Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I am looking at buying one of these, and need some guidance.

Celestron Nexstar 4 SE

Sky-Watcher Explorer-130P Synscan AZ GOTO

Celestron Nexstar 127 SLT MAK

 

I ended up With these 3 Choices mostly because of the cost I am willing to do the first time, and it seems like they have some abilities (motorized with GoTo-options)

Priority 1: I want to observe nebulas, and galaxies (i.e. Andromeda)  on a decent "zoom" and focus.

Priority 2: I want to do astrophotography.

I've read elsewhere on the forum than its preferable to have an equatorial mount for astrophotography. As far as i can see none of the above have that, even if Celestron Nexstar 4SE is promoting astrophotography on the product info. Or have i misunderstood here and one of the above has an equatorial mount?
The Product info on the Celestron Nexstar 4 SE says it has Alt-Az, EQ North & EQ South. Does this mean it has both options, az-al and equatorial mount?.

 

I think should add that i consider myself at least an "above beginner"-photographer, and Photoshop user. I use NIKON D810 - is this even mountable on one of the telescopes mentioned here?
I also have the Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer mini. Can i setup one of the telescopes mentioned with this and call it a telescope with equatorial mount? 

I guess some of these questions might seem stupid to you, but I just dont know alot regarding telescopes yet:)

Thanks in advance for any replies.

 
 
Edited by masjstovel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should add that the 2 priorities i mentioned  come pretty close together. I mean that if the telescope is perfect for observing, but doesn't work for photography visa versa, it's not that interesting to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly urge you to stop right where you are and start your thinking again once you have done more research. Although astrophotography can be done with an alt-az mount, and there is a thread on here dedicated to that, the right mount for AP if you are driven by the idea of getting the best results is - just is - the equatorial.

A computer driven alt-az mount is very nice for observing, slightly preferable in my view to an equatorial. But an equatorial is vastly preferable to an alt-az for imaging.

When you begin to try deep sky (not lunar-planetary) imaging a short focal length will make your life much easier and give you much better results. You can do wonders in astrophotography below, even well below, 500mm focal length. Once you go for longer FL you introduce massive difficulties. Don't buy anything until you understand this argument.

Olly

Edit: I should add that when I saw your thread title 'astrophotography telescope' I knew in my heart that it was the wrong question to be asking. The right question would have been 'astrophotography mount' because the mount comes first. Every time, with no exceptions.

Edited by ollypenrice
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, masjstovel said:

I also have the Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer mini. Can i setup one of the telescopes mentioned with this and call it a telescope with equatorial mount? 

Have you used the Star Adventurer at all? It's an equatorial mount which allows long exposures to be taken. A motorized alt-az mount will also track an object across the sky but will suffer from field rotation, they are far less suitable for astrophotography as exposures will be limited to about 30 seconds. Reading the specs for the Star Adventurer Mini it suggests it's suitable for lenses of up to 100mm focal length. This may not sound a great deal but there are some very large objects up there, for example this quick shot of the Rosette and Cone was taken with a 135mm lens.

1135378956_RosetteandConeHa.thumb.JPG.aba326536ae2229f618c0333da4f0e09.JPG

The scopes you mention are not suitable for deep sky imaging, both because of the alt-az mounts and in the case of the Celestron scopes too long a focal length. I believe the 130P does not reach focus with a camera, the imaging version is the 130 pds and is quite popular. However, it would probably require an HEQ5 mount and guide scope to get the best out of it.

1 hour ago, masjstovel said:

I should add that the 2 priorities i mentioned  come pretty close together. I mean that if the telescope is perfect for observing, but doesn't work for photography visa versa, it's not that interesting to me.

Unfortunately visual and imaging scopes have very different requirements. For visual work aperture (and therefore light-gathering ability) is the most important attribute, dobsonians offer the best value for money and are often recommended. For imaging I'd recommend giving the Star Adventurer a try with your existing lenses. Everything is more forgiving at short focal lengths and it would give you the opportunity to learn the image processing skills required for AP.

Hope that's some help. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reluctantly agree with Olly. I say reluctantly, because despite the advice of my betters, I did pretty much what you are thinking of doing. In my own defense, I did not start out with the specific intention of getting into astrophotography. It just turned out that way :).

I got a Skywatcher 127 Maksutov with an AltAz GoTo Wifi mount. Regardless of what I wrote above, I still maintain that it is a realy great mount (and telescope) at this pricerange. You will have hours and hours of fun with this setup. And yes, with a halfdecent digital camera and some T2 fittings, you will even be able to take some pretty cool pictures. Not only of the moon and planets (where the Mak truly shines) but also of nebulae and galaxies. Just know that your limit will be around the 20-25 second mark. Exposures longer than that, will start making trails and mess up your picture. But even with that exposure time, you can take some pretty great pictures and have a lot of fun doing it. I know *I* am :).

Here are two pictures that I have taken of the same target (Orion nebula). One is taken with my AltAz Goto mount and the other is taken with an equatorial Goto mount. I feel confident that you will be able to determine which is which without help. These are not 'showcase' pictures. I am a true novice in astrophotography. They are just to show how big a difference there is, even to a beginner like me, between the AltAz and the equatorial mount. And keep in mind that a 127mm Mak is propably the least useful telescope for a target such as this. Still, I hope you get the picture (pun intended) :).

 

 

2059360649_AltAzOrion.jpg.d032c63c27b8ac4cdb6122be0c22082e.jpg

 

1177832371_EQOrion.thumb.jpeg.f3ea86dd1287f85ecfac3212aaa71e46.jpeg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, George Gearless said:

I reluctantly agree with Olly. I say reluctantly, because despite the advice of my betters, I did pretty much what you are thinking of doing. In my own defense, I did not start out with the specific intention of getting into astrophotography. It just turned out that way :).

I got a Skywatcher 127 Maksutov with an AltAz GoTo Wifi mount. Regardless of what I wrote above, I still maintain that it is a realy great mount (and telescope) at this pricerange. You will have hours and hours of fun with this setup. And yes, with a halfdecent digital camera and some T2 fittings, you will even be able to take some pretty cool pictures. Not only of the moon and planets (where the Mak truly shines) but also of nebulae and galaxies. Just know that your limit will be around the 20-25 second mark. Exposures longer than that, will start making trails and mess up your picture. But even with that exposure time, you can take some pretty great pictures and have a lot of fun doing it. I know *I* am :).

Here are two pictures that I have taken of the same target (Orion nebula). One is taken with my AltAz Goto mount and the other is taken with an equatorial Goto mount. I feel confident that you will be able to determine which is which without help. These are not 'showcase' pictures. I am a true novice in astrophotography. They are just to show how big a difference there is, even to a beginner like me, between the AltAz and the equatorial mount. And keep in mind that a 127mm Mak is propably the least useful telescope for a target such as this. Still, I hope you get the picture (pun intended) :).

 

 

2059360649_AltAzOrion.jpg.d032c63c27b8ac4cdb6122be0c22082e.jpg

 

1177832371_EQOrion.thumb.jpeg.f3ea86dd1287f85ecfac3212aaa71e46.jpeg

 

 

Point well made, though I'm slightly sorry that your agreement is reluctant. The trouble is that the physics is very simple and cannot be refuted: over time an equatorial holds the camera in the same orientation with the sky and an alt az does not (for those of us fortunate enough not to be imaging at either of the poles... :icon_mrgreen:) It is certainly possible to work around the alt-az limitations for imaging and the thread on this subject is a worthy one, but nothing is going to persuade me that I should advise astrophotographers to use alt-az mounts if they are starting their thinking from scratch.

Olly

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to have a telescope that would give you great visual experiences on a mount that would also allow you to also do some good quality imaging, you need to spend a bit more money unfortunately, and go for someting like this:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-150p-ds-eq-5-pro-goto.html

If you only go for imaging you could buy a Star Advenurer mount but that will only hold a smaller (200 mm or maybe up to 300 mm) telephoto lens and a DSLR camera and would not be useful for visual. With the packages you are suggesting visual would be quite ok but trying to do imaging with them would probably only be a frustrating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m pretty new to this money pit....sorry hobby and I can’t offer to much advice but one thing I can advise is research and lots of it. 

Someone said I should buy this book and I thought yeh yeh but I did and it was absolutely brilliant advice. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/books/making-every-photon-count-steve-richards.html

559D4928-0F1C-4D4F-A337-98A6F6AA5EF3.thumb.jpeg.3eeae60d9b18a3ca204ddcf5f52c4f9e.jpeg

 

The first thing I bought after the book was a HEQ5 mount and then I learned how to use it with just my DSLR. By the time I had decided on a scope and lots of questions and research later I was competent enough with the HEQ5 so the addition of my SW ED80 was pretty painless and not to much in one go....a nice steady learning curve to just get into it as the leaning will never stop.

Take your time and research as costly mistakes can easily be made. 

Good luck with you journey ??

Edited by Danjc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ollypenriceThanks alot you guys for replies. Olly: I can manage to hear the truth, so i am glad for your thoughts on the matter.

@Knight of Clear Skies Yes I've used it 1 time for Milkyway photography. My interest for getting a telescope sort of grew from that.. I got the Polar alignment, but used a 14-24mm f/2.8 lens, so i cant tell about the accuracy, but i did a 240 second exposure and couldn't see any startrails or anything so i was quite satisfied. That was in september 2018. I live in Bergen, Norway.. If you're not familiar with what Bergen is known for - I can tell you that september 2018 was the last time with clear skies here. 

Anyways i would like to observe trough a telescope as well as AP, and i think it would be cheaper than getting for example a 500mm lens for my camera.

Would you reccomend getting a telescope for observing only, and keep my Star-adventurer for the AP? 

2 hours ago, gorann said:

If you want to have a telescope that would give you great visual experiences on a mount that would also allow you to also do some good quality imaging, you need to spend a bit more money unfortunately, and go for someting like this:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-150p-ds-eq-5-pro-goto.html

If you only go for imaging you could buy a Star Advenurer mount but that will only hold a smaller (200 mm or maybe up to 300 mm) telephoto lens and a DSLR camera and would not be useful for visual. With the packages you are suggesting visual would be quite ok but trying to do imaging with them would probably only be a frustrating.

@gorann I studied the SkyWatcher Explorer 150p DS EQ5 PRO GoTo a little.
What exactly is the DS - "Dual Speed"? 
Would i be in the same ballpark With a SkyWatcher Explorer 150p EQ3-2, With a SkyWatcher Dual Axis drive installed? 


Again, thank you all for your replies. they're all on-topic, and very informative - I'm not used to that.

 

 

379.jpg

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lovely photograph with both stars and cloud looking good.

I think the 'Dual Speed' will probably be referring to the focus knobs, one for coarse adjustment and one for fine.

Olly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, as Ollys says DS is Skywatchers name for their dual speed focuser so you have a fine adjustment nob inside the big nob on one side. Nice to have but not critical. However I do not think the EQ3-2 is sturdy enough for imaging. You really need an EQ5 or even HEQ5 for imaging with a telescope that size. A good combination could be an the 130P (a bit lighter) and an EQ5. However, I never used any of these so hopefully someone else can also make a comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ollypenrice Thanks alot! The fine tuning for focus or for movement?

@gorann I saw a couple of videos with the setup I described (?). I think many of these shots look pretty decent or? I see that one of the videos is With Nikon D3000 (around 500-600grams) and the other is With Canon 600D (around 600 grams). My Nikon D810 is 988 grams of weight. You think those extra 400 grams will have a negative effect?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqoHo2OgXhU,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWzSDuLg_9o



In the videos, it says for example "80x30''. The first number is the eyepiece? What is the second? 
Also it says what i presume is the exposures that are stacked together, for example "30 Dark, 30 offset, 15 flat". What does this mean? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a look at the video and it is far far from where you want to go in astrophotography after your first few attemps. It will rapidly limit your progress. What is shown in the video are all short exposure times on very bright objects like the moon and Orion nebula (the latter image is quite ugly in my mind - there is so much more to bring out in an Orion nebula image) and I expect you soon want to achieve more. So you will find a SkyWatcher Explorer 150p on an EQ3-2 rather limiting and frustrating as you will be limited to very short exposures and low resolution on very few objects. Even with the short exposures in that video you see that the mount is not up to the task and if you look closer the stars are not round but egg shaped. So, for going anywhere in astrophotography you need a more sturdy mount, like an EQ5 or better and HEQ5, and they would both handle and 130P better than the larger 150p.

Edited by gorann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Previous posters have clearly stated the broadly-popular beginner's wisdom: high-quality EQ mount first, short-focal-length optics second, aperture takes a back seat.

Refractors are popular for this because they're small, light, don't require finicky collimation, and tend to be more compact. All this minimizes avoidable obstacles early on -- imaging, as it turns out, has plenty of challenges remaining!

For a given budget, a quality triplet refractor will have a much smaller aperture than its Newt or Mak stablemate. But that's fine! For imaging, that matters very very little.

Here's the secret, though: a small high-quality refractor is also a LOT OF FUN to look through! Yes, I can see dimmer objects and resolve finer details with my 11" Dob than with my 70mm Stellarvue APO. But these are improvements at the margin! I'm always blown away by the delights visible through the little scope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/03/2019 at 23:14, masjstovel said:

 

@Knight of Clear Skies Yes I've used it 1 time for Milkyway photography. My interest for getting a telescope sort of grew from that.. I got the Polar alignment, but used a 14-24mm f/2.8 lens, so i cant tell about the accuracy, but i did a 240 second exposure and couldn't see any startrails or anything so i was quite satisfied. That was in september 2018. I live in Bergen, Norway.. If you're not familiar with what Bergen is known for - I can tell you that september 2018 was the last time with clear skies here. 

Very nice Milky Way image. In terms of clouds we can certainly relate to that in the UK.

On 17/03/2019 at 23:14, masjstovel said:

Anyways i would like to observe trough a telescope as well as AP, and i think it would be cheaper than getting for example a 500mm lens for my camera.

Yes, it would make more sense to get a scope rather than a long lens for AP, I was wondering if you already had one.

On 17/03/2019 at 17:29, masjstovel said:

Would you reccomend getting a telescope for observing only, and keep my Star-adventurer for the AP? 

It depends what interests you and what your budget is, but a dobsonian for observing and Star-Adventurer for AP could be a good plan. What camera lenses do you currently own?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for your replies guys!

@gorann i definately see your point. Its a budget question, and i feel i must set an upper limit when i havent tried this before. Also i need to defend this for my girlfriend:D 

I've been in contact with a sky-watcher supplier whos checking out the price for a SW Explorer 150 PDS on a EQ3-2 mount as a package. They were only offering the 150p with the EQ3-2 My plan is then to just live with bad quality photos, andgo for a EQ-5 after some time. I know this is more costly way to go, but it sort of feels better to use $1400 over 4 months than $1000 in one go. You know what i mean, even if it may sound stupid?

 

I think I would prefer the 150PDS with a very cheap mount to see if this is for me, and then buy the EQ5 after some time, but i struggle with finding suppliers in Norway that offer other packages then the one i mentioned with the 150p.

@Knight of Clear Skies thanks alot!

i currently own the nikon 14-24mm f2.8, the 50mm f1.4 and a 24-75mm (f4?)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you looked at the second hand market for a better mount?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@spillage I have. But  without any luck. I think the Norwegian market is very small on telescopes. Unfortunately. And when i look outside the borders i have to take taxes in consideration

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a long thread on imaging using the eq3-2 and you can read and see what members have managed with it and gripes. The bigger the telescope the heavier it is an opportunity of it being a wind sail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, masjstovel said:

I've been in contact with a sky-watcher supplier whos checking out the price for a SW Explorer 150 PDS on a EQ3-2 mount as a package.

A few words of caution here. I haven't tried using a scope with my EQ3-2 but I have struggled when trying to use a heavy 200mm lens with it. It's not quite clear but the biggest weakness of the EQ3 may be the lightweight tripod, which may flex and ruin polar alignment. There is a thread here about imaging with this mount.

I believe you'd need a coma corrector to image with the 150 pds, is this something you've budgeted for? Also, I don't think the image circle of this scope will cover your full-frame sensor, although cropping the image down is an option.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Knight of Clear Skies ive decided to go for the 150 PDS with EQ5 and then add the synscan goto st another time. I made a post on the equipment beginner  forum, and were told it then would be exaclty the same performance as a EQ5 pro synscan goto. Correct?

With 9 kg limit on the mount i guess that would be stable enough with a 988grams nikon d810 added. 

No i havent even considered that. Thank you! What is a coma corrector? 

I also wonder what adaptor(s) i need to mount a Nikon full frame

Edited by masjstovel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/03/2019 at 08:02, masjstovel said:

@Knight of Clear Skies ive decided to go for the 150 PDS with EQ5 and then add the synscan goto st another time. I made a post on the equipment beginner  forum, and were told it then would be exaclty the same performance as a EQ5 pro synscan goto. Correct?

With 9 kg limit on the mount i guess that would be stable enough with a 988grams nikon d810 added. 

No i havent even considered that. Thank you! What is a coma corrector? 

I also wonder what adaptor(s) i need to mount a Nikon full frame

I think the 150 will be too much for a standard EQ5 - that requires a HEQ5 at minimum. You need to keep the weight down with the EQ5, so its either the 130pds or 80ED (or smaller.. perhaps the 72).

As a general rule of thumb for mounts at the chepaer end of the scale, your payload should not exceed 50% of the rated maximum load. A fully loaded 150pds with corrector, camera, and guider will probably take you well over 5kg which is too much for reliable and consistent guiding.

Oh, and the corrector (coma corrector) is an additional correcting lens to remove the coma/field curvature that you get from newtonian type optics - they are pretty much mandatory.

Or..

Push all the cash into an HEQ5 and use it with just the DSLR and whatever lenses you have to hand (any lens between 100-200mm will give good results). It might be worth scouring the for sale ads to see if there is one up for grabs at a knockdown price. The point of this is that you will not have to upgrade further down the line (false economy etc...) when you want to use a bigger, heavier telescope.

The mount is the heart of the setup, get it right first time :) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/03/2019 at 14:52, masjstovel said:

@spillage I have. But  without any luck. I think the Norwegian market is very small on telescopes. Unfortunately. And when i look outside the borders i have to take taxes in consideration

I feel your pain here but with a little patience there are some good deals to be had on FINN.

Anyway, the point of my message was to let you know before you jump into the 150PDS perhaps you would like to contact me. I live in the Bergen area and could offer some advice on the route to take (more like not to take) based on my experience. I’ve gone through a similar thought process as you and if I could go through it all again I would do it all differently.

I’m not joking when I say I’ve got all the gear and no idea! I have accumulated a vast amount of gear that is way beyond my capabilities and it is having a negative impact on my progress. Right now I have more equipment than images!

 

I have the HEQ5 and Star Adventurer mounts. In terms of telescopes and lenses I have a SkyWatcher Esprit 100ED, SharpStar 60ED, SkyWatcher 90mm mak, Samyang 135mm and Samyang 14mm. Cameras I have a Nikon D600, Canon 500D and a ZWO ASI1600mm. 

I would  be happy to meet you and show you it all so you can get a feel for it. Plus, I’m probably looking to offload some stuff as I can’t justify keeping it all. PM me if your interested. 

 

Chris

Edited by Icesheet
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By JimV
      Hello all,
      TL;DR: are there any cheap ways, including secondhand, of mounting a 130P-DS for not-completely-terrible results?
      I am looking to buy a telescope as a gift for a family member. I had in mind a budget of around £150-£200, and from looking at advice had almost settled on the Sky-Watcher Explorer 130P. But then I realised that there's a good chance that if they get into astronomy there's a good chance that my relative will want to do some photography, and would probably be interested in attaching their micro four thirds camera. I've learnt that the 130P is not great for this as you cannot get prime focus, so you need to look at the Sky-Watcher Explorer 130P-DS instead.
      Great, I thought! It's a bit cheaper, but it isn't available in a kit with any form of mount. OK, I'll need to get one of those too...
      Then I started looking at mounts. Oh my, those things crash through the top of my budget! Even the EQ2 mount on its own, when you can find it, is about £115.
      https://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-skywatcher-eq-2-equatorial-mount-aluminium-tripod.htm
      (Given that you can get the spherical version of the Sky-Watcher 130 on that mount for £155 from FLO, that seems to value the OTA part at somewhere around the £40 mark.)
      So, I'm after advice on whether there is an affordable way of doing this.
      I've read enough on this forum and other sites around the web to know that the main recommendation is that the heavier duty the better. Something like an EQ3 or upwards. And that for AP a lot of people seem to view an HEQ5 as a starting point. But since I can't stretch to that, I'm OK with leaving it as an upgrade path for my relative if that's the way they want to go (or option for future gifts!).
      I know that for next-to-no budget I'm not going to be able to give something that will get the best out of the telescope. I know that getting motors and whatnot to do the guiding that will make DSO photography possible is way out of the realms of possibility. What I'm hoping for is some sort of option that gives acceptable results. Usable rather than unusable. Limiting the results rather than destroying them! Getting this set up so that they can do reasonable observation at first, and maybe give a try at attaching their m4/3 camera to try photographing the moon. If that whets their appetite then mount upgrades can be possible later.
      Since I'm planning on a new OTA, I'd be happy with going secondhand for the mount.
      I've been trawling ebay, and see the odd thing like this come up:
      https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Telescope-On-Tripod-Stand-Model-900114-Spares-N-Repairs/124230022581?hash=item1cecafb5b5:g:Ay8AAOSwSz1e7OCu
      To my untrained eye, it looks like there's an EQ2 mount on that, so I'm wondering whether that would do the trick. (Working on the, possibly faulty, assumption that if EQ2 is viewed by Sky-Watcher as being sturdy enough to supply as the kit mount for the 130 and 130P, it's probably up to scratch for observing with the 130P-DS too.)
      Even that, at another £58 inc postage for the buy it now would be over my budget, but I'm wondering more generally whether trying to grab something like that to essentially discard the tube would even be feasible as an option if I can get one at the right price.
      Or, of course, I'm open to any other ideas and suggestions that the forum might have.
      Thanks in advance, and clear skies.
    • By Zermelo
      I’ve been starting to think about my next scope, and knowing that order lead times are quite long at the moment, I’ve been spurred into writing by the pre-midnight appearance of Jupiter and Saturn.

      I’m hoping for some wise input to break me out of analysis paralysis. Here are my thoughts so far. Please feel free to rebut/add anything at all (but you might want to note my PS). Thanks in advance.

      Context: I’ve had a "budget" (but quite decent) 70mm F/10 refractor on a GEM for a while now, and recently have started to take observing more seriously, learned my way around a bit, and started to run up against aperture limits. My partner is also interested, but not so keen on spending long hours in the cold watching me failing to find stuff. We already have Telrad, barlow and a few extra EPs.

      Location: most observation is likely to be from the back garden, which ClearOutside declares to be Bortle 4 (I would say slightly generous, some nearby lighting) but we have darker skies within a 15 minute drive that we would like to take advantage of with the next scope.

      Likely Targets: equally interested in solar system, DSOs and doubles, so not much help on the decision there I'm afraid. Might be interested in spectroscopy at some point, but not a deal breaker. Not really keen on solar.

      Imaging: we are both interested to get into this “at some point” but I have taken on board the message that visual and imaging often send you down different paths, and we have agreed that we will prioritize visual for a few seasons, and consider buying further kit later if we do decide to do imaging. It might be a bit nuanced now with decisions like mounts, but ideally we would prefer to spend only what we need for visual work now, rather than going for a higher spec that would also support photography at some unknown point in the future.

      Budget: not particularly constrained, but ideally looking to spend no more than £600.

      Aperture: I know some have said good things about some 130mm scopes elsewhere, but I feel anything less than 150mm doesn’t seem enough of a step up from the current scope (and also possibly because Patrick Moore always said six inches was the minimum size for a beginner! ). I even considered a 200mm but decided against on portability (and on the heights of some of the prospective observers! ).

      OTA: looking to a Newt for bang/buck. There is so much choice that I’ve only been looking at Skywatcher models so far – not because I’ve already decided they’re best, but they seem to be a decent quality/price point for us and then I’ll have something to compare with if people suggest alternative ranges. So in the 150mm arena I've been looking at the Explorer 150P (F/5) and 150PL (F/8). Obviously if we were going to do imaging we’d opt for the shorter model, but for visual the F/8 is quite appealing to me with its 1200mm focal length – better contrast and magnification, more forgiving in various respects (eyepiece design, collimation, …) We’re probably not looking to spend more than £50ish per eyepiece, and may need two or three more yet, so that favours the PL. On the con side, we are obviously sacrificing some TFOV compared with the F/5, and it’s physically longer. I'm thinking a wide-field 32mm will span most DSOs with the PL. The 150P comes with a 2” Crayford focuser, the PL has a rack-and-pinion, I’ve read pros and cons for both? We’re unlikely to make use of 2” ultra-wide field EPs. Both scopes have parabolic mirrors, which I like, and I've read good things about the durability of the coatings. The PL seems to have attracted some good feedback in these pages.

      Mount: Getting tricky now. But GoTo (or at least PushTo) is an absolute must, because there will be one or more observers who will be wanting fast location (and even I will probably lose the will to live if I have to star hop too much). I have seen good things written about the Skywatcher AZ GTi (and it’s a keen price), but I’m advised that it’s not too stable with anything larger than a 130mm instrument. So if I went for the F/8 150 Newt, then in the Skywatcher range we’re looking at, minimum an EQ3 pro, possibly an EQ5 pro (I’m quite comfortable with equatorials). Is it worth the extra £160 for the EQ5? Would we only see any benefit in the future for imaging, or will a 1200mm tube behave better now on an EQ5 anyway? One other factor: noise. Small back garden, so motors must be quiet, and need to be able to slip and slew by hand without the GoTo losing its fix.

      So, where I am at the moment: For the sake of convenience, I’m still framing this in terms of the Skywatcher range (in the absence of some revelation of a better value offering elsewhere).

      I seem to have convinced myself of the following:

      - Newtonian
      - 150mm
      - GoTo (probably on an EQ mount )
      - Skywatcher are a brand to beat

      But still undecided on the focal length. I’ve found one or two “150P vs 150PL” discussions on these forums that are interesting but haven’t been conclusive for me, mainly because I have no preference on planetary vs DSO. I think more of a factor for me on the longer focal length is just the effect on stability, and the impact of that on the mount decision. We could live with the PL on an EQ3 if it were steady enough for regular visual, even knowing that we wouldn't use the mount subsequently for photography, or even for upgrading to a 200mm for visual only. Is it just a question of living with a bit longer wait for the image to settle after focusing, for example? That wouldn't be a problem. But if an EQ3 is only marginally capable handling the 150PL, that would push us into considering either the 150P on EQ3 or 150PL on EQ5.

      So as I said, a bit deadlocked at the moment. If anyone can chip in with any thoughts that sway it one way or another (or unpick it and take it in some other direction), I’d be very grateful!

      (PS Yes, I know I’ve not mentioned Dobs.  Yes, I have considered them, but as I mentioned, it’s important to me that we have a scope that finds and tracks objects. While I’m sure you can make a Dob do that, I don’t think that’s its raison d’être. Please don’t be offended, Dob lovers).


       
    • By Ryan Adams
      Hi there,
      I recently posted a thread getting ideas for what scope and mount I should get for beginner astrophotography.
      After researching on my own and getting thoughts from others on scopes and mounts here is what I have come up with.
      Mount - Skywatcher EQ5 GOTO
      Scope - Sky-Satcher Explorer 130P-DS
      Guide Scope - Skywatcher Evoguide ED50
      Guide Camera - ZWO ASI120MM Mini
      DSLR - Canon 350D
      I understand that the camera I am using is fairly old but it is an old DSLR that I have at home and it saves me money on buying a new camera. All in all this setup comes to just over £1000; I just wanted to people's get thoughts on this set up and if it can be improved in any way without stretching the budget by more than £100. Also I wanted to know whether any of the equipment I have chosen isn't great.
      Thanks in advance,
      Ryan
    • By Anthony RS
      Hello,
      Is anyone here using the TS Photon 6" F4 newtonian? I'm about to purchase it but I have some doubts and questions:
      1- Does it hold collimation well, at least in a single session?
      2- Is it impossible to balance in DEC due to its small dovetail or is it possible but harder?
      3- Is the focuser rigid enough or does it introduce tilt?
      4- Will collimating it be a nightmare?
      5- I'm really picky when it comes to coma, should I expect some coma on edges even while using the Skywatcher Aplanatic F4 CC?
      6- All in all, do you advice me to buy it or have some other option in the same price range.
      Cheers!
      Anthony
    • By Ryan Adams
      Hi there,
      I am relatively new to astronomy, as well as this forum so I'm sorry if anything seems obvious that I don't pick up on. However after using a very basic set up to capture some photos of the moon I wanted to invest in some astrophotography equipment.
      Ideally I am looking to spend around £800 - £900, and I wanted some ideas on good mounts as well as scopes that can be used to take decent images of the moon along with other celestial bodies in the solar system. 
      I have been looking at the Celestron Nexstar 6SE as well as the sky watcher explorer/evostar series attached to a EQ-5 Pro GOTO Mount but as I said I am relatively new to the hobby and have no idea what's good and what's bad. 
      I would also prefer it if the mount is suitable for deep sky astrophotography along with planetary imaging as once I get the hang of planetary imaging I would like to take a stab at deep sky astrophotography.
      Any help would be greatly appreciated.
      Ryan
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.