Would this be a good camera for starting in astrophotography?

[kelly324]

Hi!

I’ve just purchased the skywatcher explorer 130M and am looking to buy my first ever dslr (yay!)

I’m currently looking into Canon EOS 4000D and was wondering if anyone could help me figure out if it would be adequate for astrophotography, as i’ve never really delved into the world of cameras and their specs etc

If it’s not good, please could you recommend me some other budget friendly alternatives?

Thank you!

Edited January 30, 2023 by kelly324

[Elp]

I've got an astro modded 600D, it's decent but you'll quickly yearn for a dedicated astro camera.

I bought this model as it has an articulated screen.

[Cosmic Geoff]

The question you should be asking is: is the EQ-2 mount suitable for astrophotography?  I think the answer is 'no' unless you just intend to try planetary imaging, for which you need a CMOS planetary camera, not a DSLR. 

[Adam J]

1 hour ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

The question you should be asking is: is the EQ-2 mount suitable for astrophotography?  I think the answer is 'no' unless you just intend to try planetary imaging, for which you need a CMOS planetary camera, not a DSLR. 

How do you know its on a EQ2 OP may have upgraded?
 

2 hours ago, kelly324 said:

Hi!

I’ve just purchased the skywatcher explorer 130M and am looking to buy my first ever dslr (yay!)

I’m currently looking into Canon EOS 4000D and was wondering if anyone could help me figure out if it would be adequate for astrophotography, as i’ve never really delved into the world of cameras and their specs etc

If it’s not good, please could you recommend me some other budget friendly alternatives?

Thank you!

 

Honestly, I think that you are vastly better off opting for something like a ASI585mc than a DSLR these days. Especially on a scope like the 130M as you will only have a 1.25 inch focuser anyway and that will not fully illuminate a APSC sized sensor like in the 4000D.

More to the point you will not get a coma corrector for the 1.25inch focuser either and so again your wasting your time with a larger sensor.

If you do have a EQ2 you are not going to be able to do DSO imaging in any serious way, but you can image the moon and planets and a ASI585mc would be an excerlent tool for that at about the same cost as a 4000D new.

But the best part is that if you do change your mount and then later your scope you will have a camera that is capable of DSO imaging and or could be used as a guide camera in the future, so its a good investment. Honestly, with this camera now on the market its hard for me to recommend a DSLR for beginners unless their budget is sub £200 and even then it would assume they are willing to perform an astro modification themselves as if not then your still talking about paying more than a 585mc.

Dont worry about people telling you what you cant do and focus on what you can do with the tools you have.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/zwo-cameras/zwo-asi-585mc-usb-3-camera.html

Adam

Edited January 31, 2023 by Adam J

[Elp]

Good shout, if you want to save even more money get a 485mc, basically the same camera but has amp glow which mostly calibrates out with dark frames.

[AstroMuni]

13 hours ago, kelly324 said:

I’m currently looking into Canon EOS 4000D and was wondering if anyone could help me figure out if it would be adequate for astrophotography, as i’ve never really delved into the world of cameras and their specs etc

What is your budget? When I first got into AP, I had the same dilemma - turned out that a few astro cameras were cheaper than a DSLR and thats what I went for. I went for the ASI224mc but these days there are better versions out there that cost less than a DSLR.

[malc-c]

12 hours ago, Adam J said:

How do you know its on a EQ2 OP may have upgraded?

I presume its because the 130M comes on a motorised EQ-2 mount, and I'm sure the OP would have stated if he had swapped that out for something else, so its a fair assumption to make.

To the OP, imaging covers a wide range of disciplines, from Luna and planetary through to faint DSO's.  There is no ideal equipment (just look at similar posts and people will argue over recommendations made) and a lot will depend on the targets you want and the budget you have.  Other than Luna imaging which can be done with any mount and a cheap webcam or even a mobile phone, the equipment required to do it to a level where you get decent results isn't cheap.  Yes if you own a DSLR then that would be a starting point, and ten years ago it was very common to see setups based around a Canon D350, 400 or 450 as these were easily modified (if you wanted to make a true Astro spectrum camera) and were quite affordable second hand, especially compared to the "entry" level dedicated astro CCD cameras at the time.  These days dedicated astro imaging cameras are getting better in performance and cheaper in price, making them recommended more over older DSLRs.

Again, the equipment is dependent on the results you aim to get.  If you want to do wide field then camera lenses on a tracking mount, or a small fast refractor would do the job, but the same kit would be useless for a really fain nebula that requires hours and hours of subs.  One of the issues I have with similar posts is that members could recommend spending £200 on a camera, and then the OP realises the limitation of his mount or scope and then ends up needing kit that is way out of their price range.  Maybe if the OP narrowed down the targets he/she is aiming for and if possible link to an image of what they are expecting, along with their budget then others will be able to narrow the recommendations down 

[ollypenrice]

As others have said, it would be good to know all of the proposed setup since the components all interact.

Olly

[rickwayne]

Yep!

So, first  question: What do  you want to image? (The Milky Way? The few big, bright objects like M42 or Andromeda? The Moon? Planets? Fainter deep-sky nebulae? Galaxies?) Even with top of the line, absurdly expensive gear, most people who do, say, faint nebulae as well as planets have completely separate rigs for it.

Next question: How? Is it  enough to just see an enhanced electronic image in the moment, or do you want to take pictures and process them for later display? (The former technique is called Electronically Assisted Astronomy, if you want to do some searches).

Third question: As Olly says, what have you got already?

Finally: Broadly speaking, how  much were you hoping to spend?

All  this is NOT to discourage you! Astro imaging does not require tons of expensive equipment. But if you tell  us where you want to go, directions are much simpler to provide.

[alacant]

On 30/01/2023 at 22:35, kelly324 said:

Canon EOS 4000D

I don't know anything about the rest of your equipment, but the simple, no nonsense 18mp 4000d is one of the best we've tried for astro.

Cheers and HTH

[Richard Wesson]

The problem with a DSLR with that scope (like many newtonians), is that there will not be sufficient inward focus for a DSLR.