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.

stargazine_ep3_banner.thumb.jpg.5533fb830ae914798f4dbbdd2c8a5853.jpg

Recommended Posts

 For Deep-Sky AP of mostly galaxies (and nebulae), what'll give me the best results– a medium-weight 130 P-DS or a very lightweight wide-field WO Z61? I know the "best" telescope is one that doesn't just collect dust all day long, but I just can't figure it out. Supporting said telescope will be the SW HEQ5 PRO Synscan (with the Rowan Astronomy belt attached), which will be supported further by a autoguiding system, possibly a very lightweight CF 32mm refractor with a ZWO ASI 120mm Mini (Can't find the -S model in Japan). On the telescope'll be the Canon EOS 600D, quite a heavy beast IMO. 

 Instead of leaving it here, I'll say (just blurt out) everything I know about these seemingly-equal telescopes.

 The 130 P-DS, clocking in at F/5, will produce fantastic photos of Nebulae and Galaxies alike, although its aperture will slightly limit the galaxies it'll see. It seems this telescope does particularly well when it comes to imaging M81 or M51, and Nebulae like the Rosette. Its price-performance ratio is basically unbeatable, as it's only 250$ over here in Japan and it cranks out fantastic images. The only addition I'll need will be a F/5 SW-issued Coma Corrector; however, I don't need to worry as I'll be getting one from me mum in a few week's time.

 The William Optics Z61, which has a slightly higher F number of 5.9. It sports 2 lenses with FPL-53 elements in them, allowing for extremely high contrast images of nebulae like the Rosette, Orion, all that lot. I've previously asked a similar question, and I've been convinced by the answer that "I won't really be able to take images of galaxies other than M31, Andromeda, and M33, Triangulum. So why do I even have this as an option when I could just go with the cheaper 130 P-DS? Well because it's a wide field APO. Everything it supports, whether it be the design to the focuser, is just amazing, so much so I can't emphasise the emotion enough. 

  On Astrobin, I've checked out what kind of images these telescopes produce, and I encountered a problem– pretty much everyone was using everything but the 600D. They all used the fancy Mono-cooled CCDs like the ZWO ASI 1600MM Pro. 

 

Clear skies,

Leon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the Canon 60Da exclusively with my WOZ61, for widish fields, as you know OK for largish galaxies and nebulas, you need to factor in the WO dedicated flattener which adds considerably to the cost.

Given the choice I'd plump for the 130PDS for general astrophotography.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention the flattener!

Anyhow, thanks you so much for the quick reply, it helps a lot!

Since I haven't gotten the Canon 600D yet, do you think now would be a good time to change my opinion?

A used 600D over here is only 160$, and I'm trying not to go beyond 250$.

 

Clear skies,

Leon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, LR Watanabe said:

 For Deep-Sky AP of mostly galaxies (and nebulae), what'll give me the best results– a medium-weight 130 P-DS or a very lightweight wide-field WO Z61? I know the "best" telescope is one that doesn't just collect dust all day long, but I just can't figure it out. Supporting said telescope will be the SW HEQ5 PRO Synscan (with the Rowan Astronomy belt attached), which will be supported further by a autoguiding system, possibly a very lightweight CF 32mm refractor with a ZWO ASI 120mm Mini (Can't find the -S model in Japan). On the telescope'll be the Canon EOS 600D, quite a heavy beast IMO. 

 Instead of leaving it here, I'll say (just blurt out) everything I know about these seemingly-equal telescopes.

 The 130 P-DS, clocking in at F/5, will produce fantastic photos of Nebulae and Galaxies alike, although its aperture will slightly limit the galaxies it'll see. It seems this telescope does particularly well when it comes to imaging M81 or M51, and Nebulae like the Rosette. Its price-performance ratio is basically unbeatable, as it's only 250$ over here in Japan and it cranks out fantastic images. The only addition I'll need will be a F/5 SW-issued Coma Corrector; however, I don't need to worry as I'll be getting one from me mum in a few week's time.

 The William Optics Z61, which has a slightly higher F number of 5.9. It sports 2 lenses with FPL-53 elements in them, allowing for extremely high contrast images of nebulae like the Rosette, Orion, all that lot. I've previously asked a similar question, and I've been convinced by the answer that "I won't really be able to take images of galaxies other than M31, Andromeda, and M33, Triangulum. So why do I even have this as an option when I could just go with the cheaper 130 P-DS? Well because it's a wide field APO. Everything it supports, whether it be the design to the focuser, is just amazing, so much so I can't emphasise the emotion enough. 

  On Astrobin, I've checked out what kind of images these telescopes produce, and I encountered a problem– pretty much everyone was using everything but the 600D. They all used the fancy Mono-cooled CCDs like the ZWO ASI 1600MM Pro. 

 

Clear skies,

Leon.

These two scopes are a world apart to the point that I am considering the Z61 as a travel scope and while keeping my 130PDS in the observatory. The 130PDS can do well with galaxies as well as nebula, but it does require some modification to get the very best out of it.

I used to use the 550D in the 130PDS and it has the same sensor as the 600D so the results will be good and identical. Just not so good as dedicated cameras.

Have you considered a 80mm F6 refactor it may be a better balance for you.

Adam

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 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 jamesj01
      Hi everyone,
      I am new to astrophotography and of course started by taking a photo of the moon (as attached) using my Canon EOS500D camera - 1/250 exposure time, 800ISO. I used my celestron 127EQ telescope with a adapter for the camera of course. I used no eyepiece. 
      However, i find that it is slightly blurred, and upon taking pictures of nearby stars, i also found them to be blurred, even with a high exposure time. am i doing anything wrong at all or is this simply because of my setup? 
      Many thanks
      IMG_3243.CR2
    • By avodcap7
      So I had this problem where if I put my finder scope on my OTA, and the finder scope is around 135 degrees from the mounting part of the scope. This made my DEC axis always stay leveled but never stay in any position I put it in (if I turned my RA axis to the balancing position, then the DEC axis to balancing position and moved the DEC axis anywhere, it would go back to horizontal or balancing position).
      Any help would be nice
       
       
      Emlis
    • By crossingsymmetry
      Greetings everyone.
      I recently scored a great deal on facebook marketplace and bought Skywatcher Skymax 180 mm Maksutov-Cassegrain Telescope (f/15) with EQ6R-pro mount. I understand that long focal length telescopes are more suitable for planetary imaging. However, as I am tight on budget, I would like to use the same scope for deep-sky astrophotography. I have Canon Rebel T5 DSLR camera that I am using for taking images. Without autoguiding and a decent polar alignment, I can get ~30 seconds long shots without any star trailing, but that's not sufficient for imaging objects like M51. I would like to be able to integrate longer, say few minutes, thus would like to purchase an autoguider.  Here are some specific questions I have.
      1). The telescope comes with an 8 x 50 straight-through finder.  If I were to use it as a guidescope, what type of image integration time can I expect? Has anyone done autoguiding for f/15 scope with an 8x50 or other finderscopes?
      2). If the integration time will be an issue with the 8x50 finder scope, I am open to purchasing an off-axis-guider. However, considering the narrow field-of-view of Mak-180 telescope, I am concerned about not having enough photons from guidestar for autoguiding. For instance, with my DSLR camera, I need to integrate 20-30 seconds to see the nearby stars in M51. What type of OAG and camera would I need to autoguide with my scope? Are there affordable cameras (~$200) that would do the job for me? Would ASI120MM Mini Monochrome (~$150) do the job? What about OAG?
      I plan to use phd2 software for autoguiding rather than relying on the build-in guide port on the mount.  Instead of integrating for hours, I am planning to do DSS stacking of few mintues long multiple shots, hopefully this will put less strict requirements on the autoguider.
      In case this information is relevant: with my current setup, I have no issue pointing my scope to a desired deep-sky object, track the object within the field-of-view of my DSLR camera for hours using the mechnical tracking of the EQ6 mount. For instance following is a single raw image of Ring nebula taken with 30 seconds shot.  But it is not enough for generating high-quality images. 

       
      Thank you in advance for your help.
       
      Regards,
      Jay
       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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