OTA Recommendation purely for AP?

[Quetzalcoatl72]

To fit my NEQQ, my c5 did exceptionally well in all front but I need an upgrade, something with twice the kick! I've been looking at newts but I read so many forums about them bendy with a heavy camera and the focussing being shoddy and awkward collimation. Hopefully that will not be a problem as I'm exclusively in the garden. Price range of up to £1300, that's including anything I need to improve the scope such as a better focuser etc. I have a 80ed but i'm not replacing that as it's newish, thanks. 

[dannybgoode]

What do you mean by twice the kick? The scope might not be the thing to be upgrading

[The Lazy Astronomer]

What's the area of interest: galaxies, small nebula, medium to large nebula?

[Quetzalcoatl72]

11 hours ago, The Lazy Astronomer said:

What's the area of interest: galaxies, small nebula, medium to large nebula?

Everything, I want to photograph all objects possible with the budget

[Quetzalcoatl72]

12 hours ago, dannybgoode said:

What do you mean by twice the kick? The scope might not be the thing to be upgrading

Trust me it's the scope lol, having a little orange c5 on a big eq6 mount is embarrassing. Maybe not twice the kick, because that would mean something like a c10 which Is over my budget, bigger images, more light gathering, sharp contrast etc those kicks 

[Quetzalcoatl72]

vx10L, quattro, v200L, C9.25. I'm interested in those 

[The Lazy Astronomer]

10 hours ago, Quetzalcoatl72 said:

Everything, I want to photograph all objects possible with the budget

Ok, so what you're asking for here is more than one telescope. Medium to large sized nebulae require short focal lengths, small nebulae and galaxies benefit from longer focal lengths.

I see you already have an 80ed, so that's basically the short focal length scope sorted.

This leaves us free to focus on a scope for small targets.

Based on budget constraints, I think an SCT is not in the equation - the edge HD range prices start some £500 over your budget. The standard SCTs are not recommended for deep sky AP, but I don't have any experience with them in this regard - perhaps someone else can comment?

The quattro has a focal length of 800mm, this I would describe as a 'medium' focal length; small objects and galaxies will still appear pretty small on the sensor.

The vx10l and the vc200l both offer a similar focal length: 1600 and 1800mm respectively, but as the former does it through the use of a Newtonian design, you end up with a very long tube which may be difficult to use practically (long moment arm, very sensitive to wind).

This leaves us with the vc200l, which is some variation on the Ritchey-Chretien design l believe. Practically, this seems like it might be the winner of the 4 options you listed, however it's quite a slow scope at f9, so you'd need long sub-exposures, and it's focal length means you'd need a good mount, and very careful guiding.

All of them would also require regular collimation for optimal results (the newts and RC especially).

Edit: I've assumed you've got some fairly decent experience in AP already; working at long focal lengths is difficult!!

 

Edited March 15, 2021 by The Lazy Astronomer

[dannybgoode]

13 hours ago, Quetzalcoatl72 said:

Trust me it's the scope lol, having a little orange c5 on a big eq6 mount is embarrassing. Maybe not twice the kick, because that would mean something like a c10 which Is over my budget, bigger images, more light gathering, sharp contrast etc those kicks 

A small scope on a big mount is a good thing for AP and as per the above, long focal lengths become much much more difficult to handle.  Your guiding needs to be spot on, there needs to be little to no wind etc.  Also, many DSO's are small and trying to make them big by chucking focal length at them isn't always desirable.  You will see that most imagers prefer scopes like the ED80 or ones that are even smaller as they are more versatile and can image objects both large and small.  

I would suggest careful consideration about exactly what objects you want to image and whether a longer focal length is the best way to go about this.

[Quetzalcoatl72]

8 minutes ago, dannybgoode said:

A small scope on a big mount is a good thing for AP and as per the above, long focal lengths become much much more difficult to handle.  Your guiding needs to be spot on, there needs to be little to no wind etc.  Also, many DSO's are small and trying to make them big by chucking focal length at them isn't always desirable.  You will see that most imagers prefer scopes like the ED80 or ones that are even smaller as they are more versatile and can image objects both large and small.  

I would suggest careful consideration about exactly what objects you want to image and whether a longer focal length is the best way to go about this.

Ok, lets say I want objects I've tried to do but yielded no results, horsehead and rosette for example

[dannybgoode]

1 minute ago, Quetzalcoatl72 said:

Ok, lets say I want objects I've tried to do but yielded no results, horsehead and rosette for example

I would say it is not the scope in that case.  The Rosette is a large target - much too large to fit in the field of view of my 650mm scope and Starlight Xpress SX674 for example and you would want a smaller widefield scope for it.  Similarly the HH is overall a large target and the ED80, depending on the camera, be about right for it. 

What camera are you using, what sort of exposure times are you giving it, are you shooting one shot colour or mono with filters etc

[dannybgoode]

To give you an example this is the Rosette with the red square simulating the field of view my TMB 105/650 + camera will give. As you can see I actually need a much smaller scope or larger camera to be able to fit it all in

 

 

[Quetzalcoatl72]

6 minutes ago, dannybgoode said:

To give you an example this is the Rosette with the red square simulating the field of view my TMB 105/650 + camera will give. As you can see I actually need a much smaller scope or larger camera to be able to fit it all in

You reminded me that I can use stellarium to do that, thanks. Surely though that's where focal reducers come into play no? is the quality reduced? My ED80 can pick it up, but imaging doesn't show any colours

[dannybgoode]

2 minutes ago, Quetzalcoatl72 said:

You reminded me that I can use stellarium to do that, thanks. Surely though that's where focal reducers come into play no? is the quality reduced? My ED80 can pick it up, but imaging doesn't show any colours

A focal reducer for my scope would cost the same as a nice 60mm ED triplet and even then I would still be struggling to fit it in so would rather get the smaller scope  .  Plus my scope is heavy and I want something more portable for a grab and go.  If you are not seeing colour etc then it is down to the imaging process.  What camera are you using, what exposure settings are you using, what software to control everything etc?

If you could post a sample image as well so we can see what you are managing to capture

[vlaiv]

So you have EQ6 and C5. That is what we know so far.

What camera are you using?

Are you guiding or not and if yes - how?

What is your processing workflow and what is typical total exposure time for your images. What is light pollution level at your location (you mentioned garden exclusively)?

[Quetzalcoatl72]

59 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

So you have EQ6 and C5. That is what we know so far.

What camera are you using?

Are you guiding or not and if yes - how?

What is your processing workflow and what is typical total exposure time for your images. What is light pollution level at your location (you mentioned garden exclusively)?

canon 600dA, using a 120asi to guide, I don't know the exact pollution stats but It's very rural with Nissan factory floodlights in the far north distance. I can show you an image of 30 minutes total from Thursday night with my ed80. I have a new "filter and x2 barlow I haven't used yet because I don't have a proper adaptor for the camera that fits 2"
 

[Quetzalcoatl72]

1 hour ago, dannybgoode said:

A focal reducer for my scope would cost the same as a nice 60mm ED triplet and even then I would still be struggling to fit it in so would rather get the smaller scope  .  Plus my scope is heavy and I want something more portable for a grab and go.  If you are not seeing colour etc then it is down to the imaging process.  What camera are you using, what exposure settings are you using, what software to control everything etc?

If you could post a sample image as well so we can see what you are managing to capture

single frame of 3 minutes 800iso

[The Lazy Astronomer]

4 minutes ago, Quetzalcoatl72 said:

canon 600dA, using a 120asi to guide, I don't know the exact pollution stats but It's very rural with Nissan factory floodlights in the far north distance. I can show you an image of 30 minutes total from Thursday night with my ed80. I have a new "filter and x2 barlow I haven't used yet because I don't have a proper adaptor for the camera that fits 2"
 

That's actually a decent image for just 10 x 3 minute subs. I'd imagine vlaiv would say the colours are good here (good = natural). However, many imagers (myself included) are guilty of pushing the colours a bit to make pretty pictures.

The easiest (and cheapest) way to improve the quality of your images is more integration time. The image below was taken with a 50mm guide scope, but is several hours of integration time, so more aperture is not necessarily needed (granted it was taken using a mono cooled astro camera, but the same principle applies to a DSLR)

[vlaiv]

Ok, I can see why you might not get along with C5, but what would be your objection to ED80?

[Quetzalcoatl72]

1 minute ago, vlaiv said:

Ok, I can see why you might not get along with C5, but what would be your objection to ED80?

I'm keeping my ED80 as the picture was taken with that, it's just not going to be great for planets or smaller nebula. I've used my C5 for a lot of things, mostly planetary. Below is a gif I created from images using the c5 and asi120. I can post others to show you what I imaged as well
 

[Quetzalcoatl72]

The first image was from the C5 and it was only 4 or 5 pictures stacked
The second was from the ED80, again only 4, 4 mins
Due to time constraints and many other problems I was only able to capture so much, and I have a habit of bouncing between different objects, It was my first time imaging at a dark site so I got too giddy.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Quetzalcoatl72

[vlaiv]

Just now, Quetzalcoatl72 said:

I'm keeping my ED80 as the picture was taken with that, it's just not going to be great for planets or smaller nebula. I've used my C5 for a lot of things, mostly planetary. Below is a gif I created from images using the c5 and asi120. I can post others to show you what I imaged as well
 

I'm trying to put my finger on what would be most beneficial to your imaging.  I'm still unsure what to recommend to you as I don't fully understand your AP needs.

So far I've gathered that you want large aperture scope capable of all sorts of targets. You have considerable budget. I'm inclined to say - go with about 1200mm of FL and use super pixel mode on your camera.

That would mean 10" F/5 Newtonian - something like SW 250PDS.

However, that is large and heavy scope and long focal length. It is not something that I would recommend unless you have enough experience to handle scope like that for imaging.

You've shown image of 30 minutes with ED80 and you mention that you can't get color out of Rosette. I tried to look up where you might be living and only Nissan plant that I've found is one in Sunderland. If you live somewhere south of there - you are still in red zone - that whole area is in pretty heavy LP:

Gradient in your M81/82 also suggests presence of LP.

What you need is more total exposure - as @The Lazy Astronomer already pointed out. Large scope will certainly help if you can manage it and process data appropriately, but I'm wondering if I'm doing you a disservice by recommending such a large and demanding telescope?

 

[vlaiv]

3 minutes ago, Quetzalcoatl72 said:

The first image was from the C5 and it was only 4 or 5 pictures stacked
The second was from the ED80, again only 5

Are you sure?

First image looks like it might be taken with ED80, but second one looks like it was taken with camera lens, maybe 100mm or so lens?

[Quetzalcoatl72]

2 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

I'm trying to put my finger on what would be most beneficial to your imaging.  I'm still unsure what to recommend to you as I don't fully understand your AP needs.

So far I've gathered that you want large aperture scope capable of all sorts of targets. You have considerable budget. I'm inclined to say - go with about 1200mm of FL and use super pixel mode on your camera.

That would mean 10" F/5 Newtonian - something like SW 250PDS.

However, that is large and heavy scope and long focal length. It is not something that I would recommend unless you have enough experience to handle scope like that for imaging.

You've shown image of 30 minutes with ED80 and you mention that you can't get color out of Rosette. I tried to look up where you might be living and only Nissan plant that I've found is one in Sunderland. If you live somewhere south of there - you are still in red zone - that whole area is in pretty heavy LP:

Gradient in your M81/82 also suggests presence of LP.

What you need is more total exposure - as @The Lazy Astronomer already pointed out. Large scope will certainly help if you can manage it and process data appropriately, but I'm wondering if I'm doing you a disservice by recommending such a large and demanding telescope?

 

I'm in Washington which is just below the pink zone, chances are I'm permanently living here. Very rare chance at the moment to get out somewhere because I rely on my mother who likes my hobby but doesn't like driving too far in the dark as a don't drive. I don't mind a heavy scope as long as the NEQ6 mount can take it, my issue is collimation and focussing. I've had a 200P newt but I sold it because the focuser was rubbish and wobbly.

[Quetzalcoatl72]

5 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Are you sure?

First image looks like it might be taken with ED80, but second one looks like it was taken with camera lens, maybe 100mm or so lens?

I must have it all muddled up you're right. I checked the info of that picture and it says I used a 70-300 Lens which is what I have but I really cant remember doing that, I must have had it piggybacked on my ED80 for some reason. The first one was taken the same year at a different time so it must be the ED80

[vlaiv]

2 minutes ago, Quetzalcoatl72 said:

I'm in Washington which is just below the pink zone, chances are I'm permanently living here. Very rare chance at the moment to get out somewhere because I rely on my mother who likes my hobby but doesn't like driving too far in the dark as a don't drive. I don't mind a heavy scope as long as the NEQ6 mount can take it, my issue is collimation and focussing. I've had a 200P newt but I sold it because the focuser was rubbish and wobbly.

Ok, that now makes much more sense.

Your worst enemy is LP - you live in very high LP area - SQM around 18.5.

I know how that feels - as I also live in SQM 18.5 zone.

Fact of life is that you'll need a lot of exposure time. I mean a lot.

This is two hours with 80mm scope and cooled dedicated astro camera. With additional 1.5h, and some careful processing - I believe you would match or even surpass this result with your setup.

In order to get really good image - we would need to image, say 8h, or even more in SQM18.5