Getting a good start on Astrophotography - Advice needed

[LonestarrSB]

Hello fellow star gazers!  Ive been wanting to really get a decent start into astrophotography and I am in need of some help / advice.

Im looking for advice on a good intermediate scope / tripod (a GoTo preferred) to start on astrophotography.  I have a DSLR camera so I'm looking for advice on a good telescope to try to image planets and and DSO (looking for a scope that can do either pretty well).  Also looking for a GoTo tripod (for family use).  Any help would be greatly appreciated.  My budget is around $1000 but would like to save a bit of that for eye pieces and other accessories if possible!

My current setup is an Orion Starblast II 4.5 on an EQ1 mount.  Also open to just getting a really good tripod if that current scope will suffice for the time being. 

 

Thanks again!  

If you need more info on what im looking for or what I currently use please feel free to ask! I will try to respond in good time!

[happy-kat]

Maybe focus on the mount, and use the telescope you have for visual and your camera and camera lenses to get going with DSO imaging. A suitable motorised goto eq mount could likely hoover up your budget.

Hopefully you'll get some relies with actual mount suggestions.

[Miguel1983]

Personally i have no experience with it, but i've been looking at the EQ35M mount lately as a lightweight second mount for wide field AP.

I think it has a reasonable price tag on it and i like the modular aspect of it, its like a beefy staradventurer  and capable EQ mount all in one.

This way you can start imaging with your DSLR and go from there.

Edit: i would not recommend starting AP with the Starblast, sure it's possible, but you're going to have a hard time balancing, focussing, collimation, ... a smal refractor is the way to go i learnt the hard way.

 

Edited December 14, 2019 by Miguel1983

[dannybgoode]

The place to start as a frustration free journey into AP isn’t the mount or telescope but worth buying a copy of Making Every Photon Count - available from FLO. 
 

There is just so much to it and it can be overwhelming. Other than that number 1 rule - the mount is everything. Spend as much as you possibly can and over spec out for your current set up.

[Pankaj]

I would say the same. Mount is everything in AP. Invest in it carefully. In my opinion, nothing less than an Neq6 if you have tight budgets. Its has sufficient weight capacity so you will be able to use a range of scope on it.

[Andy R]

Also worth considering is buying used/secondhand. I bought a well looked after Heq5 pro mount & tripod last week, its not as beefy as a Neq6 (smaller payload) but still a capable mount for starting AP etc. Plus the money I’ve saved will go towards a suitable triplet refractor/guiding setup.

 

[Skipper Billy]

The best start in astroimaging is this by a country mile!!

 

[sloz1664]

20 minutes ago, Skipper Billy said:

The best start in astroimaging is this by a country mile!!

 

Totally agree David. It saved me a lot of time, effort and money in the long run...... Although it has cost me a small fortune to get me were I am now 😱

Steve

[Owmuchonomy]

Do you have any medium to longer focal length lenses to complement your DSLR?  It is often advisable to concentrate your resources onto procuring a quality equatorial mount.  You can then start off with your DSLR and lenses taking wide field shots.  Unfortunately, trying to match a single telescope to capturing DSOs and planets isn't going to work well.  DSOs predominantly are faint, wider field objects requiring a short focal length and fast telescope.  Capturing planets (or small bright DSOs such as planetary nebulae) requires a set of different techniques particularly the use of long focal length telescopes (I use 4.6 metre fl) and fast frame rate video capture which requires specialist cameras.  The book described in the threads above is a worthy investment.

[George Gearless]

On 14/12/2019 at 10:48, Miguel1983 said:

Personally i have no experience with it, but i've been looking at the EQ35M mount lately as a lightweight second mount for wide field AP.

I think it has a reasonable price tag on it and i like the modular aspect of it, its like a beefy staradventurer  and capable EQ mount all in one.

This way you can start imaging with your DSLR and go from there.

Edit: i would not recommend starting AP with the Starblast, sure it's possible, but you're going to have a hard time balancing, focussing, collimation, ... a smal refractor is the way to go i learnt the hard way.

 

I have that mount as my primary mount. EQM35-Pro.

One of the parameters I chose it from, was definately the price. Money is a huge issue for me :). But as a first equatorial go-to mount, it does allow you to grow, kit wise.

I started out with a Mak127. I then got the Evostar 80ED Pro. And this summer I got a Skywatcher 180mm Mak.

The max additional load is listed at 10Kg. So with the Mak 180mm (7 kg tubeweight), DSLR, finderscope and heatbands, I'm realy stretching its capabilities. But so far it has performed without missing a step. I have taken some great shots of the moon with it, but have yet to record my first planet. Which is the real test with this scope.

Of the features that you would not normaly get with a mount of that pricerange I'd like to mention:

Built in polar scope.

Com port for guided photography.

10 kg payload.

 

Idealy, I'd have bought an EQ6 for the greater payload. But it was, for me, prohibitively expensive at the time. Or put another way; if I had bought an EQ6, I wouldn't have been able to afford neither the Evostar 80 refractor nor the Mak 180mm. At the time it didn't make much sense to put a Mak127 on an EQ6 when you're still just starting out. In rounded numbers the EQ6 is twice as expensive as the EQM35.

I whole heartedly recommend the EQM35 to beginners and experienced users alike. 

 

[Miguel1983]

I have the Evostar 80ED too, this scope is a performer and a perfect fit for that mount I think.

[LonestarrSB]

I really do appreciate all advice in this thread.  My budget is around $1000.  Just looking for advice on a good mount and scope to start with but also upgradeable (willing to put more money initially into the mount than the scope).  Are there any scopes that are decent enough at imaging planets and DSO? Im looking for a good starting point that is good for my entry into AP and also good for just showing my family and friends who aren't as into star gazing as I am the planets and some DSO. I realize i'm probably sound maybe a little vague but if you have any questions that I may be able to answer in order to help guide any advice into any mounts, scopes, eye pieces, or accessories please feel free to ask.  Most of you are light years ahead of me in knowledge lol!

 

Thanks again!

[LonestarrSB]

I'm currently looking into the Orion Sky View Pro 8 GoTo reflector.  Is this a worthy enough upgrade over my current Starblast II 4.5?

[happy-kat]

That is an 8" f5 telescope, which would be great for visual use but put big demands on the mount for imaging.

What you want to find out is for that mount on the sky view pro 8 goto is what is the imaging payload of the mount or failing that what is the visual use payload of that mount, then you could work out if the mount is up to the job of imaging with an 8" reflector. The sturdier the mount the less images taken that you can't use because the mount moved be it from breeze caught on the telescope.

A tracking mount is great for sharing views with others to look through the eyepiece.

I am not familiar with EQ mounts to know if that is the same as the EQ5 sold over here in the UK.

But  you can image DSO using just a DSLR and camera lenses.

What camera lenses do you already own with your DSLR?

This is a useful field of view calculator

field of view calculator

 

Edited December 17, 2019 by happy-kat

[bottletopburly]

Money doesn’t go far in this hobby and I would definitely look into used equipment ,90 percent of my kit is secondhand and tbh most astronomers look after their kit quite well .

[carastro]

Quote

Are there any scopes that are decent enough at imaging planets and DSO?

That's a tough call, but I guess a reflector might be your best option on a sturdy Equatorial mount capable of guiding, if you're prepared to do the collimation.  Probably a Skywatcher 150PDS or a 200PDS might do it.  Reflectors are a lot cheaper than refractors anyway.  

NOTE the Word PDS after the model name, this means the tube has been slightly shortened to allow focus with a camera.

Carole 

[cjdawson]

On 14/12/2019 at 03:29, LonestarrSB said:

Hello fellow star gazers!  Ive been wanting to really get a decent start into astrophotography and I am in need of some help / advice.

Im looking for advice on a good intermediate scope / tripod (a GoTo preferred) to start on astrophotography.  I have a DSLR camera so I'm looking for advice on a good telescope to try to image planets and and DSO (looking for a scope that can do either pretty well).  Also looking for a GoTo tripod (for family use).  Any help would be greatly appreciated.  My budget is around $1000 but would like to save a bit of that for eye pieces and other accessories if possible!

My current setup is an Orion Starblast II 4.5 on an EQ1 mount.  Also open to just getting a really good tripod if that current scope will suffice for the time being. 

 

Thanks again!  

If you need more info on what im looking for or what I currently use please feel free to ask! I will try to respond in good time!

 

Here's the thing, looking at what you are asking, I think you are asking for trouble.   Here's what I mean....

 

1. A good starter scope for astrophotogaphy is normally a small but good refractor.  A telescope like that will have a wide field of view, and fast optics which will mean it will be great for capturing large DSO's like the Orion Nebula, Horsehead and Flame, M32...the list goes on.

2. For plantary, bigger is better.  You'll have to work with long focal lengths, I think about 8000mm is what I use (that's a 2000mm scope, with a 4x barlow)  when working with figures like that, you'll be wanting the biggest aperture that you can get your hands on.  I've got an 8" SCT, but in this case bigger is better.

3. Goto mounts are not cheap.  for astrophoto's for most gear, I'd suggest something like a HeQ5, big heavy, stable mount.  But, that will eat your budget before even getting the other bits that make things from "ok" to good.   You won't even have a scope to put on it!

 

I'm not trying to put you off, just trying to help you see what you are asking.  Hopefully this will help you figure out what you are really after and can work from there.

[rickwayne]

I agree -- while people do manage to do deep-sky and planets with one scope, they are much more advanced imagers than I, with bigger budgets.

Planets are tiny, so you need a lot of focal length, and greater aperture helps resolve finer detail. But they're bright, sunlit objects, so exposure times can be minimal. And successful planetary imaging leans heavily on software that processes hundreds of frames, picking out the transient sharp bits of each to assemble a high-quality image.

Deep-sky objects can be tiny too, of course, but many of them are HUGE compared to planets. But they're very very dim, so imaging them involves sensitive cameras, low noise, and absurdly long exposure time compared to planets. That's why everybody is banging on so about mounts. For a good "starter" equatorial mount with goto, you're already spending around $1000.

HOWEVER.

You can get started for less. A LOT less. Since computers let us stack multiple short exposures into a picture equivalent to one long one, you don't have to have something that enables two-hour exposures. A minute or two suffices, and you can get there several ways:

1. Use a camera tracker. I'm more familiar with iOptron products so the SkyTracker and SkyGuider are what I think of, but there are others. You can go even cheaper with "barn door" trackers such as the Nyx mount.
2. Use shorter focal lengths. At 500mm, tiny angular deflections are pixel-sized and visible. Plenty of excellent targets are out there for shorter lengths, however (North America nebula, Milky Way...). You can get old "prime" telephotos for just about every DSLR for a song on the used market, if you hunt.
3. Accept some image flaws. No, really. Astrophotographers tend to be really detail-oriented pixel-peepers, but normal people won't notice or care about tiny tracking imperfections. They'll look at the glorious nebula on your wall and say, in that wonderful slightly-confused tone of voice, "...you took that. Yourself."

The book recommendation is excellent. Understanding what's going on is a healthy immunization against wasting money on the wrong gear. I also really like Bracken's The Deep Sky Imaging Primer.

Example: This image has all manner of flaws, so (3) applies. Boy, does it ever! It was taken with a DSLR, a $125 500mm mirror lens, and a $300 SkyTracker. But I tell ya, it wows the normies.

 

[George Gearless]

14 hours ago, rickwayne said:

I agree -- while people do manage to do deep-sky and planets with one scope, they are much more advanced imagers than I, with bigger budgets.

Planets are tiny, so you need a lot of focal length, and greater aperture helps resolve finer detail. But they're bright, sunlit objects, so exposure times can be minimal. And successful planetary imaging leans heavily on software that processes hundreds of frames, picking out the transient sharp bits of each to assemble a high-quality image.

Deep-sky objects can be tiny too, of course, but many of them are HUGE compared to planets. But they're very very dim, so imaging them involves sensitive cameras, low noise, and absurdly long exposure time compared to planets. That's why everybody is banging on so about mounts. For a good "starter" equatorial mount with goto, you're already spending around $1000.

HOWEVER.

You can get started for less. A LOT less. Since computers let us stack multiple short exposures into a picture equivalent to one long one, you don't have to have something that enables two-hour exposures. A minute or two suffices, and you can get there several ways:

1. Use a camera tracker. I'm more familiar with iOptron products so the SkyTracker and SkyGuider are what I think of, but there are others. You can go even cheaper with "barn door" trackers such as the Nyx mount.
2. Use shorter focal lengths. At 500mm, tiny angular deflections are pixel-sized and visible. Plenty of excellent targets are out there for shorter lengths, however (North America nebula, Milky Way...). You can get old "prime" telephotos for just about every DSLR for a song on the used market, if you hunt.
3. Accept some image flaws. No, really. Astrophotographers tend to be really detail-oriented pixel-peepers, but normal people won't notice or care about tiny tracking imperfections. They'll look at the glorious nebula on your wall and say, in that wonderful slightly-confused tone of voice, "...you took that. Yourself."

The book recommendation is excellent. Understanding what's going on is a healthy immunization against wasting money on the wrong gear. I also really like Bracken's The Deep Sky Imaging Primer.

Example: This image has all manner of flaws, so (3) applies. Boy, does it ever! It was taken with a DSLR, a $125 500mm mirror lens, and a $300 SkyTracker. But I tell ya, it wows the normies.

 

This is an excellent post.

We (as in 'I') tend to get bogged down in all the wonderous stuff that is readily available for purchase at various supplier sites. You will NEVER have enough gear!

I actualy thought about it the other night when I was setting up to take some pictures of the moon. It takes me about 30-45 mins just to set up everything the way I want it. I caught myself thinking "things were so much simpler in the old days". By the old days I mean only a couple of years ago when all I had was a Wifi Alt-Az mount, a 127mm Maksutov and a realy old DSLR. The enjoyment of watching the skies and making a 'good catch photo' with that equipment, was just as great as it is for me today with much more advanced (and expensive) tools at my disposal.

I know that your post was directed at a beginner who sought specific advice (and I think he got some good advice from you). But I think that intermediates as well as experts could stand a bit of 'grounding' every once in a while. 

 

[ollypenrice]

I'm another who would not try to find a scope capable of doing both planetary and deep sky imaging. The requirements are quite different and grow even wider apart when the mount has to fit within a tight budget and the imager is a beginner. As others have said, the best mount you can find and a prime focus camera lens will get you going very well indeed.

Olly

[vlaiv]

There are a few options out there for a scope that is capable of doing both planetary and DSO imaging well.

Even modest 6" F/8 newtonian is going to be rather good at both, provided that person operating it knows what they are doing. If I was asked to choose a scope that does it both well, then this would be my choice:

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p10753_TS-Optics-8--f-12-Cassegrain-telescope-203-2436-mm-OTA.html

However these sort of scopes and required knowledge and skill to produce good results with them are beyond beginner level, so that would not be my recommendation for OP.

My recommendation for good photographic kit that can do both DSO imaging and planetary imaging with such a limited budget would be EQ5 mount and 6" newtonian with suitable coma corrector and barlow. Something like 150PDS.

If shopping second hand then even Heq5 might not be out of reach?

[teoria_del_big_bang]

I only took up astrophotography about 14 months ago so my advice is nothing like as useful as some of the advice given above.

But what I would add is that it is not an easy hobby and there is an awful lot to learn to get a good image. I too started out by asking advice on this forum about a setup to do both planetary imaging and DSO's and was heading down that route. But when I started to get advice and also read up on both of these they really are two very different things and require different kit (Ideally). Also techniques are different.

So after much thought my own decision was to pick one and concentrate on that. My thinking was that for one learning both would be harder, also whatever I buy will be a compromise and sooner rather than later I am sure I will regret it and end up buying a scope suitable for one or the other.

You have a DSLR which is great as it saves a lot of expense but again at some stage you may well will find yourself wanting a dedicated astro camera and whilst there are ones suitable for both, again it will always be a compromise.

I think what I am saying it was my point of view anyway that it is better to be good at one (or at least as good as possible) rather than struggle and maybe get okay images of both.

So I chose DSO's but I always though that when money became available and in the near future I would also buy some planetary gear. I did get a camera 2nd hand but to be honest I have found there is always so much to improve on your techniques and also just so amazed at what is out there regarding DSOs and even those are not all the same and require different approaches that is more than enough for me at the moment.

If you are absolutely sure you must do both then fine but have a real good think before you buy 🙂 

Also you have the camera put at least half your budget, or more, into a good sturdy mount. I have often heard that you can great images from a fairly cheap scope (especially 2nd hand) but will struggle and you will get frustrated with a poor weak mount.

Steve

Edited December 20, 2019 by teoria_del_big_bang