mount is everything. There is no point having a good scope if you have a wobbly mount, so the better way round would be to buy the HEQ5 mount suggested by Olly and use it with your camera for widefield imaging, then when you have more funds move to a scope. Shorter focal length lenses are easier to track or guide so the errors are not visible in the image. When you progress to a longer focal length (and heavier) scope, tracking and guiding errors will become noticeable so you need to get these right.

I suggested the StarAdventurer because of your budget limitations. Astrophotography is expensive and so being able to learn the principles with this little mount and your camera would be a great place to start. I believe your lens would be ok, used at the shortest focal length to start while you learn the ropes.

[ollypenrice]

12 minutes ago, Stu said:

First thing to say is listen to Olly’s advice above anything I say, he actually does this stuff every night!

Second point is to remember that with long exposure imaging, the mount is everything. There is no point having a good scope if you have a wobbly mount, so the better way round would be to buy the HEQ5 mount suggested by Olly and use it with your camera for widefield imaging, then when you have more funds move to a scope. Shorter focal length lenses are easier to track or guide so the errors are not visible in the image. When you progress to a longer focal length (and heavier) scope, tracking and guiding errors will become noticeable so you need to get these right.

I suggested the StarAdventurer because of your budget limitations. Astrophotography is expensive and so being able to learn the principles with this little mount and your camera would be a great place to start. I believe your lens would be ok, used at the shortest focal length to start while you learn the ropes.

Stu's right. If you want to do AP at 500 dollars a long focal length is out. A long focal length requires not just an EQ mount but an accurate one. If you bring the focal length down to 50mm then even a very basic and unguided EQ mount like the Star Adventurer will do the trick perfectly well. So If I were to spend your budget I'd buy a star adventurer and use the kit camera lens. And I'd buy a small Dob, possiblyu second hand, to look through. On 500 dollars you need to uncouple the AP from the visual. They won't mix.

Focal length isn't everything. I did this Orion with an 85mm Samyang lens.

Olly

[ph0t0gr4ph3r]

6 minutes ago, Stu said:

First thing to say is listen to Olly’s advice above anything I say, he actually does this stuff every night!

Second point is to remember that with long exposure imaging, the mount is everything. There is no point having a good scope if you have a wobbly mount, so the better way round would be to buy the HEQ5 mount suggested by Olly and use it with your camera for widefield imaging, then when you have more funds move to a scope. Shorter focal length lenses are easier to track or guide so the errors are not visible in the image. When you progress to a longer focal length (and heavier) scope, tracking and guiding errors will become noticeable so you need to get these right.

I suggested the StarAdventurer because of your budget limitations. Astrophotography is expensive and so being able to learn the principles with this little mount and your camera would be a great place to start. I believe your lens would be ok, used at the shortest focal length to start while you learn the ropes.

Now I see. I'm not used to the very long exposures needed for serious astrophotography (longest I've done is 120 sec), so this is all new to me. I'm for sure going to have to read up on DSO imaging, and will see if I can remember to buy Making Every Photon Count sometime within the next few days.

And now that I look closer at the Star Adventurer, it really looks like a good all-around solution for my purposes. I would love to have the HEQ5, so I will have to see how much/if I can push my budget.

[ollypenrice]

1 minute ago, ph0t0gr4ph3r said:

Now I see. I'm not used to the very long exposures needed for serious astrophotography (longest I've done is 120 sec), so this is all new to me. I'm for sure going to have to read up on DSO imaging, and will see if I can remember to buy Making Every Photon Count sometime within the next few days.

And now that I look closer at the Star Adventurer, it really looks like a good all-around solution for my purposes. I would love to have the HEQ5, so I will have to see how much/if I can push my budget.

We'll help you push your budget. It's a grand forum tradition!!!

Olly

[ph0t0gr4ph3r]

Just now, ollypenrice said:

Stu's right. If you want to do AP at 500 dollars a long focal length is out. A long focal length requires not just an EQ mount but an accurate one. If you bring the focal length down to 50mm then even a very basic and unguided EQ mount like the Star Adventurer will do the trick perfectly well. So If I were to spend your budget I'd buy a star adventurer and use the kit camera lens. And I'd buy a small Dob, possiblyu second hand, to look through. On 500 dollars you need to uncouple the AP from the visual. They won't mix.

Focal length isn't everything. I did this Orion with an 85mm Samyang lens.

Olly

Wow, that image is absolutely amazing! I always thought that focal length is the most important part of an AP setup, but man was I wrong! I'll see if I can find a nice dob on Craigslist or eBay once I get all the other gear I need (which will probably be around Christmas time).

[ph0t0gr4ph3r]

4 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

We'll help you push your budget. It's a grand forum tradition!!!

Olly

Ha ha! I'm sure the bank won't be all that happy, but I sure will!

[ollypenrice]

Just now, ph0t0gr4ph3r said:

Wow, that image is absolutely amazing! I always thought that focal length is the most important part of an AP setup, but man was I wrong! I'll see if I can find a nice dob on Craigslist or eBay once I get all the other gear I need (which will probably be around Christmas time).

You can do quite well with a maximum focal length of a metre...  

... and the Canon Nifty Fifty is an imaging classic. This Gendler/Guisard image is an example:

http://www.robgendlerastropics.com/OrionSG.html

Olly

 

 

[Ande]

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

Stu's right. If you want to do AP at 500 dollars a long focal length is out. A long focal length requires not just an EQ mount but an accurate one. If you bring the focal length down to 50mm then even a very basic and unguided EQ mount like the Star Adventurer will do the trick perfectly well. So If I were to spend your budget I'd buy a star adventurer and use the kit camera lens. And I'd buy a small Dob, possiblyu second hand, to look through. On 500 dollars you need to uncouple the AP from the visual. They won't mix.

Focal length isn't everything. I did this Orion with an 85mm Samyang lens.

Olly

Wow!! Just wow!!  That photo is stunning.  One of the most striking images I have ever seen.  Is there a thread detailing how you achieved it?

[ollypenrice]

1 hour ago, Ande said:

Wow!! Just wow!!  That photo is stunning.  One of the most striking images I have ever seen.  Is there a thread detailing how you achieved it?

It was a long time ago! I used a one shot colour CCD camera behind the Samyang lens and made a 6 panel mosaic. (The CCD had a chip smaller than a DSLR.) Then I did the same again with a mono CCD camera and an Ha filter. The Ha layer was used to lighten the red channel.

Olly

[Ande]

Well, I can't pretend I understood any of that, lol.  I'm just starting out.  But it's quite evident that you are extremely talented in this field.  I'll be sure to take any of your advice on these forums very seriously.  That is an amazing piece.  If I had taken that, it would now be framed gracing my wall

[Stu]

39 minutes ago, Ande said:

Well, I can't pretend I understood any of that, lol.  I'm just starting out.  But it's quite evident that you are extremely talented in this field.  I'll be sure to take any of your advice on these forums very seriously.  That is an amazing piece.  If I had taken that, it would now be framed gracing my wall

Whilst I do think Olly is a talented chap, don’t under estimate my knowledge and achievements when it comes to astrophotography.......  

This is how M42 should really look  

‘nuff said  

[Ande]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Whilst I do think Olly is a talented chap, don’t under estimate my knowledge and achievements when it comes to astrophotography.......  

This is how M42 should really look  

‘nuff said  

I guess your work here is now done  

[rigradio]

FYI, this guy knew how to use optimally his Star Adventurer & HEQ5 -> Eric

[ph0t0gr4ph3r]

1 hour ago, rigradio said:

FYI, this guy knew how to use optimally his Star Adventurer & HEQ5 -> Eric

Wow, his images are amazing! He definitely knows his stuff. I'm extremely captivated, even at only 25 out of the 160 images.