Cannot decide

[David 55]

Need some advice, I already have a Celestron c6 Astro fi.  I have purchased an AM3 to mount it on, already have the .63 reducer. Was also thinking of getting the Hyperstar as well. But here is where I need advice.  I have now seen the Askar 103 and was wondering should I stick the the C6 as I already have it, I know most advice says it is difficult with astrophotography. Or do bite the bullet and go with the askar?

[TiffsAndAstro]

27 minutes ago, David 55 said:

Need some advice, I already have a Celestron c6 Astro fi.  I have purchased an AM3 to mount it on, already have the .63 reducer. Was also thinking of getting the Hyperstar as well. But here is where I need advice.  I have now seen the Askar 103 and was wondering should I stick the the C6 as I already have it, I know most advice says it is difficult with astrophotography. Or do bite the bullet and go with the askar?

I'm a beginner, but if this were me I'd want to give the C6 on the am3 a go with the reducer. 

I'd also want to watch every related yt video I could find.

From what I've watched/read online a camera will be wide compared to the central obstruction and stars will not be flat at the edges, though maybe acceptable for small sensors. Also twice as much collimation to do?

The refractor should be less hassle but why not give the c6 a chance with the reducer before deciding anything? 

 

Edited July 15 by TiffsAndAstro

[Elp]

Have you got prior DSO imaging experience?

[ollypenrice]

I would not watch every UT video I could find. A staggering number of them are churned out by floundering beginners who have no sound basis of understanding behind what they are doing. There are oceans of gibberish on UT, along with good stuff. I would try to build a sound understanding of the principles, well away from people trying to sell you stuff, or themselves. 

You have an AM3, a C6 and a reducer. But what is your camera? Pixel size? Chip size? These matter. I suggest you use these items and begin to form your own opinions on what does and does not work for you. Don't even think about a Hyperstar in your first two years of imaging and don't fall for the blather on their website. I'd argue that it should land them in court.

Olly

 

 

 

[Elp]

I have a C6, the reducer and the HS. I would not recommend any of these for beginner AP, maybe planets or lunar, but not DSO to begin with, nor a long focal length refractor or any long focal length item.

You need to decide first what you'd like to image, to what quality level with what you have at hand or within reach.

[David 55]

I do not have any DSO imaging experience yet.  I am looking at getting an ASI533mc pro, getting the experience with that and then in a couple of years seeing if that keeps me happy or get a new scope. Just for the price of the Askar, I just had a thought of getting one and not using the C6. 

[happy-kat]

When considering what you'd like to image and to what capability you would like to see, maybe add looking at EEA electronically enhanced astronomy, and whether images along those lines fit with where you are and the equipment you already have whilst you learn about it more.

[Elp]

23 minutes ago, David 55 said:

I do not have any DSO imaging experience yet.

Have you got any camera body at hand you can try, even a compact camera which can image in RAW format?

As the am3 is a harmonic drive mount you typically need to autoguide with it, imaging with a short focal length camera or lens will be more forgiving in the beginning and likely you don't need to autoguide.

Long focal length imaging needs good autoguiding (so more expense, setup and power requirement). And if your tripod is not sturdy enough, forget it, do not underestimate the instability a 4 inch plus refractor causes.

[David 55]

Thank you for all of the replies.  I do not have a dslr body or compact to try unfortunately. I currently have the tc40 tripod, but will upgrade to a different one at some point, luckily when I purchased the mount the tripod was included for the same price.

[TiffsAndAstro]

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

I would not watch every UT video I could find. A staggering number of them are churned out by floundering beginners who have no sound basis of understanding behind what they are doing. There are oceans of gibberish on UT, along with good stuff. I would try to build a sound understanding of the principles, well away from people trying to sell you stuff, or themselves. 

You have an AM3, a C6 and a reducer. But what is your camera? Pixel size? Chip size? These matter. I suggest you use these items and begin to form your own opinions on what does and does not work for you. Don't even think about a Hyperstar in your first two years of imaging and don't fall for the blather on their website. I'd argue that it should land them in court.

Olly

 

 

 

I think that's a little harsh. Without having hands on in the flesh time with a nice variety equipment it's a decent substitute, pitfalls aside.  

[Elp]

The shortest route to entry with what you have currently is to do what has been suggested above, try EAA (electronic assisted astronomy) as your guiding doesn't have to be critical, it still needs to be good which the am3 is more than capable of.

You need a planetary camera, and connect it to a laptop via USB, then use software to control the camera (zwo cameras have asi studio), or you can use free astro software like Sharpcap or NINA or equivalent. Once your scope is pointed at something via ZWOs Stargazing app (make sure your mount+scope is aligned to some bright stars which you can check visually with your own eyes looking at the sky, adjust manually looking at your live camera feed connected to the scope (or do it visually with an eyepiece) and centre target star if needed with the joystick hand controller, then sync to mount), you can even do this with the am3 in alt az mode but note the tracking will likely be poorer than in equatorial mode. Then start taking short exposures with the camera in whatever live mode/EAA mode they use. I've only used an Asiair (and raspberry pi with astroberry) and it's easy to do with that, I'd expect PC software to work similarly.

If you are dead set on imaging via a telescope (even though camera lenses will be more forgiving for tracking accuracy), then I'd suggest a short focal length refractor 200-400mm FL, deep sky however benefits from autoguiding so you'll need more stuff (guidescope, guide camera, a computer/computer controller with associated software, maybe a cable or two to connect it all together).

Another good entry point is to image the moon or nearby planets with your current scope. Good images require the lucky imaging type method, lots of images (hundreds to thousands within a minute or two) or RAW video (as it's fast per second frame capture), then run the files through Autostakkert or Registax to get the best result. This again needs a planetary camera and capture software. Tracking doesn't have to be so accurate for planetary imaging, and you can see live on screen what you're trying to capture (as opposed to mostly invisible deep sky objects). From this you'll learn nuances about your setup and how to resolve certain issues. The first thing I guarantee you'll encounter is difficulty understanding what your scope is looking at due to the focal length (which stars), a 4 inch refractor will also suffer the same but slightly more forgiving than an SCT.

Edited July 15 by Elp

[ollypenrice]

10 hours ago, TiffsAndAstro said:

I think that's a little harsh. Without having hands on in the flesh time with a nice variety equipment it's a decent substitute, pitfalls aside.  

I said this because I've followed links on here to post processing videos in which the You Tuber clearly has no idea about the management of the histogram and simply trashes the data by basing their actions on what they think looks OK. What looks OK obviously matters but what I've seen many times are operations being carried out to rectify previous errors. With a proper understanding of the stretching process these errors can be avoided in the first place. I find it baffling that, in so many fields, people with little or no experience of the subject produce 'tutorials' for public consumption. Being of a pre-internet generation I take the old fashioned view that first you learn and understand, then you teach.

What we really need is a website containing links to tutorials which have been favourably reviewed by experienced imagers.

Olly

[John]

6 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

..... people with little or no experience of the subject produce 'tutorials' for public consumption. Being of a pre-internet generation I take the old fashioned view that first you learn and understand, then you teach....

 

Well said Olly.

Unfortunately, it's not just in the field of astro imaging that this is happening 🙄

[ollypenrice]

Just now, John said:

Well said Olly.

Unfortunately, it's not just in the field of astro imaging that this is happening 🙄

Indeed not. I sometimes return to my previous life by reading literary criticism and some of the stuff aimed at older school students is so superficial as to be worthless. It clearly finds a market in the world of clicks, though.

Olly

[M40]

15 hours ago, David 55 said:

Need some advice, I already have a Celestron c6 Astro fi.  I have purchased an AM3 to mount it on, already have the .63 reducer. Was also thinking of getting the Hyperstar as well. But here is where I need advice.  I have now seen the Askar 103 and was wondering should I stick the the C6 as I already have it, I know most advice says it is difficult with astrophotography. Or do bite the bullet and go with the askar?

Going back to the op original question, my answer would be similar to @TiffsAndAstro in that maybe give what you have already a go before adding to your equipment. I saw that you do not yet have a camera, have a play with the calculators in the resources and look for one that works well with your telescope and perhaps also the askar. I looked at the zwo482mc as that appears to work well with both whereas not so good if you add the hyperstar. I threw a few things in the field of view calculator and the hyperstar massively changes the telescope to a widefield piece of kit, so have a think about what you would like to image. All the best.

 

 

 

 

 

[Groovyson]

I went with the Askar 103 and 0.8 reducer and was very happy with the first night out.

Lack of experience led me to get a 200p with EQ5 mount which sat unused in the shed for the last year, just decided to ditch it all and get the askar and heq5 (used) and was really happy with my first shot. 

I'm just starting out so this is just my personal experience.