Scope to get started with deep sky AP

[JoshHopk]

Hello all, hope everyone's staying well

I've been into lunar and planetary imaging for a while, but I'm keen on getting started with deep sky AP. I've read Steve Richards' book and I think I've got a good understanding of the requirements.

I know that the mount is the most important part of the whole operation, so I managed to pick up a belt modified HEQ5 Pro for a very reasonable price.

Now I'm a bit stuck on choosing a scope; I've tried my Nexstar 5SE, but it's slow with a F ratio of F/10, and with a FL of 1250mm, it's in dire need of guiding, so I was left wondering if it's even worth trying to get working well.

I've been looking at the 150P-DS, which is much faster and has a more manageable focal length; It's also easier to guide I believe. I've also seen the incredible images the 130P-DS provides, but I'm unsure if it has any advantages over the 150? 

I was just wondering what scopes people would recommend, with a budget of about £500. I would be using my Canon DSLRs with whatever I end up going for. 

Would I be approaching the limits of the HEQ5 with a 150pds, CC DSLR and guiding? Also what coma corrector is most suitable for these f5 newts, the Baader MPCC or the SW 0.9x CC?

Thanks in advance

Edited May 22, 2020 by JoshHopk

[wimvb]

The 150pds is slightly heavier than the 130pds. It's also longer, and more sensitive to wind. This makes the 130pds easier to handle. Quality wise, these scopes are very similar. Both need a coma corrector, so you need to calculate that into the cost. All in all, I'd say that it depends very much on your personal circumstances as to which will suit you better. 

[JoshHopk]

2 minutes ago, wimvb said:

The 150pds is slightly heavier than the 130pds. It's also longer, and more sensitive to wind. This makes the 130pds easier to handle. Quality wise, these scopes are very similar. Both need a coma corrector, so you need to calculate that into the cost. All in all, I'd say that it depends very much on your personal circumstances as to which will suit you better. 

Thanks for the reply. 

I thought it may come down to personal preference, but thought I'd ask anyway.

[Astrosharkey]

I started off with a 200p and last year switched to an Ascent 80ed Frac (about £390) and added a reducer / flattener and have done all my imaging with it since, at 80 its very wide with my camera (about 2.5 degrees) so good for the large stuff (but not great at the small stuff).  It always worth using the astro tools FOV to play around with possible scope / camera combinations to see what you can achieve

[ollypenrice]

There is no point in going for more focal length if it takes you to a resolution (in arcseconds per pixel) beyond what your tracking under guiding will allow. I can't see any point in going for the 150 over the 130, quite honestly.

Olly

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I started out on my deep sky imaging with something fairly short, in this case an APM 80mm F/6, usually with focal reducer. I have more recently been using a Meade 6" F/5 Schmidt Newton, and that is considerably more difficult to handle. I did get some good results, but it is not a scope I would recommend as a starter scope. The 130 can be quite a handful itself.

[JoshHopk]

18 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

There is no point in going for more focal length if it takes you to a resolution (in arcseconds per pixel) beyond what your tracking under guiding will allow. I can't see any point in going for the 150 over the 130, quite honestly.

Olly

Thanks Olly, I hadn’t considered resolution

[JoshHopk]

13 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

I started out on my deep sky imaging with something fairly short, in this case an APM 80mm F/6, usually with focal reducer. I have more recently been using a Meade 6" F/5 Schmidt Newton, and that is considerably more difficult to handle. I did get some good results, but it is not a scope I would recommend as a starter scope. The 130 can be quite a handful itself.

Thanks Michael, I had considered refractors, but they exceed the budget a bit

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

1 minute ago, JoshHopk said:

Thanks Michael, I had considered refractors, but they exceed the budget a bit

They are costly, but second-hand SkyWatcher 80mm ED scopes come up quite often

[JoshHopk]

1 minute ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

They are costly, but second-hand SkyWatcher 80mm ED scopes come up quite often

That is true, I’ll keep an eye out 

Edited May 22, 2020 by JoshHopk