Good Scope or Good Mount?

[Chromium]

Hi all... First time poster.

A beginner to astronomy, but otherwise an experienced photographer and professional cameraman/filmmaker (in a previous career) ... but itching to get started. Budget is fairly limited and can't afford the full kit I would like with all the acessories. So to get started do I get the mount I want and a cheaper scope (for example; Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer GTI mount combined with a Evostar 72ED or Askar FMA 180), or the better scope such as the William Optics Zenith star 73, Askar FMA 230 or perhaps a Redcat 51 (all 3 of which I like the specifications of) and a cheaper non-goto mount initially? 

My intuition says get the mount sorted first as that doesn't need loads of additional accessories like flatners, eyepiece etc. But I would like to hear any opinions before I dip my toe in. 

Cheers, Chromiun

[M40]

Hello Chromium and welcome to the site.

Interesting question, I am sure most will say concentrate on the mount but looking at your listed telescopes I would say go for your ideal telescope so you can take it on your upgrade path with you. 

All the best and keep us up to speed 

[happy-kat]

welcome do you see your self doing visual observing with the telescope?

[Carbon Brush]

A good guide on a mount for astrophotography is to buy the next size up from that offered in a scope/mount package.
Another thought,  given your photography background, do you have decent telephoto lenses available?
A DSLR with a 200mm or 400mm FL lens on a driven mount may be a good way to get you started.
Old fashioned lenses (no auto bells and whistles) unwanted by photographers give very good performance for the ££ spent.

[Elp]

Considering your background I'm surprised you haven't mentioned the Samyang 135mm F2 lens which will outperform the lot of scopes for raw speed and field of view. The lenses sharp nature even wide open is legendary for daytime and astro.

The mount and tripod is the most important part of any setup. You might already have a few manual primes already as well as capable camera, so it'd make sense to get the mount first.

Edited January 13 by Elp

[MikeAa]

Most important thing in my view is a mount which is future-proof and above all else STABLE! Last thing you want is the thing wobbling around, especially if you will be imaging, but also annoying for visual at high mags.

[Chromium]

Thanks for the comments and suggestions. To answer a few raised... I got rid of most of my pro photography gear before 2011 and now I'm using a Panasonic GH4 with is a mirrorless with micro 4/3rds sensor, but I don't have any long focal length lenses. I'm currently considering which direction to concentrate on, but particularly interested in capturing deep space images of nebulae and galaxies etc. I have a set of very strong Manfrotto 058B legs which are very stable, so hoping to use these as a base for my mount (opinions?), I think they may be stronger than those that come with the Sky-Watcher mounts? I'll check out the Samyang 135mm... Thanks Elp. 

[Beardy30]

Depends what you want to do /see is it visual or AP and do you have a budget? 

[Chromium]

3 hours ago, Beardy30 said:

Depends what you want to do /see is it visual or AP and do you have a budget? 

Hi Beardt30, as I think I said above mostly interested in AP. As far as budget initially roughly about £1. 2k to start off, but planning to add to that as and when... 

 

Cheers, Chromium

[Elp]

If you're thinking of keeping a small setup in future (ie small refractor likely less than 80mm aperture) you can't really go wrong with the Skywatcher SAGTI. I've been using the azgti for AP for a few years in equatorial mode which was the system to put together in this class and budget before SW decided to make an all in one product in the SAGTI. If you want to keep the setup lighter still but with a proper EQ mount you'd have to consider a harmonic drive as they don't need counterweights, the ioptron hem15 would fall into a similar and slightly more advanced weight class but be at the top of your budget.

If you want to do deep sky with minimal hassle at a reasonable focal length, say longer than 100mm (and the majority of your subs being good without trailing) you'll have to implement autoguiding which will also take up some funds as it'll need a guidescope, small planetary camera, way to fix to your setup (hardware), cable from your computer to the mount and some sort of computer controller whether it be free software on a laptop or a telescope mounted computer. Without autoguiding you may get star trailing more often than desired, it's more apparent the longer focal length you image at. The cheapest commercial eq mount I had was the Omegon LX, and I could to 2 minute images at 14mm, though at 14mm you can take reasonably long images on a fixed tripod.

 

[Elp]

If you want instant results, on a small 500 budget, with minimal fuss and hassle get a ZWO Seestar, nothing else will come close to what this can do based on what I've just said in this comment.

[Chromium]

On 14/01/2024 at 06:46, Beardy30 said:

 

Thanks for all the advice and comments... Very much appreciated. The plan right now is to get the SAGTI and try it just with my DSLR until I get the hang of using it. I have an 85mm lens 50mm and with an M42 adapter a vintage 400mm Soligor (not expecting great results wit that, but may be interesting as an experiment). I will then buy the scope I want and possibly an autoguiding scope as like that concept 

Cheers, Chromium

Edited January 15 by Chromium
Posted incorrectly

[Chromium]

Decided on this path... Dipping my toe in using my Panasonic GH4 3/4 DSLR on the recently purchased SWA-GTI, with the older primes I have and I have ordered an Askar FMA135mm to start with  The reason I've gone for the small Askar, is that when I possibly upgrade to a larger telescope, this should make a good guide scope. Before I go that way I want to get a grip on what I'm doing with capture and processing. I know I will need to understand more about guiding etc. too. 

[900SL]

23 hours ago, Chromium said:

Decided on this path... Dipping my toe in using my Panasonic GH4 3/4 DSLR on the recently purchased SWA-GTI, with the older primes I have and I have ordered an Askar FMA135mm to start with  The reason I've gone for the small Askar, is that when I possibly upgrade to a larger telescope, this should make a good guide scope. Before I go that way I want to get a grip on what I'm doing with capture and processing. I know I will need to understand more about guiding etc. too. 

There's at least a year learning the ropes with astrophotography, both in capture and processing. Much depends on location, weather and light pollution. Good luck and clear skies

 

[PeterC65]

I have an Askar FMA135 and it's a fantastic scope for widefield. It still amazes me what it can capture. Here is what it showed me when I pointed it at Orion's Belt a few weeks back ...

Yes, that really is the Horsehead Nebula.

It would be wasted as a guide scope. I use it alongside another scope so that I have both wide and narrow field views for EAA.

 

[Chromium]

On 31/01/2024 at 09:38, PeterC65 said:

I have an Askar FMA135 and it's a fantastic scope for widefield. It still amazes me what it can capture. Here is what it showed me when I pointed it at Orion's Belt a few weeks back ...

Yes, that really is the Horsehead Nebula.

It would be wasted as a guide scope. I use it alongside another scope so that I have both wide and narrow field views for EAA.

 

Brilliant pic PeterC65. What camera/mount was used and please let me know how many frames/exposure etc. It took to create that. Thanks, Steve

[900SL]

A word of caution with the smaller Askar scopes. Mine had unacceptable chromatic aberration, with excess bloating in blue on OSC or DSLR, and I'm in no way unique in this regard.

Despite Askars claims to achieve apochromatic focus, they typically don't, and require a UV cut filter like an L2 or L3  

This was taken in my early astro days with a Samyang 135mm and a Nikon D610 DSLR, by way of example.  Diffraction spikes round the stars are from the lens diaphragm being stopped down to f2.8, but the level of CA is minimal

 

Edited February 3 by 900SL

[PeterC65]

14 minutes ago, Chromium said:

Brilliant pic PeterC65. What camera/mount was used and please let me know how many frames/exposure etc. It took to create that. Thanks, Steve

I was using a Player One Uranus-C camera (IMX585) and a Sky-Watcher AZ-EQ5 mount (in AZ mode) and took 20 x 15s frames. I do EAA not AP, so relatively short exposures and relatively few frames, and the post processing was minimal (stretch, background removal, noise reduction).

I don't see any chromatic aberration with the FMA135 and the stars are really sharp. I think this is partly because the magnification is relatively low, but I also think the scope is very well corrected. The price you pay for this is that you do need to set the back focus just right (55mm) as the field flattener is built in to the scope.