Complete novice - help me spend money!

[MarkAR]

I think the Canon 90D is the replacement for the 80D so it'll be great. I've got the 80D and its superb. 

Definitely worth thinking about a used astro modded body as well, Canon 450D up to a 6D. Stick with APS-c size cropped format so that if you get the clip in type filters you can use them on both bodies with any EF lenses. Do not use EF-S lenses as they will crash into the filter.

 

[happy-kat]

Plus new camera does not necessarily mean better so a second hand astro modded canon is a way to expand at minimal cost.

[Sunshine]

The star adventurer is loads of fun under a dark sky.

[Mr niall]

29 minutes ago, danorman said:

The imaging side of things would be purely to get some nice pictures at the end of it all. If I'm out with a telescope or reading a book under the night sky then I may aswell take some pictures which I'm heavily interested in. I understand that these pictures are formed in editing but that's another thing which I enjoy doing.

Those sorts of tasks, which may would find a ball ache, are actually rather nice for me given my lifestyle!

Good stuff - in that case you are all set!

[danorman]

I'm scared by all these terms of "modded". Surely there's plug and play filters available to eleminate this issue? Unless of course I'm getting it all wrong?

[danorman]

I've just read this article which seems very interesting. The conclusion seems good aswell.

https://clarkvision.com/articles/do_you_need_a_modified_camera_for_astrophotography/

[tooth_dr]

23 minutes ago, danorman said:

I've just read this article which seems very interesting. The conclusion seems good aswell.

https://clarkvision.com/articles/do_you_need_a_modified_camera_for_astrophotography/

There is an argument for leaving the camera stock. But I’m not sure about the last paragraph/conclusion including where he says a modified camera is “too-sensitive” to H-alpha.  I want to record what’s there, whats being emitted, not filter it out, even if our eyes aren’t specifically designed to see deep reds. 

55 minutes ago, danorman said:

I'm scared by all these terms of "modded". Surely there's plug and play filters available to eleminate this issue? Unless of course I'm getting it all wrong?

You need to remove a filter, not add one. That filter is inside the camera itself.

 

[Merlin66]

The in-built filters (colour correction and AntiAlias/ dust shake) in the commercial cameras are there to give an "acceptable" colour balanced image to the eye. This is what the majority of users pay the money for.

These filters modify the output from the CMOS chip to achieve this; the response to the red part of the CMOS chip spectrum is reduced by about 40% to give "normal daytime colour rendering to the average user"

When the camera is "modded" the colour correction filter is removed, thereby allowing a 40% improvement in the red response - very useful to astronomers trying to record Ha in nebulae.

This can't be done by adding extra filters up front.

HTH

 

[danorman]

Okay so this makes a lot more sense to me now. I've read multiple articles and get it now. Thank you @tooth_dr and @Merlin66 for explaining things to me.

In essence - a stock camera will produce great pictures but a modded one will produce more accurate ones. I think I'll get a regular camera (Canon 80/90D for example) and then think about getting a modded body at a later stage.

I'm excited. I'm going to wait for the book to come before placing any orders but it's good to have a starting point of a shopping list.

Cheers!

[BrendanC]

If you're interested in a modded DSLR, this is where I got mine from and whereas it might cost a little more, I've been very pleased with the results from my lowly EOS1000D and the service is good too: https://www.cheapastrophotography.com/