Newbie seeking advice on camera and lens for DSO, planets and moon WITH camera suitable for eventual telescope use

[900SL]

On 31/10/2021 at 16:10, Ed Galea said:

Thanks Onikkinen, I hear what you are saying and appreciate the advice.  But given that I am in Bortle 8 I'm not sure what I will be able to achieve or if I'll be happy with what I can achieve.  So I want to approach this is a gradual way, taking small steps.  I know this will cost more in the long run, but in the short run, I think it is the most sensible way to approach this.  Especially as I'm also after a good setup for terristerial photography.  I'm totally with you on the mount, when I puchase a tracking mount it will be something substantial that I can grow into and HEQ5 is something I'll consider.  Right now (my Step 1) its the camera and lens and suitable mount for this kit.  I hear you about the astro camera, but that is my Step 4.  But I'm also looking for a camera that can be used for terrestrial photography as well as AP.   So my camera search has led me to the Fujiflim X-T3 or possibly the newer X-T4.  I believe the X-T4 has better video capabilities which may be useful for planetary photography and I think I read somewhere that it is better in low light?.  What do you and the community think about these cameras for AP?  Would the X-T3 be appropriate or should I go for the X-T4, is it worth the extra £££ for AP?  Also, by going the Fujiflims route, will I be limiting myself in terms of the scope of lenses I can use and other accessories?  Hopefully, the Samyang 135 has an X mount adapter as this is ONE of the lenses I'm thinking about getting for AP.  Any advice welcome.

I followed a similar approach as you are planning a year ago.  DSLR, prime lenses, Tracker. I bought a D5600 cropped sensor, SY 135mm f2, Skywatcher Star Adventurer.

I think it will be a zero return in Bortle 8. For this you need GoTo to actually find anything, narrowband filters to deal with light pollution, and a 135 on a APS C soon seems limited in focal length. Too wide for the moon or the main DSO's

 

 

 

[Ed Galea]

7 hours ago, ONIKKINEN said:

https://shop.stcoptics.com/product/clipfilter_fujifilm/

Could be worth checking out for the Fuji.

Broadband imaging from light pollution is not impossible at all by the way, it just has additional issues and restrictions but a filter is never a necessity.

Bright broadband targets like the popular nearby galaxies should be doable from anywhere, just takes more time.

Hi Onikkinen, many thanks again for the great information and for the words of encouragement.  When you say 'a filter is never a necessity' are you suggesting that I don't need a filter or that it is not essential?  Also, I 'm not clear if for the short duration exposures I will be taking initially (without a tracker) if a filter will make any descernable difference at all.  But it is good to know that there are clip in filters for the fujifilm cameras.

[ONIKKINEN]

4 minutes ago, Ed Galea said:

Hi Onikkinen, many thanks again for the great information and for the words of encouragement.  When you say 'a filter is never a necessity' are you suggesting that I don't need a filter or that it is not essential?  Also, I 'm not clear if for the short duration exposures I will be taking initially (without a tracker) if a filter will make any descernable difference at all.  But it is good to know that there are clip in filters for the fujifilm cameras.

Necessity as in impossible to image without, which it is not. Some targets like wide emission nebulae are impractical without a filter and the result would be underwhelming, but not impossible to get. In the end its a practicality question of how long do you want to image a single target for. The required time to reveal a target from a sea of lightpollution noise increases with sky brightness. I have started and given up on a few targets after realizing that im looking at 10-20h on the same target to get where i want.

A narrowband filter will work great from light pollution, so much more than just a slight difference. Narrowband filters also require that the target is bright on that spectrum. Typically a duo narrowband filter lets in emission lines from oxygen iii and hydrogen alpha - which are the most common types of bright nebulae. If you want to image nebulae you will definitely want this kind of filter.

Short exposures will be troublesome for the narrowband filters as you are cutting out most of the light. Im not sure untracked would be effective like this.

 

Galaxies do not benefit from these filters, as they are broadband targets so you might aswell image them without the filter, (actually better without)  but here your focal length will limit the available targets. The 135mm samyang will get a great shot of andromeda and perhaps triangulum with a longer integration, but the rest are quite small.

 

But Andromeda, Orion, Pleiades would turn out nice without filters, and thats already a list of targets to start with.

[happy-kat]

Plus a multitude of star clusters.

[Ed Galea]

2 hours ago, ONIKKINEN said:

Necessity as in impossible to image without, which it is not. Some targets like wide emission nebulae are impractical without a filter and the result would be underwhelming, but not impossible to get. In the end its a practicality question of how long do you want to image a single target for. The required time to reveal a target from a sea of lightpollution noise increases with sky brightness. I have started and given up on a few targets after realizing that im looking at 10-20h on the same target to get where i want.

A narrowband filter will work great from light pollution, so much more than just a slight difference. Narrowband filters also require that the target is bright on that spectrum. Typically a duo narrowband filter lets in emission lines from oxygen iii and hydrogen alpha - which are the most common types of bright nebulae. If you want to image nebulae you will definitely want this kind of filter.

Short exposures will be troublesome for the narrowband filters as you are cutting out most of the light. Im not sure untracked would be effective like this.

 

Galaxies do not benefit from these filters, as they are broadband targets so you might aswell image them without the filter, (actually better without)  but here your focal length will limit the available targets. The 135mm samyang will get a great shot of andromeda and perhaps triangulum with a longer integration, but the rest are quite small.

 

But Andromeda, Orion, Pleiades would turn out nice without filters, and thats already a list of targets to start with.

Onikkinen many thanks, in particular for your last sentence.  Thanks also to happy-kat.  This is precisely what I was looking for.  Those are precisely the DSO targets I was  hoping to image in my Step 1.  It sound like I won't really benefit (or need) any filters in Step 1 of my adventure. So in my merry-go-round of purchase decisions I think I'm back to the possiblity of a FujiFilm X T3 and Samyang 135 and possibly a yet to be decided Canon and Samyang 135 on a solid tripod of some kind.  I will continue to search for a suitable Canon camera (currently thinking of a Canon EOS T7i or better) before I finalise my decision, but as I have said previously, I will want the camera to also function as a terristerial camera too which is way I fancy the XT3. 

[AstroGee]

Would you be considering second-hand or new for the camera and lenses?

Some places to try for second hand:

wex

mpb

ffordes