What do you suggest as a next improvement to my setup?

[Mcwaffles2003]

Been doin AP for almost 2 years now and have put together the basics of a kit over that time. This is my setup so far:
 

• Mount: SW HEQ5
• OTA: 6" f/9 RC
• Camera: Canon 1300D
• Autoguiding: Orion StarShoot AutoGuider with a 60mm f/4 guide scope

Any suggestions for what I should focus on upgrading first? Was thinking of getting a dedicated AP camera like a ASI1600 mono with filters but then thought of getting a small star tracker so I can still use my Canon for more wide angle shots (and more ease of transport) first. Also, I think I am coming up to the limits of my mount as my kit, though I've never weighed it, must be in excess of 20 lbs. As I understand it I should be able to sell the HEQ5 used for at least 75% of its original cost (it's in good condition besides some wear on the rubber feet of the tripod) and upgrade to an HEQ6. Then I also have to think about the fact that my scope is an f/9 and and takes a fair amount of time to collect data and it being a 6" limits its resolving power for anything I try to do with planets.

 

Any suggestions or wisdom?

Edited August 31, 2020 by Mcwaffles2003

[vlaiv]

No such thing as HEQ6.

If you are referring to EQ6, then you won't really see any improvement in precision over HEQ5, and you are still not close to weight limit of your mount.

Step up from this mount could be CEM60 (no longer produced for some strange reason).

Yes, dedicated cooled astro camera would be my first choice, maybe OSC one if you are used to that sort of framework and don't want to "shuffle" things too much.

If you want to try planetary, then that will probably be cheapest upgrade - switch guider camera for planetary camera (and also guider camera) and purchase SW 6" F/8 newtonian scope. Alternatively, if you want really good optics - go for Orion Optics UK VX6L with upgrade to 1/10PV (if budget allows and you really want to do planetary / lunar - go for OO with 1/10)

RC 6" is not the best for planetary work only because of massive central obstruction, but in reality can give you decent planetary images. Here is Jupiter with RC8":

Just changing your current guider camera for planetary / guider with USB3.0 - something like ASI120 usb 3.0 version or maybe more serious camera like ASI224 should give you decent results with your scope.

Another cost effective upgrade, if you have not done that already is belt mod for HEQ5.

 

[Mcwaffles2003]

1 hour ago, vlaiv said:

If you want to try planetary, then that will probably be cheapest upgrade - switch guider camera for planetary camera (and also guider camera) and purchase SW 6" F/8 newtonian scope. Alternatively, if you want really good optics - go for Orion Optics UK VX6L with upgrade to 1/10PV (if budget allows and you really want to do planetary / lunar - go for OO with 1/10)

RC 6" is not the best for planetary work only because of massive central obstruction, but in reality can give you decent planetary images. Here is Jupiter with RC8"

I primarily do imaging for DSO's but go for planets from time to time to check up on them to make sure they're okay 😛. Also, I'm aware of the limit of an RC from the secondary effectively making the scope perform as a 4.5"

1 hour ago, vlaiv said:

Just changing your current guider camera for planetary / guider with USB3.0 - something like ASI120 usb 3.0 version or maybe more serious camera like ASI224 should give you decent results with your scope.

Hadn't thought of that and will definitely consider it as that wouldn't be a very costly upgrade, especially if I can sell the starshoot. In retrospect I'm wondering now why the star shoot is $300 vs the ASI being $150 when the star shoot has pretty much the same size sensor and is uncooled. As I understand it the larger pixels help it collect more light for better accuracy on stars but 2x2 binning should lead to a similar result, if not better since it is cooled. Correct?

1 hour ago, vlaiv said:

If you are referring to EQ6, then you won't really see any improvement in precision over HEQ5, and you are still not close to weight limit of your mount.

I was referring to the EQ6, my mistake. The weight limit for the HEQ5 is about 30lbs though and I thought the rule of thumb was to try and stay below 50% capacity.

1 hour ago, vlaiv said:

Yes, dedicated cooled astro camera would be my first choice, maybe OSC one if you are used to that sort of framework and don't want to "shuffle" things too much.

Cool, I was thinking as much. I figure allowing myself to use narrow band imaging would greatly increase my time at the scope since I live in a light polluted area and the moon being the beautiful obstructive thing it is 1/2 of the month. Not to mention the shear reduction in noise that accumulates on a 25C+ sensor.

 

BTW, I do not know what OSC stands for

 

I'll probably snag the sky tracker mount before taking the nearly $2000 leap on a dedicated mono camera + filters

Edited August 31, 2020 by Mcwaffles2003

[vlaiv]

2 minutes ago, Mcwaffles2003 said:

Also, I'm aware of the limit of an RC from the secondary effectively making the scope perform as a 4.5"

That is not quite true for imaging purposes. It is still 6" scope, but with more contrast loss than unobstructed scope. You need greater SNR to restore those frequencies.

4 minutes ago, Mcwaffles2003 said:

Hadn't thought of that and will definitely consider it as that wouldn't be a very costly upgrade, especially if I can sell the starshoot. In retrospect I'm wondering now why the star shoot is $300 vs the ASI being $150 when the star shoot has pretty much the same size sensor and is uncooled. As I understand it the larger pixels help it collect more light for better accuracy on stars but 2x2 binning should lead to a similar result, if not better since it is cooled. Correct?

ASI120 is not cooled either - none of those planetary cameras are (there were few models there were cooled but they stopped making those - I still have ASI178 that is cooled). In any case, there is no point in cooling for planetary and guiding purposes, and you are right - 2x2 bin will increase pixel size. There are a few options in PHD2 - among them is 2x2 average to reduce noise - which is essentially the same as binning.

Sometimes it is better to have smaller pixels for guiding - better precision.

7 minutes ago, Mcwaffles2003 said:

I was referring to the EQ6, my mistake. The weight limit for the HEQ5 is about 30lbs though and I thought the rule of thumb was to try and stay below 50% capacity.

Sort of is, but you can put quite a bit of kit on HEQ5. I image with 8" RC scope on HEQ5 and manage 0.5" RMS guiding, but mount is modded quite a bit (berlebach tripod, geoptic saddle plate, belt mod, tuned, etc ...).

I used to image with 8" F/6 newtonian and guide scope on HEQ5 - now that was pushing it - but it sort of worked.

 

[Mcwaffles2003]

 

9 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Sort of is, but you can put quite a bit of kit on HEQ5. I image with 8" RC scope on HEQ5 and manage 0.5" RMS guiding, but mount is modded quite a bit (berlebach tripod, geoptic saddle plate, belt mod, tuned, etc ...).

I used to image with 8" F/6 newtonian and guide scope on HEQ5 - now that was pushing it - but it sort of worked.

I wanted to do this when I started out and saw the weight and thought, well I guess that wont work... that's why I went for an RC, better brightness than a Cass and much lighter than a Newtonian while still having a great focal length (the 1370mm FL with my 1300D sensor will fit the solar eclipse in 2024 perfectly). BTW how much of a difference has the belt mod made for you? I have been considering that as well and I hear it does wonders for backlash and the loud grinding sound the HEQ5 makes.

Edited August 31, 2020 by Mcwaffles2003

[vlaiv]

49 minutes ago, Mcwaffles2003 said:

 

I wanted to do this when I started out and saw the weight and thought, well I guess that wont work... that's why I went for an RC, better brightness than a Cass and much lighter than a Newtonian while still having a great focal length (the 1370mm FL with my 1300D sensor will fit the solar eclipse in 2024 perfectly). BTW how much of a difference has the belt mod made for you? I have been considering that as well and I hear it does wonders for backlash and the loud grinding sound the HEQ5 makes.

I can't be totally sure how much belt mod itself made a difference because I tuned my mount as well when I did the belt mod. I had to do that because one of bearings had a crack and needed to be replaced so I changed all of them for high quality SKF bearings.

I do know that periodic error went considerably down, backlash improved dramatically and yes, noise went down - but that was not something I was overly concerned with. After all the mods and improvements, I went from >1" RMS guiding to ~0.5" RMS guiding, so that is quite an improvement, but I can't say how much is it down to belt mod itself and how much is due to other changes.