Astrophotography help

[Lebster31]

Hi! I am looking to buy a new telescope, one that will work for astrophotography. I've heard that Dobsonian telescopes offer the best bang for your buck in terms of aperture but is it even possible to track objects with them? Any advice on what kind of telescope I should buy would be extremely helpful. I'm looking to spend no more than $1000 on the scope alone. 

 

Thanks!

[cletrac1922]

Dobs not much use for AP, as most unable to track

I have a SW ED80 on a EQ5 mount

U will gets heaps of advise on other scopes and mounts as well

Individual choice

John

 

 

 

[steppenwolf]

A Dobsonian is not suitable for deep sky astrophotography although it can be used for Lunar and planetary imaging to some extent.

For deep sky you would be far better off with a motorised equatorial mount and a small refractor. The mount is the most important component.

[Star101]

Personally, I would agree with John and Steve, above. 

Lots of targets in the sky are quite large. One does not need a long focal length scope to start with. 

https://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/

Check out this link and try swapping cameras and scopes to see what suits. Make sure you select Imaging at the top.

Good luck.

 

[Lebster31]

I was under the impression that you needed a larger telescope to Increase the amount of light for deep sky 

Thanks!

[Davey-T]

12 minutes ago, Lebster31 said:

I was under the impression that you needed a larger telescope to Increase the amount of light for deep sky 

Thanks!

Larger as in aperture not length but when it comes down to it you need more than one scope for everything up there 

Dave

[Star101]

As Dave has just said.

My first purchase was a C11. 2800mm Focal length at f/10 WOW, great for looking at planets and far away galaxies. But at f/10 it takes a lot longer to image stuff than say f/6. Or f/2 ( hyperstar )  With the C11,  I can fit M77 and M27 in field of view nicely on my camera. But M81, M101, M33 and especially M31 are much to large.  So, I bought the TS65Q 2.5" 420mm Focal length at f/6.5. A miniscope in comparison but again, WOW, I can fit so much more in the field of view. And at f/6.5 is much faster to image with.

So, it really depends what you want to image. I can also say that guiding a small focal length scope is much easier than long focal length. And when doing AP, that is VERY important.

Take a look at https://www.astrobin.com/ . Some images have the details of scopes used etc. Maybe this will help.

[Demonperformer]

I would think the only possible advantage of a dob would be if it was a solid tube one that could be taken off the base and put on a "proper" mount for imaging, but used as a grab'n'go on the dob base for visual. But big scopes add problems like guiding, acting as sails, ...

[steppenwolf]

11 hours ago, Lebster31 said:

I was under the impression that you needed a larger telescope to Increase the amount of light for deep sky 

Not such a problem for astrophotography (although larger aperture is always goof if your mount will carry it!) more important for observing where your eye has only one 'shutter speed'!!

[Mick J]

As Steve said above the mount is very important, good reliable tracking and can be a major cost.  Will the new telescope also be used for visual ? and what camera do you have in mind ?

Remember that a dslr and good lens would give you a good start.