Please help me choose a setup

[TheGlobeTrevor]

So I have narrowed my choices down to these 2. Although I am not married to either choice. If someone has something similarly priced that I haven't thought of, I'm still open to suggestions. I want something that is good for observing and also astrophotography. So a motorized EQ clock mount is essential. A GoTo is not necessary, as I think I can manage finding things myself.

 

First choice: Orion SpaceProbe 130mmST (5") Equatorial Reflector Telescope with an EQ-2 mount with no drive, but I will add one on. for $99 After shipping costs= $493.48

Diameter=130mm FL=650mm Av=f/5 Included= Collimation cap,  6x30 finder scope (not the greatest I hear)

 https://www.telescope.com/Orion/Orion-SpaceProbe-130ST-Equatorial-Reflector-Telescope/rc/2160/p/9007.uts

https://www.telescope.com/Orion/Orion-EQ-2M-Electronic-Telescope-Drive/rc/2160/p/7827.uts?keyword=drive

 

Second Choice: Orion AstroView  150mm (6") Equatorial Reflector Telescope with an EQ-3 mount with no drive but I will add one on. for $150 After shipping costs= $734.98

Diameter=150mm FL=750mm Av=f/5 Included= Collimation cap,  6x30 finder scope (not the greatest I hear) (it's the same scope as above)

https://www.telescope.com/Orion/Orion-AstroView-6-Equatorial-Reflector-Telescope/rc/2160/p/9827.uts#

https://www.telescope.com/Orion/Orion-EQ-3M-Dual-Axis-Electronic-Drive/rc/2160/p/7828.uts?keyword=drive#

 

So everything in the 2 choices are equal except for a difference of 20mm diameter, and 100mm of focal length but the 6" is $240 USD more expensive (which is $305 Cad)

 

Would there be much of a difference in what I can see between these 2 choices? Is it worth a $240 difference since it puts me close to my limit? The cheapskate in me wants to go for the lesser version, but will I kick myself later for not spending the extra? Since each EQ mount is (close) to its weight limit; the only way I can upgrade the scope later, would be to replace the entire thing. Am I overlooking something?

If I get the less expensive version I can buy more accessories (like a better scope, eyepieces barlows etc.) Or should I go for the more expensive one and just get the accessories later when I can afford them? I am close to my spending limit with the 6" so I can probably only afford to get a camera adapter. I will probably be attaching a canon camera "prime focus" 

 

I plan on getting a canon mirrorless EOS-M100 which weighs only 300g without a lens.

 

Like I said if I'm overlooking a choice similarly priced option. Please don't be afraid to speak up. My firm limit would be $800USD including shipping to Canada and essential accessories. 

 

 

[teoria_del_big_bang]

Hi,

I really don't think any of the options will be good for Astrophotography but fine for observing.

For AP you really need a good sturdy mount and you can get away with a budget scope but the mount really wants to be something like a HEQ5.
I personally do not have any experience of buying a non motorised mount then adding motors in order to use for AP but would think the tracking will not be great and you will be far better off buying a good EQ goto mount that already has tracking capability.

Also although not impossible buying a scope and mount that is good for visual and AP is never a great idea as you will end up with a setup that may do bth but far from ideal for either and personally I think you will regret it.  Getting a setup for AP on a tight budget is difficult as it is without trying to shoehorn a visual setup in it as well.

One way round is to go the route you suggest and forget the added motor and get a couple of decent EP's and concentrate on visual for now whilst you save for a decent mount like the HEQ5 and then look at doing some AP.

That is my opinion as somebody who started out doing visual for a year or so and then switched to AP. Others may give you some other ideas and have a different view.

Steve

Edited March 12, 2021 by teoria_del_big_bang

[TheGlobeTrevor]

47 minutes ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

Hi,

I really don't think any of the options will be good for Astrophotography but fine for observing.

For AP you really need a good sturdy mount and you can get away with a budget scope but the mount really wants to be something like a HEQ5.
I personally do not have any experience of buying a non motorised mount then adding motors in order to use for AP but would think the tracking will not be great and you will be far better off buying a good goto mount that already has tracking capability.

Also although not impossible buying a scope and mount that is good for visual and AP is never a great idea as you will end up with a setup that may do both but far from ideal for either and personally I think you will regret it.  Getting a setup for AP on a tight budget is difficult as it is without trying to shoehorn a visual setup in it as well.

One way round is to go the route you suggest and forget the added motor and get a couple of decent EP's and concentrate on visual for now whilst you save for a decent mount like the HEQ5 and then look at doing some AP.

That is my opinion as somebody who started out doing visual for a year or so and then switched to AP. Others may give you some other ideas and have a different view.

Steve

Thank you I appreciate your feedback

 

GoTo mounts do track or not? I see contradictory information sometimes. 

 

Not sure there will ever be a scenario where I spend $1100 on only a mount. I don't make that much money. I'm not expecting to go deep sky, or get several hours long tracking. If I got 30s exposures or a few minutes at 750mm and stack: I'd be ok with that. I'm aware those  setups have limitations. Would I be able to work around those limitations? or are they so severe I shouldn't bother? I'm legitimately asking. Your not going to hurt my feelings, if it would be a waste of money, I'd like to know before I waste it

 

Do you think I would be better off getting "just" a EQ tracking mount with a drive, forgoing the telescope and using my 400mm f5/.6 canon lens? I weighed my camera with lens and it weighs 6.3lbs and the mount is rated for 7.1. I could go with the 130mm for observation, then unmount the telescope and mount my camera with telephoto?

[EntropyTango]

Go the 6" for the increase in aperture and better mount.

You can always upgrade the EP's later

Make sure the item is in stock due to supply problems from China

[TheGlobeTrevor]

So these are GoTo's for almost the same price

https://www.telescope.com/Orion/Orion-StarSeeker-IV-150mm-GoTo-Reflector-with-Controller/rc/2160/p/113917.uts?keyword=goto&sortByColumnName=SortByPriceAscending

https://www.telescope.com/Orion/Celestron-AstroFi-130mm-Wi-Fi-Reflector-Telescope/rc/2160/p/116662.uts?keyword=goto&sortByColumnName=SortByPriceAscending

Are those better options? Or still not good?

Is it that it won't track effectively enough for photo use? and will only work for veiwing?  Is it because I'm going so deep, that the slightest movement will blur the photo regardless of a tracking motor? Like, if a mouse farts at 50 paces it will shake the tripod 😄 ?

 

 

[kendg]

I would suggest getting in touch with the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada Calgary Center.

They have excellent people and may even have a loaner program similar to the one we have in Canada.

That way you can try before you buy.

There also is an excellent telescope store in Didsbury. All-star Telescopes and I'm sure that Ken there will be more than willing to help you.

Hope this helps a bit.

[Louis D]

Goto mounts will have field rotation which limits how long individual frames can be.

Off the shelf cameras won't be as sensitive to the far red where H-alpha resides as a dedicated astro camera would be.  It is an important nebula emission line for DSO imaging.

Here's a mega-thread on DSO imaging without an EQ mount:

 

[johninderby]

Alt-Az GOTO mounts have the field rotation problem so only suitable for very short exposures. You need an EQ GOTO mount for longer exposures as they aren’t affected by field rotation.

You wouldn’t notice field rotation for visual observation which is why Alt-Az mounts are very popular for visual observing.

Edited March 12, 2021 by johninderby

[teoria_del_big_bang]

8 hours ago, TheGlobeTrevor said:

GoTo mounts do track or not? I see contradictory information sometimes. 

I would think all goto mounts will track to some extent, but I should have said to make sure it is an EQ goto not a alt-az goto as mentioned above.
I have no experience as such of those add on motors but looking at the gears on them I suspect only good good visual.

Regarding AP in general it usually is a pretty expensive hobby. I know people have done it on the cheap but with a small mount and large scope would be difficult and probably frustrating.

If your budget is tight and you want photography is your real desire then using a camera direct on the mount is probably the best and least costly route.

Something like these are very popular and produce some great images.

skywatcher-star-adventurer

Steve
 

[happy-kat]

If you are into making things it is possible to make a mount to track the stars to take photos using a camera and lens (generally lens length of around 50mm or a bit longer if your build is accurate). The name often used is a 'barn door' mount, there's a link to the build I did in my signature. The One Sky telescope is 130P on a small dobsonian mount and is probably the lowest cost telescope with good mirror, it's the same as what we call the Heritage 130P. Use on a table or upturned bucket while sitting on a garden chair or camping stool. A great visual telescope but not for imaging other than perhaps the Moon.

Edited March 12, 2021 by happy-kat

[Cosmic Geoff]

3 hours ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

I would think all goto mounts will track to some extent, but I should have said to make sure it is an EQ goto not a alt-az goto as mentioned above.
I have no experience as such of those add on motors but looking at the gears on them I suspect only good good visual.

AFAIK all GoTO mounts, whether alt-az or equatorial, will track (often far better than a motorized equatorial mount.)  Whether the result is any use for astrophotography is another matter...  Nowadays there is not much point in having an equatorial mount unless (a) it is for long exposure astrophotography, or (b) it's a manual mount and you want to manually track by rotation about one axis only, or (c) it's a non- GoTo mount and you want to have it made to track via a RA motor drive.

If you are interested in astrophotography, you should obtain and read "Making Every Photon Count" by Steve Richards (available from FLO). It could save you from wasting a lot of effort and money.

If you are content to take widefield views with a camera & camera lens (no telescope), there are various modestly priced mounts designed for that purpose.

Edited March 12, 2021 by Cosmic Geoff
Camera mounts.

[KP82]

As you've already got a 400mm camera lens, I believe the best option for you is to get a SW star adventure for your camera and lens to take pictures while buying a 130 or 150mm dob for visual.

Edited March 12, 2021 by KP82

[Stu1smartcookie]

Despite the "unwritten Law " that you need a mount such as an HEQ5 to even start taking Astro photography seriously , i suggest you just buy the best you can afford . The EQ3-2 is a fine lightweight mount that , if correctly aligned can indeed help you take perfectly acceptable photos of objects . The science , is , knowing its limitations . 

You could , as KP suggests get a star tracker which is an enjoyably very portable way to get some fantastic images when coupled with a stock DSLR . 

I picked up on your sentence of observing and astro photography ... if you are going for a combination set up then the scope should favour the observing side imo . Also , what do you want to observe ? planets and doubles or faint fuzzies ? 

Be warned , the questions , and invariably the expense never stops .  

[TheGlobeTrevor]

Thank you to everyone I appreciate everyone's feedback. There are too many people to quote individually.

14 hours ago, kendg said:

I would suggest getting in touch with the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada Calgary Center.

They have excellent people and may even have a loaner program similar to the one we have in Canada.

That way you can try before you buy.

There also is an excellent telescope store in Didsbury. All-star Telescopes and I'm sure that Ken there will be more than willing to help you.

Hope this helps a bit.

Except I will quote this one, this helps a lot because I live in Alberta.

Can someone help me understand why this Telescopes Equatorial mount with an (added) dual (or) single axis drive won't track properly for AP?

https://www.telescope.com/Orion/Orion-SpaceProbe-130ST-Equatorial-Reflector-Telescope/rc/2160/p/9007.uts?sortByColumnName=SortByPriceAscending

 

If you zoom in (using a mouse wheel) on the mount on Orion's website it looks like you can add a right ascension, and (I assume declination?) with a dual axis drive.

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by TheGlobeTrevor

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, TheGlobeTrevor said:

Thank you to everyone I appreciate everyone's feedback. There are too many people to quote individually.

Except I will quote this one, this helps a lot because I live in Alberta.

Can someone help me understand why this Telescopes Equatorial mount with an (added) dual (or) single axis drive won't track properly for AP?

https://www.telescope.com/Orion/Orion-SpaceProbe-130ST-Equatorial-Reflector-Telescope/rc/2160/p/9007.uts?sortByColumnName=SortByPriceAscending

 

If you zoom in (using a mouse wheel) on the mount on Orion's website it looks like you can add a right ascension, and (I assume declination?) with a dual axis drive.

 

It's not that it won't track properly, it just won't do it accurately enough for long exposures.  You'll start to see stars wandering around a bit due to inaccurate tracking.  The mount also won't be able to resist gusts of wind, so you'll need to shelter it from wind somehow.  It would be fine for short exposures for later stacking.

[TheGlobeTrevor]

29 minutes ago, Louis D said:

It's not that it won't track properly, it just won't do it accurately enough for long exposures.  You'll start to see stars wandering around a bit due to inaccurate tracking.  The mount also won't be able to resist gusts of wind, so you'll need to shelter it from wind somehow.  It would be fine for short exposures for later stacking.

OK thank you, that helps me understand

 

Would a 1/2 focal reducer help? I assume it Is because it is to large a focal length.

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by TheGlobeTrevor

[Louis D]

8 minutes ago, TheGlobeTrevor said:

Would a 1/2 focal reducer help?

Mathematically, yes.  Reducing image scale reduces the visibility of tracking imperfections.  I would avoid the cheap 0.5x focal reducers unless you're using a really small sensor.  They introduce all sorts of outer field aberrations like field curvature and spherical aberration.

[TheGlobeTrevor]

5 minutes ago, Louis D said:

Mathematically, yes.  Reducing image scale reduces the visibility of tracking imperfections.  I would avoid the cheap 0.5x focal reducers unless you're using a really small sensor.  They introduce all sorts of outer field aberrations like field curvature and spherical aberration.

Could I unmount the telescope from the equatorial mount putting my camera with lenses on for AP, then use the Tscope for observation? I have a 16mm f/2 a (100mmf2.8) (24-105mm f/4) a (55-250mm5.6) and the 400mm5.6.

 

Basically I want the best of both worlds setup. I know that is a tall ask

 

Would that make the tracking more accurate or is it the tripod and tracking motor themselves that are inaccurate? If you don't extend a tripod's legs and use a counterwight in the middle of the tripod. (im not talking about a tripod head counterweight) I'm talking right in the middle of the 3 legs adding a counterweight. I know that works for photography when it is windy.

Edited March 12, 2021 by TheGlobeTrevor

[Louis D]

If you can rig up a way to attach the camera in place of the scope, of course you can use the mount sans telescope.

It would definitely resist wind much better with a camera only due to not having a large sail of a scope tube attached to it.

Would the mount track more accurately?  Barely.  It will still have uncorrected periodic error (stars track small orbits) among other issues.  Again, keep the exposures short for later selection and stacking, and it would probably work well enough to learn basic astrophotography on.

[happy-kat]

You could fit a red dot finder in the camera flash hot shoe to help with aiming when just a camera and camera lens is used.

[Gfamily]

16 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

You could fit a red dot finder in the camera flash hot shoe to help with aiming when just a camera and camera lens is used.

This is how I repurposed my redundant RDF using a dummy Hot Shoe from ebay for about £1.99, and a simple L bracket that I hit with a hammer to turn into a ⊃ bracket.

[TheGlobeTrevor]

2 hours ago, Louis D said:

keep the exposures short for later selection and stacking

Sounds good i dont have a problem with stacking. How short are we talking? 10s 30s a couple of minutes? What would be the max? I know its dependant on FL but say 100mm and 400mm (just so i have an idea) a rough estimate will suffice.

 

Thanks happykat and gfamily.

[Cosmic Geoff]

4 hours ago, TheGlobeTrevor said:

Can someone help me understand why this Telescopes Equatorial mount with an (added) dual (or) single axis drive won't track properly for AP?

https://www.telescope.com/Orion/Orion-SpaceProbe-130ST-Equatorial-Reflector-Telescope/rc/2160/p/9007.uts?sortByColumnName=SortByPriceAscending

I used to have a mount equivalent to the EQ-2, and I do not consider it suitable for anything other than supporting a budget visual telescope.   Serious imagers would not use an expensive EQ-6 mount laden with autoguiders and other specialist devices if they thought an EQ-2 would do.  If you cannot afford a proper imaging mount what you can achieve is accordingly limited, which is why it is suggested above that you use your existing camera and lenses on a widefield tracking mount.   I saw one at an astro meeting which consisted of a camera mount with a 1-axis clockwork drive.

[TheGlobeTrevor]

3 hours ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

I used to have a mount equivalent to the EQ-2, and I do not consider it suitable for anything other than supporting a budget visual telescope.   Serious imagers would not use an expensive EQ-6 mount laden with autoguiders and other specialist devices if they thought an EQ-2 would do.  If you cannot afford a proper imaging mount what you can achieve is accordingly limited, which is why it is suggested above that you use your existing camera and lenses on a widefield tracking mount.   I saw one at an astro meeting which consisted of a camera mount with a 1-axis clockwork drive.

Ok that is good to know, thank you.