DSLR for DSO imaging initiation

[barbulo]

I was thinking about acquiring a second hand DSLR camera to initiate in DSO imaging with my SW150P. 
Would you recommend so? Would a Canon EOS Rebel T6i do it? Need to mod it? 
Thanks in advance. 

[dobblob]

The Rebel T 3i is considered amongst the better DSLRs.  Modding is not necessary but certainly does help with heavy Ha nebulae. I imagine they can be found for 150-200 euros.

It's a great starter camera for DSOs.

[Crackabarrel]

I've been having success with the Nikon D5300, good image quality and nice Ha response stock, however the T3i is well regarded and would be a good choice of starter camera.

[barbulo]

Thanks for your replies. 

I've read that the T3i is the same model as the 600D. Is that true? I see more 600D than T3i around.

 

[Clarkey]

Yes the 600D and the T3i are the same. I have a 600D and it is good for imaging although I don't use it much since moving over to an asi1600 mono.

[Crackabarrel]

The T3i seems to be just the American name for the 600D as far as I can tell from looking at the specs

[barbulo]

Thanks to both. That's what I suspected. 

@Clarkey : ASI1600MM, along with a filter wheel, is my ultimate target. $tep by $tep though.

[Clarkey]

There are plenty of 600D's available 2nd hand with low shutter counts for around £200. Astro modding will cost about another £75 (if you want to) at Cheap Astrophotgraphy.

I have used my 600D with a 200P and it was fine. With a 150P it is probably a better pixel scale so should be ideal. I'm not sure if there are any issues with the back-focus distance with the 150P. I have to put the camera right into the draw tube to get focus - but it will do it. The 150P being slightly smaller may be a problem. Best check with owners.

[barbulo]

That's a good point, @Clarkey Thanks. 

Anyone with 600D and 150P? 

 

[The Lazy Astronomer]

18 hours ago, barbulo said:

Thanks to both. That's what I suspected. 

@Clarkey : ASI1600MM, along with a filter wheel, is my ultimate target. $tep by $tep though.

Just a side note: the 1600mm is relatively old now, if you were in the market for a 4/3 sensor in the future the 294mm would be the way to go. 

[barbulo]

35 minutes ago, The Lazy Astronomer said:

Just a side note: the 1600mm is relatively old now, if you were in the market for a 4/3 sensor in the future the 294mm would be the way to go. 

By the way, one question: 4/3”@3,8µm vs 1”@2,4µm? (1600mm/294mm vs 183mm)? Differences?

[The Lazy Astronomer]

2 hours ago, barbulo said:

By the way, one question: 4/3”@3,8µm vs 1”@2,4µm? (1600mm/294mm vs 183mm)? Differences?

I'm by no means an expert, but basically:

1. The 4/3 sensors will have a larger FOV than the 1"

2. The different pixel sizes will dictate the sampling rate for a particular telescope. Very short focal lengths will benefit from smaller pixels. However, at longer focal lengths, very small pixels are likely to just be "wasted" resolution. I.e. you're not recording any further detail, just spreading it out over more pixels.

[rickwayne]

Well, expert enough to be correct with your advice, at least!

If you want to get all quantitative about it, here is a calculator for image scale: astronomy.tools CCD calculator.

As for field of view, Telescopius.com will help you previsualize what various setups will do, as will the Stellarium application if you download it.

 

[TerryMcK]

The ZWO ASI 2600MM is the way I would go

[The Lazy Astronomer]

1 hour ago, TerryMcK said:

The ZWO ASI 2600MM is the way I would go

Well ideally, yes, but then that's another step up in price - OP had originally mentioned the 1600mm was their ultimate target, I was just pointing out that in the 4/3 sensor size the 1600mm has been superseded by the 294mm