Beginners astrophotography setup

[CaptainShiznit]

Hi, first time poster here.

 

I'm looking to take my first steps into astrophotography while being relatively novice at both astronomy and photography. I am familiar with a lot of concepts and terminology on the subjects but lack understanding and experience in many of the processes. I have done lots of research but I've come to a point where the sea of information is getting overwhelming and I feel like I could go on reading forever without ever being sure what to make my first purchase, and I'm itching to get going and looking for some guidance.

 

I currently own a small refractor (Celestron Travelscope 70) which I've only used for observing. I have no camera equipment other than a phone. I do own a decent laptop. I don't have a specific budget in mind, maybe in the £500-1000 range but I'm hesitant to spend a lot right out of the gate and would prefer to build something up gradually rather than be the guy with all the gear and no idea.

 

I'm interested in starting with planetary stuff with a webcam as it appears to circumvent a lot of the photography knowledge required for DSLR use (I could be wrong), but also I would like to own a telescope and mount that leaves the option open for me to acquire a DSLR for capturing DSOs in the near future. Does such a scope exist? I've read that the Canon 550d is a camera that can do both which would make acquiring the webcam pointless for me. Is this outdated information or still valid?

 

I've been looking at both the Sky-Watcher Explorer 130p and 200p with EQ5 mounts as either of these plus either a ZWO ASI120MCS (and a DSLR in future) or a used Canon 550d would be within my intended budget to get started.

 

Basically my bottom line questions would be:

Can I buy a telescope/mount and a webcam to get me started with planetary imaging but be able to purchase a DSLR at some point for deep sky imaging with mostly the same setup?

Do I even need to buy a webcam or would the Canon suit my purpose?

Would the telescopes above suit my purpose?

 

Please bare in mind my lack of experience in this hobby and also my hesitation to want to jump straight into buying expensive kit that would be wasted on me.

 

Thanks in advance.

[CloudMagnet]

I currently use the Skywatcher 200p with an EQ5 mount and image with a Canon 450d. It does the job and you can get some good pictures with it, but I would advise for starting out to keep the focal length of the telescope short as this will really help with the long exposures that you will use for deep sky stuff.

The mount is also really important for stability so keeping to a lightweight scope such as the 130p may be a better idea unless you go for the 200p and a HEQ5 at least.

 

Edited January 1, 2020 by CloudMagnet

[CaptainShiznit]

53 minutes ago, CaptainShiznit said:

I've been looking at both the Sky-Watcher Explorer 130p and 200p with EQ5 mounts

Just a correction that the 130p I'm looking at comes with an EQ2 not 5.

[CloudMagnet]

I wouldn't recommed the EQ2 for any major photography. Given your budget, I would give the EQ5 a go as a HEQ5 will set you back a lot unless you look at used as an option. You will find that astrophotography will quickly drain your account by the time you have invested in motor drives/GOTO upgrade, a camera and other accessories.

You are doing the right thing asking for advice upfront. For your question for the planetary imaging, you will only get very small images with DSLR cameras. If you know the specs of the camera, you can use this simulator to get an idea of the image size that you will get for a certain scope/camera combination.

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

 

[CaptainShiznit]

20 minutes ago, CloudMagnet said:

I wouldn't recommed the EQ2 for any major photography. Given your budget, I would give the EQ5 a go as a HEQ5 will set you back a lot unless you look at used as an option. You will find that astrophotography will quickly drain your account by the time you have invested in motor drives/GOTO upgrade, a camera and other accessories.

You are doing the right thing asking for advice upfront. For your question for the planetary imaging, you will only get very small images with DSLR cameras. If you know the specs of the camera, you can use this simulator to get an idea of the image size that you will get for a certain scope/camera combination.

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

 

That tool is really good, thanks for that. I'll have a proper go later on my PC but even on my phone it gives me a clear look at the differences I'll see between DSLR and webcam.

The HEQ5 looks awesome but definitely a future purchase once I know a bit more about what I'm doing. 

If I was to go with the 200p/EQ5 and a Zwo webcam, would a future DSLR purchase in the future allow me to at least scratch the surface of some DSO imaging or would I also require a mount like the HEQ5 first?

Also regarding a DSLR with the 130p, I came across this article https://www.firstlightoptics.com/blog/skywatcher-explorer-130-vs-130p.html where it says: However, neither model is suitable for use with a DSLR camera because their focusers haven't enough inward focus travel for a DSLR to achieve focus. Attaching the DSLR  to a suitable barlow lens will overcome this but field of view is reduced so it is a compromise.

I don't fully understand what this means but does the 200p have the same limitation?

Thanks again.

[CloudMagnet]

Backfocus is bascially a measure of where your camera needs to be to be in focus when you take a picture. If you use a Barlow, it has the effect of increasing your focal length. This in turn means that your focal point moves further away from your telescope which if normally fine for DSLR cameras as the focus tube can easiy move backwards enough for this. If you remove the Barlow, your focal point moves closer to the telescope and this could mean that your focal point lies so close to the secondary mirror that your focus tube physically can't move the camera close enough to focus.

My Canon 450d has about 15mm of backfocus left without using a Barlow so this is not an issue for me. If you look at the PDS versions, they are designed to overcome any backfocus limitation, but having not used these versions, I cant say how they would be for visual work.

[carastro]

Quote

200p/EQ5 

I think that scope is too big for an EQ5.  I'd recommend either a SW130PDS or 150PDS.  These are smaller and lighter, and you will get a bigger FOV, plus they are cheaper and they will place less demands on a beginner. 

Note I said PDS, if you get a P version, you may not be able to get focus with a camera.  The PDS version is modified for imaging.

If you get an EQ5, make sure you get the version that guides, I think there are several models. 

Carole 

[CaptainShiznit]

32 minutes ago, carastro said:

If you get an EQ5, make sure you get the version that guides, I think there are several models. 

Just to clarify, do you mean a go-to model such as https://www.tringastro.co.uk/sky-watcher-eq5-pro-synscan-goto-equatorial-mount-2869-p.asp?gclid=CjwKCAiAo7HwBRBKEiwAvC_Q8dIqCckphRxVzADjVbIqk8OxBvUPJOO_HeAKYUyQyatHX8SxZLonShoCOgcQAvD_BwE ?

 

36 minutes ago, carastro said:

I think that scope is too big for an EQ5.  I'd recommend either a SW130PDS or 150PDS. 

And these do sound better, thanks for the recommendation.

[carastro]

That mount is probably OK, but I do think you would be better off with an HEQ5, maybe a second hand one.   I don't like the look of those sticking out boxes on the EQ5 and I can't see a polarscope.   I have no experience with EQ5, so probably best to see what others think about that. 

Carole 

 

[happy-kat]

A 130pds can still be used for visual observing, this is achieved by using a 2 inch extension before the eyepiece which comes with it I think. The canon 550d had the ability to use a crop mode when videoing which is better for videoing planets and may not be reflected in the astronomy field of view calculator. You can also do DSO imaging with a DSLR and camera lens on a tracking mount though for smaller DSO a telescope like the 130pds gets you closer there's a great thread on using that telescope. A coma corector is a nice to have but not essential to start. Your travel scope has uses in the future it could be used as a guiding scope and if you got an imaging camera for your planets it could likely be used for guiding.

If you want to read lots then the book Making every photon count is a good read before spending any money.

[happy-kat]

There's also a great thread on imaging with a samyong 135mm camera lens. The important item is the mount, if the mount has limitations you'll be having to work around them to get results, the less limitations the less frustration.

I image with a light weight tracking none equatorial mount and I have to bin lots of exposures due to wibbly stars, be it from wind or sticky tracking even if I'm within the limitation of a none equatorial mount. The camera and long exposure length means a camera picks up way more then your eyes so there's less need to get aperture fever if imaging, lighter and smaller is less demanding for a mount.

[Starflyer]

If you buy new I think you'll struggle at your budget. It may seem daunting buying second hand gear that you don't have experience in, but you can get so much more for your money and astronomers tend to look after their kit.

Join a local astronomy club if you can find one near by and get some advice there.  Everyone will tell you the mount is everything in astrophotography, a decent mount will remove a major source of frustration, and believe me it can be a frustrating hobby.

If it were me I'd have the following on my (second hand) shopping list;

Mount - HEQ5 ~ £500

Scope - 150PDS / 200PDS ~ £150 / £190

Camera - Canon 1100D / 550D ~ £150 / £200

Cables, power supply, etc, maybe a cheap webcam for the balance of your budget. Add a guide camera later, or use your webcam, and you've got an awesome deep sky setup.

Edited January 1, 2020 by Starflyer

[Nigella Bryant]

Specifically for planetary imaging you'd be looking at, at least an 8inch/ 200mm SCT f10. You need long focal lengths so also at least a 2x barlow even 3x going f20 or f30. You can use newtonians but need 5x Barlow. Newtonian scopes are cheaper. Also the mount becomes even more critical so at least an heq5 or neq6 unless you go for an SCT. Planetary imaging is expensive and difficult. Second hand would be your only option with your budget. Dso imaging is another story with lower f ratio's needed like f4/f6 newtononians. I happen to use an f4 Newtonian for DSOs and use a 5x powermate for planetary imaging. Attached image of Mars 2018 with my set up at f20. I did go second hand £350 for the orion optics 12inch f4 optical tube and £650 for the neq6 mount. You'd also need a webcam. I use an zwo Asi 224mc these are around £150 second hand. The dslr would be best Astro modded but a used 1000d would be around £100. Dslr would be used for dso imaging. Attached M64 at f4

Cheaper options would be dslr, camera lens and star tracker mount but this would exclude planetary imaging. 

Edited January 1, 2020 by Nigella Bryant

[happy-kat]

In the northern hemisphere for a few years yet the planets are pretty low and in the murk. The Moon is great to start with and learning DSO imaging should be easier with a less demanding and smaller telescope

Edited January 1, 2020 by happy-kat

[CaptainShiznit]

1 hour ago, Starflyer said:

Mount - HEQ5 ~ £500

Scope - 150PDS / 200PDS ~ £150 / £190

Camera - Canon 1100D / 550D ~ £150 / £200

 

A used HEQ5, used 550d and new 130PDS or 150PDS is exactly what my shopping list had turned into before your comment so thanks for the reassurance

Edited January 1, 2020 by CaptainShiznit

[Nigella Bryant]

2 minutes ago, CaptainShiznit said:

A used HEQ5, used 550d and new 150PDS is exactly what my shopping list had turned into before your comment so thanks for the reassurance

Try and go for the 200mm scope for planetary imaging. 

[carastro]

You need a completely different scope and camera for Deep Sky imaging to planetary.  There are hardly any planets around at the moment and they are too low anyway, so I wouldn't choose a planetary scope as your primary choice.  

If you get a 150PDS this could be a compromise, and you can do DS imaging with that and with a Barlow, you could get some planetary done as well but your FOV will be smaller for DS imaging.  Planets won't be huge with this scope, but still doable.  I did planets with a 120 refractor and Barlow, not particularly great images though.  There are far more DS objects to choose from than planets and Moon.

If you're not bothered about planets, then you could just get a 130PDS and get a bigger FOV.  New this scope is about £180.  Secondhand HEQ5 would be around £500 (New £789).  You'll need a camera and some other bits, but this will get you started. 

Carole 

 

 

 

 

[CaptainShiznit]

39 minutes ago, carastro said:

If you're not bothered about planets, then you could just get a 130PDS and get a bigger FOV.  New this scope is about £180.  Secondhand HEQ5 would be around £500 (New £789).  You'll need a camera and some other bits, but this will get you started.

 

 

 

 

I think this is the way I'm going to go to get started. Thanks again for your help.

[steve k]

This may be worth a look.. have heard good reports on the OTA and represents good value for money..

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/startravel/sky-watcher-startravel-102-az-gte.html

[happy-kat]

The startravel is an achromatic refractor which means it does not resolve blue light the same as the other colour wavelengths so will show chromatic aberration which can only be post processed out so far. The mount moves in tiny left right up down so is not tracking equatorially. A great suggestion for visual observing but will present limitations for imaging. I'm not aware if the az-gte flavour can take the firmware update to enable equatorial like the az-gti.

Edited January 2, 2020 by happy-kat

[carastro]

Quote

This may be worth a look.. have heard good reports on the OTA and represents good value for money..

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/startravel/sky-watcher-startravel-102-az-gte.html

Totally agree with Happy Kat, the Achromatic refractor is not suitable for imaging because of chromatic aberration, plus the mount is totally unsuitable.  This scope and mount would only be suitable for visual only.

Carole 

[steve k]

4 hours ago, happy-kat said:

The startravel is an achromatic refractor which means it does not resolve blue light the same as the other colour wavelengths so will show chromatic aberration which can only be post processed out so far. The mount moves in tiny left right up down so is not tracking equatorially. A great suggestion for visual observing but will present limitations for imaging. I'm not aware if the az-gte flavour can take the firmware update to enable equatorial like the az-gti.

CA not disatrous with the Startravel series.. the mount can be configured to EQ mode with Firmware so for the money a good start for imaging although with more expensive equipment can be improved..

[Cosmic Geoff]

If you want to do serious astrophotography, be prepared to spend a lot of money.  The requirements for planetaty imaging and deep-space imaging are quite different.

For planetary imaging you need a large-aperture, long focal length scope on a decent mount., plus a decent video camera such as the ASI224MC.  A SCT of 8" aperture or more is the kind of thing you want.  It is possible to use a lightweight (visual) mount because the post-processing covers a lot of sins, but a rigid and well-behaved mount makes the whole exercise less trying.  You don't need an equatorial mount, as the CPC mounts bundled with Celestron's SCTs work well, but this restricts you to visual observing and planetary imaging.

For deep space imaging, as others have pointed out, you need a solid eqatorial GoTo mount and a small fast telescope, plus a camera (usually a DSLR).  You could start with the Travelscope 70 - if nothing else you will discover at first hand why others use more expensive scopes of similar aperture.

Another option is to try EEVA (see sub-forum threads on this).  With whatever you have to hand, you can give this a try, and maybe get quick results that surpass what can be seen visually.  Don't underestimate what a small and inexpensive scope can do - I managed to image comets and Pluto with a 102mm Celestron Startravel achromat.

[spillage]

16 hours ago, Starflyer said:

If it were me I'd have the following on my (second hand) shopping list;

Mount - HEQ5 ~ £500

Scope - 150PDS / 200PDS ~ £150 / £190

Camera - Canon 1100D / 550D ~ £150 / £200

Maybe a 130/150 pds as the 200 will have smaller fov and be much heavier. I would not waste money on new kit that is not suitable as you will just end up with a large loss financially. Buying second hand is the easier way as if you make a wrong purchase you can normally get your money back or a much smaller loss. I think most of us started out too small, thinking you will upgrade in a few years. How wrong was I and within months find yourself looking a other bits of kit that you should have purchased in the first place.

[CaptainShiznit]

4 hours ago, spillage said:

Maybe a 130/150 pds as the 200 will have smaller fov and be much heavier. I would not waste money on new kit that is not suitable as you will just end up with a large loss financially. Buying second hand is the easier way as if you make a wrong purchase you can normally get your money back or a much smaller loss. I think most of us started out too small, thinking you will upgrade in a few years. How wrong was I and within months find yourself looking a other bits of kit that you should have purchased in the first place.

I'm not fully understanding the field of view thing for DSOs (as I said, novice here), but I'm doing as much reading as two small kids permits right now. Intuitively, I imagined that you would need greater magnification to see DSOs, a more 'zoomed in' look, rather than, counterintuitively, more 'zoomed out'. I understand now that it's to do with gathering more light from a greater FOV (?). With that in mind, what would the differences between a 130PDS and 150PDS be in real terms of the types of images I could make and/or what I could visually observe?