New Equipment Recommendations

[Cuto100200]

Hi 

For around 6-ish months now I've been taking photos with a 250D, the lenses I have are a 130mm and 18-55mm Zoom Lens. Along with this I also own a 8" Dobsonian and I've generally been doing a mix of wide angle shots with the lens, and very limited deep sky imaging using the telescope. It's been a real joy doing all this but I think it's time i'd like to get past this wall I feel i'm at with Deep Sky Imaging so any equipment recommendations would be amazing.

Currently i'm looking at the Sky-Watcher Evostar 80ED DS-Pro along with the Sky-Watcher HEQ5 Pro Mount as I've heard these are good all-round products and good for starting out a bit more seriously. Any recommendations on equipment that would be useful to go along side this, if there is any that i'd need, would be much appreciated, or just any alternatives to the main equipment in general.

Budget for this stuff is going to be around 1500 all together (excluding the already acquired items like 250D camera).

I'm going to use the 250D as an imaging camera, however will either get it modded in future or eventually upgrade to a dedicated AP camera when I have the budget. 

Thank you

Lewis

[rickwayne]

The classic advice is "go long on mount, skimp or delay on optics or camera if you have to", as you may have heard. Your budget would accommodate an EQ6-R Pro or even an iOptron CEM40. If the former, you could add a nice old manual-everything prime telephoto in the 3-400mm range from the used market. That would obviate adapters and field flattener or flattener/reducer needed for a telescope. Next step after that could be autoguiding, then a scope. There are many, many excellent targets amenable to that focal range. 600mm is actually a tad on the long side if you're starting out with "serious" deep-sky AP, and f/7 is pretty slow. So you'd want a flattener/reducer anyway, putting you right about...400mm.

An upgraded mount like that would be no harder to operate (well, the EQ6-R is a beast to lug around, they say), but deliver significantly better performance and would not need to be replaced for years, maybe never.

Just my two cents. Did I do it that way? No. Scope Fever had me in its implacable grip. Do I wish I had? Yeah, kinda. But that Stellarvue sure is a jewel... 🙂

[tooth_dr]

The ED80 is a fantastic scope and I would certainly be a big fan. You would need to budget for the optional 0.85x, because with a DSLR the stars are unacceptably distorted without it.  It then runs at 510mm F6.4 and takes great images.

Ths HEQ5 is also perfect for serious astrophotography.  And once you get well used to it, you could consider a belt modification too.

Another thing you will want to do is start guiding.  You can buy an adapter to convert your existing finderscope, and then add something like a ZWO 120MM.

 

 

 

 

[wimvb]

I agree with @tooth_dr on this one; start small. While the eq6-r is a great mount, I fear it won't see much use if you can't install it permanently, and can only use it with a camera and lenses. A friend of mine got great results with an 80ed on a heq5 and a used Moravian G2 with lrgb filters, from a balcony in a major city. If you have to set up every time, the heq5 will be much easier.

[gorann]

10 hours ago, rickwayne said:

The classic advice is "go long on mount, skimp or delay on optics or camera if you have to", as you may have heard. Your budget would accommodate an EQ6-R Pro or even an iOptron CEM40. If the former, you could add a nice old manual-everything prime telephoto in the 3-400mm range from the used market. That would obviate adapters and field flattener or flattener/reducer needed for a telescope. Next step after that could be autoguiding, then a scope. There are many, many excellent targets amenable to that focal range. 600mm is actually a tad on the long side if you're starting out with "serious" deep-sky AP, and f/7 is pretty slow. So you'd want a flattener/reducer anyway, putting you right about...400mm.

An upgraded mount like that would be no harder to operate (well, the EQ6-R is a beast to lug around, they say), but deliver significantly better performance and would not need to be replaced for years, maybe never.

Just my two cents. Did I do it that way? No. Scope Fever had me in its implacable grip. Do I wish I had? Yeah, kinda. But that Stellarvue sure is a jewel... 🙂

I echo this recommendation. A great alternative to an ED semi-apo telescope is a used Canon 300 f/4 or 400 f/5.6 lens from the professionald EF series. They are apochromatic lenses with a flat field that will fit directly on your camera. Just see to it that you get the older (and cheaper) model without image stabilizer. On ebay they seem to go for 600 - 700 pounds in the UK (cheaper if you get  it from Japan as I did with my 300 f/4). On my Astrobin there are some images I have taken with that Canon 300 f/4, although I used a cooled CMOS (ASI071) rather than a DSLR. Here is an example:

https://www.astrobin.com/m5oh8m/F/

And you can of course capture birds with it a daytime🕊️

[wimvb]

52 minutes ago, gorann said:

I echo this recommendation. A great alternative to an ED semi-apo telescope is a used Canon 300 f/4 or 400 f/5.6 lens from the professionald EF series. They are apochromatic lenses with a flat field that will fit directly on your camera. Just see to it that you get the older (and cheaper) model without image stabilizer. On ebay they seem to go for 600 - 700 pounds in the UK (cheaper if you get  it from Japan as I did with my 300 f/4). On my Astrobin there are some images I have taken with that Canon 300 f/4, although I used a cooled CMOS (ASI071) rather than a DSLR. Here is an example:

https://www.astrobin.com/m5oh8m/F/

And you can of course capture birds with it a daytime🕊️

And the mount used for this stunning image was ...

(drum roll) ...

 

 

A star adventurer.

I agree that a short fl lens ("short" in AP is imo, anything up to about 400 mm fl) with a dslr can give spectacular results. But if you mount that camera on a SW EQ6-R, and have to haul that out every time there is a gap in the clouds, you'll probably lose interest in this hobby very soon. The EQ6-R with tripod weighs 25 kg, without counter weights (you probably don't need those with a 400 mm lens and dslr). A HEQ5 weighs 15.6 kg, and a CEM40 about the same.

For a £ 1500 budget, I would get an HEQ5 with Rowan belt mod (£ 980), a guide kit (£ 220 - 250, total £ 1200) and either a 72ED Evostar (£ 270, wo flattener), or save another £ 300 to get that 300 or 400 mm lens.

Just my €0.02

Edited December 21, 2020 by wimvb

[gorann]

14 minutes ago, wimvb said:

And the mount used for this stunning image was ...

(drum roll) ...

 

 

A star adventurer.

I agree that a short fl lens ("short" in AP is imo, anything up to about 400 mm fl) with a dslr can give spectacular results. But if you mount that camera on a SW EQ6-R, and have to haul that out every time there is a gap in the clouds, you'll probably lose interest in this hobby very soon. The EQ6-R with tripod weighs 25 kg, without counter weights (you probably don't need those with a 400 mm lens and dslr). A HEQ5 weighs 15.6 kg, and a CEM40 about the same.

For a £ 1500 budget, I would get an HEQ5 with Rowan belt mod (£ 980), a guide kit (£ 220 - 250, total £ 1200) and either a 72ED Evostar (£ 270, wo flattener), or save another £ 300 to get that 300 or 400 mm lens.

Just my €0.02

Yes, a Star Adventurer and 90 second exposures so no guiding. That setup will not break you bank (unless you also buy the cooled camera) or back🙂 and you can travel across the world with it. But a HEQ5 will give you more options for the future.

An interesting alternative to the Skywatcher ED80 is this one. It costs about the same, it is a true triplet apo, a bit faster (f/6), and more wide field (FL 480 mm). It was my first apo and I still have it:

https://www.bresser.de/en/Astronomy/Telescopes/EXPLORE-SCIENTIFIC-ED-APO-80mm-f-6-FCD-1-Alu-2-R-P-Focuser.html

[Owmuchonomy]

My first ever astrophotography effort was using a Canon 600D, an EF300mm f/4 lens and an HEQ5 pro mount. I personally wouldn't go heavier than an HEQ5 pro until you have a permanent set up.  I built an obsy and installed an AZ EQ6 GT.

 

Edited December 21, 2020 by Owmuchonomy

[Cuto100200]

Hi Guys

Thanks for all the replies this has really helped, I really appreciate it. 

Just a quick question, is there any difference between the HEQ5 Pro and the EQ5 Pro other than weight capacity, stability and future proofing, does the HEQ5 provide any superior tracking benefits and would this be worth the extra cost? This is assuming both mounts can carry the weight of the rig. 

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/equatorial-astronomy-mounts/skywatcher-eq5-pro-synscan-goto.html

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

Thank you

 

[Cuto100200]

4 hours ago, Owmuchonomy said:

My first ever astrophotography effort was using a Canon 600D, an EF300mm f/4 lens and an HEQ5 pro mount. I personally wouldn't go heavier than an HEQ5 pro until you have a permanent set up.  I built an obsy and installed an AZ EQ6 GT.

 

Also love this it looks beautiful, thanks for sharing this. Didn't know what sort of stuff you could do with lenses + mount so this gives a really nice bit of perspective. 

[wimvb]

1 hour ago, Cuto100200 said:

Hi Guys

Thanks for all the replies this has really helped, I really appreciate it. 

Just a quick question, is there any difference between the HEQ5 Pro and the EQ5 Pro other than weight capacity, stability and future proofing, does the HEQ5 provide any superior tracking benefits and would this be worth the extra cost? This is assuming both mounts can carry the weight of the rig. 

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/equatorial-astronomy-mounts/skywatcher-eq5-pro-synscan-goto.html

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

Thank you

 

There's a reason why the heq5 has a higher payload; it's sturdier and a better build. But get the one with belt drive, it runs smoother.

[rnobleeddy]

I have an older EQ6 without a permanent setup (although a good cover means I leave it out quite a lot) and I'd definitely recommend the HEQ5 instead. I never owned a HEQ5 but I've used an EQ5 and it was much easier to move around. I'm a pretty large/fit guy but the EQ6 is a lot of effort because it's awkward as much as it is heavy.

The HEQ5 appears to be the sweetspot - unless you want the extra weight capacity of the EQ6 (and most don't) then it's cheaper and isn't going to have significantly worse performance if you get the belt mod.

I'd probably recommend skipping the EQ5 - whilst some people have got good results with them, my experience is they take a lot of effort/tuning to get solid guiding accuracy.