Jump to content

Narrowband

The usual question


Recommended Posts

Hi all, my name is Dave from Wigan. I know you are probably all sick of the what telescope should I buy question but I need to ask that question. I have always wanted to take this hobby up for years but I have been far to busy with working full time, having my own part time business and 2 active kids that need to be run to all their sporting venues. I feel I am now at a time in my life were I can start to chill and take up this great hobby. Can you all advise me on a great starter scope, i would like to use for observing and photography. In an ideal world I would like to use my Canon 5d mk3 with the scope to capture images. Do i prefer planetary or deep space? I don't know, it all interests me so a great all rounder would be great. I appreciate any answers, my budget is around £2000.

 

Many thanks, Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dave and welcome to the forum :smiley:

I don't image so I can't really help with scope suggestions. Your budget should be able to get you something decent though.

The challenge at the current time is finding what you decide on, actually in stock somewhere !

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, John said:

Hi Dave and welcome to the forum :smiley:

I don't image so I can't really help with scope suggestions. Your budget should be able to get you something decent though.

The challenge at the current time is finding what you decide on, actually in stock somewhere !

 

As John  says Scopes low on stock and don't buy on an impulse because it is in stock... as you will regret it later. When you wanted something different.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The closest to an all-round telescope is a 130mm f/5 or 150mm f/5 Newtonian, and with magnifications ranging from 20x to 200x and beyond; for observing practically everything in the sky.

A 130mm f/6 apochromatic-refractor would be an ideal all-rounder, too, with little to no collimation worries, but I digress.

When wanting to take pictures, many begin with a short 80mm ED-doublet or -triplet refractor, or a 130mm f/5 Newtonian; for examples...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/pro-series/skywatcher-evostar-80ed-ds-pro-ota.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/esprit-professional-refractors/skywatcher-esprit-ed-80-pro-triplet.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-130p-ds-ota.html

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/210593-imaging-with-the-130pds/

I would choose a 130mm f/5 Newtonian, and an EQ5-class go-to equatorial mount; the HEQ5 listed below.  But you will need to learn and master the art of collimating a Newtonian, in addition; for imaging, to the point of fanaticism even, and in making the master, Newton, proud.  He observed with a 33mm f/5 instrument.  Alas, if only he had had a camera.

When imaging with a DSLR-camera, the mount used must be much larger than the telescope, and supportive of the imaging equipment attached in addition; for examples...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/equatorial-astronomy-mounts/skywatcher-heq5-pro-synscan.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/equatorial-astronomy-mounts/skywatcher-eq6-r-pro-synscan-go-to-equatorial-mount.html

The telescope and camera must be held rigidly, steadily, like a rock, whilst tracking and photographing an object, during timed-exposures, so as to avoid soft and blurred images. 

That's just the basest of basics.  The photographic endeavour can be a real money-pit; or not if you choose a more casual approach.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For £2k you are well beyond what would normally considered a beginner's outfit and could get something much more advanced.

I'd suggest something like this https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-200p-ds-ota.html (with a coma corrector for imaging and wide field), a suitable mount, https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-heq5-pro-synscan.html along with some decent eyepieces for visual use.

You'd have a complete set up which could do almost anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With your £2000 you could buy some quite useful kit, but I would suggest that you first buy a relatively inexpensive outfit to see how you get on.  There is unfortunately no all-rounder scope that does everything, especially if you want to do imaging.

An 80mm aperture apochromatic refractor  on an EQ-6 mount would be a fine setup for deep-space imaging, but not much good for general observing or planetary imaging.  I'm told that deep-space imaging is an expensive and very demanding hobby.

A CPC800 would be fine for planetary imaging (with a specialist planetary camera, not a DSLR) and general observing, but not good for deep-space imaging.

Various outfits such as a 8" Dobsonian or a Celestron C8 SE would be fine for visual observing but not much good for imaging anything.

No doubt someone will suggest an outfit that comes closer to meeting your requirements. 

I should also point out that an alt-azimuth GoTo mount (primarily suited for visual observing and planetary imaging) is generally much quicker and easier to set up than a German equatorial GoTo (required for deep space imaging and not much else).

I would suggest that if you are determined to 'dive in at the deep end' that you think in terms of 1 mount + 2 different scopes, or 2 mounts and 2 scopes, rather than trying to find a compromise. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Dave, when building up your shopping list, can I suggest you look at the weight of the various items on your list. The reason is that the mount has to be good enough to move the combined weight of everything you put on it. I have the HEQ5 pro goto mount and depending on what you read, this seems to have a carrying capacity of between 11 - 18Kgs. The combined weight of my telescope tube assembly, eyepiece and camera is about 8.5kgs and its certainly good for that. As others have said, there are very few telescopes and mounts available at the moment so don't rush. Once things become available, you can get adapters to mount your camera directly to a goto type mount. There are some posts on here that show what can be achieved just by using your camera, so have alook around. Plus I might add that I got the Hyperion zoom eyepiece plus adapters that enable you to fit the Canon to the eyepiece, I am loving this eyepiece. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, heller792 said:

Hi all, my name is Dave from Wigan. I know you are probably all sick of the what telescope should I buy question but I need to ask that question. I have always wanted to take this hobby up for years but I have been far to busy with working full time, having my own part time business and 2 active kids that need to be run to all their sporting venues. I feel I am now at a time in my life were I can start to chill and take up this great hobby. Can you all advise me on a great starter scope, i would like to use for observing and photography. In an ideal world I would like to use my Canon 5d mk3 with the scope to capture images. Do i prefer planetary or deep space? I don't know, it all interests me so a great all rounder would be great. I appreciate any answers, my budget is around £2000.

 

Many thanks, Dave

You've had some great suggestions above on scopes to get started, but it's worth considering some practicalities of scope ownership as well.

1) Storage - scopes, especially large Newtonians can require a bit of storage space. If married, an understanding partner can be an essential accessory for for amateur astronomers!

2) Observing location  - do you need to move the scope far? Even setting up in the garden can take a bit of time as you move kit back and forth. A smaller scope can make this a lot easier- more so if you are driving to a dark location.

3) Automation - it's great when it works, but expect a fair bit of frustration getting everything set up.

4) Take your time to learn what you like- I have a shelf of 'essential' accessories I have bought that have had very little use. In some cases because I was too ambitious (need to get the basics sorted first), others because I have changed direction of interest since the purchase.

If you really want to get into astrophotography, then my suggestion would be to start with a shorter focal length scope (such as @Alan64 suggestions) as this is a lot more forgiving although you might want to check how much vignetting you may get on a full frame camera for some of the OTA. The most useful 'essential' purchase I have made is an Ioptron Ipolar - for polar aligning my equatorial mount. Using this device lets me set up quicker and earlier (I can align the scope before I can even see Polaris) letting me maximise my viewing sessions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/10/2020 at 20:40, heller792 said:

I need to ask that question

Hi

Hands on advice from someone who does astro-photography is gold dust in this game. I recommend getting in touch with an astro club near you. You'll be able to see -albeit via video link- all the suggestions which have been made here. If you do finally decide to go for whatever it may be, you know there's someone on hand to help should you get stuck. The importance of the latter when beginning astrophotography can't be emphasized enough. Save yourself the stress and frustration!

If you do decide to go it alone, my recommendation would be to get the heq5 mount and start with what you already have; camera and lens. If you're short on glass, there are some great 135mm and 200mm vintage lenses which will cover your 5d fine but don't expect any telescope within your budget to cover full frame;)

Cheers and HTH

Edited by alacant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all your advise, I will spend the next few hours looking over the options, as I open 1 web page it leads to another and the next thing I know is i am lost in the 20 pages I have open. My current glass go to lens on the camera is my Canon 200-400 L f4.5. I currently  keep and grow corals, I thought that was complicated until I stared looking in to astrophotography.

 

Thanks again,

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually the book 'Making Every Photon Count' by Steve Richards is recommended for anyone interested in getting into imaging:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/books/making-every-photon-count-steve-richards.html

A very good read, and well worth the time to get and read, if telescopes are in short supply presently anyway.

Started out myself a couple of years ago, with the combo suggested by Michael above.  I wanted to do 'a little bit of everything' too, but with emphasis on imaging.   The 200 PDS on a HEQ5 is perhaps not the easiest scope/mount to begin imaging with, as it's definitely on the upper limits for the mount.  Still, I've gotten some images with it that I'm quite happy with, and the few times I've used it for visual, the views have often been amazing - the Moon, Saturn & Jupiter, despite the two latter being 'down in the muck' all the time I've had the scope, have afforded some spectacular views. 

The equatorial mount, which is pretty much required for deep sky imaging, can have some confusing movement patterns though, if you slew it around manually (during alignments for example), and the eyepiece on a large Newtonian can end up in some hard to reach places (but the scope can be rotated inside the scope rings, helping with this).

As a supplement to the 200 PDS, I've also gotten a 130 PDS, for wider fields of view than the 200 PDS (It has shorter focal length - 650mm vs 1000mm).  A very nice scope too, and much easier to handle, not least for the mount.  With the 200 PDS (including huge dew shield), it has to be almost wind still if I am to image.  With the 130 PDS, I recently imaged in a half gale, and only had to discard 3 out of 119 images, getting a perfectly usable image out of the rest.  As such, it would be a much more forgiving entry into imaging, but with considerable less light gathering power than the 200 for visual use.  Compromises, compromises... :wink2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Erling G-P said:

Usually the book 'Making Every Photon Count' by Steve Richards is recommended for anyone interested in getting into imaging:

...

The equatorial mount, which is pretty much required for deep sky imaging, can have some confusing movement patterns though, if you slew it around manually (during alignments for example), and the eyepiece on a large Newtonian can end up in some hard to reach places (but the scope can be rotated inside the scope rings, helping with this).

+1 for that old stalwart 'Making Every Photon Count', not an easy read for the beginner but worth studying.  If it puts you off imaging for a while then it'll already have saved you some money and paid for itself!

If you have a reasonaly solid flat area that you can setup on then a small step ladder can help enormously with the large newtonian (or pier-mounted scope), even if you only stand on the first step.  Just remember to move it well out of the way when not in use.  When observing using the local society's big scope in a dome I was very grateful for this facility.  A caravan step may also do the job, you want something very solid and stable that you don't need to balance on otherwise you'll be moving about too much at the eyepiece.

 

I think many people have the idea that they'd like to view as well as photograph, I was no exception, but I quickly realised that I wouldn't be able to image as well as I'd like to without quite a bit of hands-on coaching (that's how I learn best), and that just hasn't been possible for me even with joining the local society.  I'm a visual observer only now, although I'd still like to do imaging I don't buy any equipment specifically for that.  I use manual EQ mounts with simple tracking, went off goto early on because of the frustration it gave me when it just refused to work properly 8/10 nights - alignment, power problems, difficult to use handsets (especially when the display dews up and gets covered in frost - thick gloves and handsets do not mix, and taking off the gloves means freezing fingers!)  So yes, my early experiences taught me a few lessons.

Rather than go straight for a telescope setup for imaging, perhaps a basic tracking camera mount might be a good first step.  It's not something I've ever really looked at (perhaps I should) but I've seen them used to great effect, and they're very simple to use from what I gather, light, portable, easy to store, and should work on a regular camera tripod.

Edited by jonathan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Dave from Wigan

You have the question with the  impossible answer. Here are some things to consider.  Now this is from my point of view. To meAstronomy is an appreciation of nature and it is also an appreciation  of science (meaning  cosmology and astrophysics.)

1. Do you appreciate the natural world? If no, do not get a telescope.

2. Can you view from your back yard, a few steps from your back door?  If no, do not get a telescope.

3. Do you have more than $2000.00?  If no, do not get a telescope.

 

The telescope that you use will be the best one for you. You need to get one that is easy to use, easy to set up, a joy to use, a joy to view through and will not be frustrating to use. You need one that tracks the objects in the sky. 

 

Most importantly  you also need to get a telescope so that you only need to make a purchase ONCE!!

 

A starter scope for you (or any one) is a tough one, Simply put:

1.    Hands down, far and away the best telescope I could recommend is a Celestron Schmitt Cassegrain 9.25 or 11 inch fork mounted telescope. Get the 11 inch if you can. These scopes are much easier to handle than you would think. Provided you only need to get it out of your back door. Get one used it would be cheaper. Optics are good, the mount is good and  the telescope is very versatile. These are very intuitive to set up and use. These telescopes take only a few minutes to take outside and start viewing.  These telescopes have built in motor drives to track the objects in the sky. This would be the only telescope you will ever need.  I would avoid a Meade product, customer support is very poor .

 

2.  A refractor telescope is a very difficult one to recommend. Usually they will be on a  German Equatorial Mount.  A  German Equatorial Mount can sometimes be very time consuming to set up and it can be confusing.  You need to balance the telescope with weights and also balance the scope using the objective lens of the scope to allow for different eye pieces. The motor drives can be a problem. It is better to have a small refractor and just move the telescope manually than to rely on motor drives at your price point.

 

3. A Newtonian telescope ( usually referred to as a Dobsonian, but Dobsonian really means a Newtonian telescope on a mount that holds the telescope near its mirror) is the least expensive but the most difficult to track an object in the sky. Difficult to balance with eye pieces. This telescope can be frustrating to use.

 

It will be difficult to summarize 35 years of back yard astronomy in a few sentences.

 

Photography and imaging refer to two different things.  Imaging means that you have very, very expensive equipment, you expose your CCD (Charged Couple Device, aka dedicated digital camera) to the night sky through an optical instrument (telescope) for an extended period of time (perhaps hours or days, or you stack images). This requires precise tracking (meaning expensive mounts).  Then you spend hours upon hours in front of a computer manipulating the images with software to get the image perfect.  Now this equipment could cost in the area of $100,000.00. Yes, that is a very substantial amount of money.

To me, I would rather look at some one else's photographs.

To me, I want to see things live through an eye piece.

I do not know your starting point. By this I mean have you been studying the sky with your naked eye for many years? I do not know of your area, is the sky dark?  Can you see any stars?  Do you live in a very light polluted city, or do you live in the country side? 

Unless you are  a somewhat accomplished naked eye observer,  I would recommend that you initially do not buy any type of telescope.  I would buy a planisphere  and study the night sky with your naked eye. Learn how the stars move.  I would not use any of those Iphone aps.  

You need to get to know the constellations, how they move across the sky. You need to be able to make a simple sketch of some of the constellation, how they are positioned in relation to one another. The brightest stars in the constellations.  

A very good reference is the National Audubon Society Field Guide to the Night Sky.  This is by far the best reference book out there.

Also get Hubbard scientific seasonal star chart is the best seasonal star chart which includes a planisphere.  This has all of the detail necessary for all but the most advanced back yard astronomer.

Also read the book Backyard astronomer's guide by Terence Dickinson and Alan Dyer. You really need to read this book to get yourself started.

But if you are past this point of personal development then here is some more information.  The number one object to view is the moon. It is large, close, bright and very interesting. It is a very easy astronomical target that is regularly viewable.  Get yourself a chart of the moon after you get a telescope.  The moon is most interesting to view 6 to 10 days after a new moon and about 3 to 8 days after a full moon.

You also want to view through your telescope with binocular vision. This means both eyes. When looking at the moon with binocular vision you think that you are looking out the window of the  Apollo 11 space ship.  Looking through one eye is not enjoyable. Binocular viewing is easily possible with a Schmitt-Cassegrain telescope.

The other interesting targets with a telescope in order:   Jupiter, Saturn, Alberio, The double cluster, the pleidies, M42, well the list goes on.

But here is the thing. These different targets have different viewing requirements. Some need low power and a wide field of view, such as the double cluster. Generally open star clusters require a wide field of view, globular clusters require higher power and a narrow field of view. Nebulas can vary.  But these are deep sky objects. Anything in the solar system is not a deep sky object. Planets usually require higher power and occupy only a few arc seconds.   

As a general rule of thumb, It requires a dark sky to view deep sky objects

 

Any object bright enough to see with your naked eye in your area will be the easiest objects to view, hence the Moon, Jupiter, Saturn, Alberio.

 

Well, I hope that gets you started.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hoss said:

Hello Dave from Wigan

You have the question with the  impossible answer. Here are some things to consider.  Now this is from my point of view..........

A few interesting points there hoss, not sure that I agree with all though. Had I, I would be sitting looking at the television instead of being out in the freezing cold getting frustrated by clouds and/or user error but also knowing that this is more than offset by being overjoyed when I get it right. I jumped in feet first years ago with a tiny budget and only in the last year have only just exceeded the £2000 starter budget.

I am as good at navigating forums as I am at navigating the night sky, but there is a superb post on this site: "what can I expect to see" , hopefully someone will post the link as Dave, I thoroughly recommend reading this. 

As I mentioned earlier, don't rush Dave, but as your camera is a perfectly capable unit, as jonathan said have you considered a camera tracking mount? When telescopes become more available, move on from there having a better understanding of where you would like to be and if necessary move your camera mount on? The camera mount will require limited storage space, it will get you used to the time it takes to setup and do stuff, the movement and speed of the sky, alignment of a mount etc so it does have a few positives, plus with Mars where it is at the moment you have an ideal first candidate for a few snaps.

Enjoy

Les

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gents, after much consideration I have decided to focus on the photography side of things, galaxies and nebulas (studio photography is already my passion). I am looking at the following set up to get me started.

Ioptron Star Guider Pro (non iPolar)

William Optics Redcat 51 or Gran Turismo GT71

 

I already have a

Canon 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 L

Sigam 70-200mm 2.8 APO DG HSM

Vanguard Alta Pro 263AP 

Canon 5d MK III

Old Canon 400D (not used any more)

 

Could I have your thought on this setup please? Also, I live 18 miles on the outskirts of Manchester so light pollution is a factor that needs considering although I will be traveling to Butterton in the Peak district on summers evening. What filters would you recommend?

 

Thanks Dave.

 

 

 

 

Edited by heller792
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.