Telescopes for Astrophotography

[Natasha]

Hi All Just starting out in Astronomy which I'm looking forward to . Looking into a telescope for Astrophotography, I'd like to photograph the planets and galaxies the most. After doing lots of research, I came across the Skywatcher Explorer 150PL EQ3-2 150mm Newtonian Reflector Telescope, it sounds like a good all rounder and good for Astrophotography which is a bonus. Would you reccommend the telescope for photographing planets and galaxies? Any advice, much appreciated, thanks .

[adamsp123]

Hi Natasha and welcome.

If you wish to "join the dark side" and get into imaging the most important thing, and I believe many will agree, is the mount.

You cannot hope to get good results with a "weak" mount and IMO the EQ3 is really not up to it, visually it should be fine, but for photography it needs to be a bigger and sturdier mount.

The scope should be fine, how are you intending to take the pictures, there is a world of bits and bobs you will need, and potential for wasting money if you are not careful and with it a steep learning curve with many pitfalls and frustrating things that go wrong, but I love imaging.

This is the right place to get some honest and relevant help.

Pete

[Natasha]

Hi Pete Thank you for your reply, going to use my DSLR camera to take photos, do you think the Aperture and focal length on the Skywatcher 150PL telescope is good for photographing planets and galaxies or would you reccommend the Skywatcher with the EQ5 mount for Astrophotography? . Sorry for asking lots of questions.

[Whippy]

Sorry Pete, but IMO the 150PL isn't a scope for imaging. A 6" f8 scope is fine observing instrument but at f8 it's not overly fast (remember you can't use reducers on newtonians) and and it also has a fairly long focal length (1200mm) that would make guiding, automated or otherwise a bit of a challenge.

Natasha, if I was you, I'd buy the 150PL anyway as it'll serve as a fine introduction to stargazing. Get used to using a mount, a scope and learn the basics before you start adding cameras to the mix as it'll only give a learning curve that'll be so much steeper.

Pete did mention that the mount is crucial, which is true as you need everything to be rock steady when your camera is attached. Astrophotography can be (and normally is!) horribly expensive, I would always recommend that you start enjoying the night sky with your eyes before you jump in the deep end and get into cameras.

FWIW, an ideal imaging setup to start with would be an EQ6 mount and something like an ED80.

Tony..

[adamsp123]

Bigger the mount the better (except lugging it around) put as much money in the mount as you can even look for secondhand deals, for planetary imaging folk use webcams and this is an area I do not image, but for Deep Sky Objects a DSLR is good, which one do you have?

Any good Newt is OK, SW included, for imaging but you will need a coma corrector to get good pics (there goes more money). Lots of people use small refractors as well you "just"! take lots of pics and longer exposures and stack them with say DSS a free program.

If you are serious about imaging spend the money and get SGL member "Steppenwolfs" book "making every photon count" IMO it is excellent for the newbie imager and will explain so much inc. lots of good pics of equipment.

[adamsp123]

Whippy is right!!! I didn't realise the scope was F/8.

Depending on your abilities in technical problem solving then it may be a good idea to start out with visual observing but if you like a real challenge........ I would cost it all out before deciding which way to go first.

I agree it can be horribly expensive but believe me so can visual observing if you go for the best EPs etc for example.

What camera do you have?

BTW I started imaging, and still do, with a refractor but mostly use a 200mm F/4 Newt which needs careful collimation unlike the refractor.

Another thing I recommend is SGL member "Steppenwolfs" book "making every photon count" IMO excellent for the newbie imager.

I am no expert and still on the steep part of the curve but it has, at times, been fun and satisfying.

Pete

[Natasha]

Hi Tony Thank you for your advice on the 150PL telescope and Astrophotography, I really appreciate it . I've been into photography for 2 years and I've always been interested in Astronomy, so it'd be nice to be able to combine the two, does the 150PL come with a tracking mount? Sorry for asking a stupid question lol. I also came across the Skywatcher Startravel 102 Synscan Refractor Telescope which sounds good for Astrophotography . From research I've been doing on telescopes I read that F8 is a good aperture for planets, so I'll probably still go with the 150PL.

[Natasha]

Whippy is right!!! I didn't realise the scope was F/8.

Depending on your abilities in technical problem solving then it may be a good idea to start out with visual observing but if you like a real challenge........ I would cost it all out before deciding which way to go first.

I agree it can be horribly expensive but believe me so can visual observing if you go for the best EPs etc for example.

What camera do you have?

BTW I started imaging, and still do, with a refractor but mostly use a 200mm F/4 Newt which needs careful collimation unlike the refractor.

Another thing I recommend is SGL member "Steppenwolfs" book "making every photon count" IMO excellent for the newbie imager.

I am no expert and still on the steep part of the curve but it has, at times, been fun and satisfying.

Pete

Hi Pete Thank you for your advice, I really appreciate it, just starting out in Astronomy/Astrophotography, so any advice or tips is helpful . I have a Canon 400D camera, going to look into the Beginner's Guide to Astrophotography, it sounds like a good book to learn from .

[RobH]

Hello Natasha.

I agree with Pete and Tony about the mount.

While, if it's a driven mount, you will be able to image planets as the exposures will be very short, it isn't suitable for galaxies and the like, where you are looking at much longer exposures and the mount needs to track well and be rock steady.

Get an EQ5 mount at the very least.

The problem you'll run into trying to image planets with the DSLR/Skywatcher 150 will be image scale.

Planets are tiny and 1200mm FL isn't long enough to get the image scale you need. Typically, people use barlow lenses to increase the effective magnification.

For planetary imaging, most people use a camera with a high frame rate, which the DSLR doesn't have, and shoot short runs of a few thousand frames. You then put this through freely available software and pick the frames least affected by the atmosphere and then create the final image from them.

I have a Phillips webcam I use for this which cost about £40.

Also, for planets, it is critical that your optics are perfectly aligned (collimated) and this can be tricky.

Refractors don't have this problem.

For deep sky work, you will have some great targets to go for with an ED80 type refractor, which will give you a wide field of view with your DSLR, and so not be too sensitive to small tracking errors.

The sort of things that look perfect with this setup are the Andromeda galaxy, the spiral galaxy M33, the Orion nebula, horsehead nebula, North America nebula, globular clusters etc etc, so lots of targets.

For a starter visual scope though, the 150 on the EQ3 will be fine.

I had a 6 inch reflector on an undriven mount made in the 60's for nearly 20 years.

Cheers

Rob

[gataki]

Hi Natasha,

I'm not at all qualified to give advice on telescope types etc as I'm really a beginner, however I would second (third!) the suggestion that you get hold of Steve's book 'Making Every Photon Count' - it's brilliant and explains things so well! There's a review of it here.

Also, I have been using a webcam to image Jupiter and Saturn - it's really exciting when they appear, especially when the moons jump out during the processing - and the results are much better than I think could be achieved with my 1000d. I used this primer and carefully followed all the steps - I don't have the same webcam but it's easy enough to get the idea.

Good luck!

Liz

[brendant]

Wholehartedly agree with all the advice already given, I started out with a 150mm f8 telescope and whilst it is a fine visual instrument, astrophotography was very difficult, contary to what most people who have never tried is that Planetary imaging is easy because they are relatively close and galaxies and nebula require huge telescopes and very costly equipment.

Almost the converse is true, most nebula are relatively large and planets are tiny requiring extremely long focal lengths to achieve any detail so you need really long focal lengths (effectively 4 - 5 Meters FL) which means big expense.

It was not till I got and ED80 telescope on a EQ5 mount that I understood that wide field telescopes with relatively short focal lengths (500-600mm Typically) are very versatile instruments and there are no end of targets and are really suited to imaging with a DSLR. The short focal length is also more forgiving of tracking errors, the longer the focal length the more difficult to image with it.

My advice would be an EQ5 with an ED80 telescope and a DSLR, makes a great introduction to astrophotography, leave planetary imaging till later when you have mastered the various techniques.

As stated earlier the most important piece of equipment for astrophotography is the mount, this is why it is generally accepted that a HEQ5 or EQ6 Pro mount are required because as you advance in the hobby the mount is usually the first thing you have to upgrade so the best advice is to spend the maximum you can on the mount - as no matter how good the telecsope is, if it is not on a steady mount it will never achieve its potential.

Brendan

[Natasha]

Hello Natasha.

I agree with Pete and Tony about the mount.

While, if it's a driven mount, you will be able to image planets as the exposures will be very short, it isn't suitable for galaxies and the like, where you are looking at much longer exposures and the mount needs to track well and be rock steady.

Get an EQ5 mount at the very least.

The problem you'll run into trying to image planets with the DSLR/Skywatcher 150 will be image scale.

Planets are tiny and 1200mm FL isn't long enough to get the image scale you need. Typically, people use barlow lenses to increase the effective magnification.

For planetary imaging, most people use a camera with a high frame rate, which the DSLR doesn't have, and shoot short runs of a few thousand frames. You then put this through freely available software and pick the frames least affected by the atmosphere and then create the final image from them.

I have a Phillips webcam I use for this which cost about £40.

Also, for planets, it is critical that your optics are perfectly aligned (collimated) and this can be tricky.

Refractors don't have this problem.

For deep sky work, you will have some great targets to go for with an ED80 type refractor, which will give you a wide field of view with your DSLR, and so not be too sensitive to small tracking errors.

The sort of things that look perfect with this setup are the Andromeda galaxy, the spiral galaxy M33, the Orion nebula, horsehead nebula, North America nebula, globular clusters etc etc, so lots of targets.

For a starter visual scope though, the 150 on the EQ3 will be fine.

I had a 6 inch reflector on an undriven mount made in the 60's for nearly 20 years.

Cheers

Rob

Hi Rob Thank you very much for your advice on telescopes for Astrophotography I really appreciate it . Finally made a decision lol because I'm starting out in Astronomy and Astrophotography, going to look into buying a book on the Guide to the Night Sky and probably going to buy the Skywatcher 200P Telescope, from reviews I've read it sounds like a good telescope

[Natasha]

Hi Natasha,

I'm not at all qualified to give advice on telescope types etc as I'm really a beginner, however I would second (third!) the suggestion that you get hold of Steve's book 'Making Every Photon Count' - it's brilliant and explains things so well! There's a review of it here.

Also, I have been using a webcam to image Jupiter and Saturn - it's really exciting when they appear, especially when the moons jump out during the processing - and the results are much better than I think could be achieved with my 1000d. I used this primer and carefully followed all the steps - I don't have the same webcam but it's easy enough to get the idea.

Good luck!

Liz

Hi Liz Thank you for the suggestion about Steve's book Making Every Photon Count, going to look into buying one, it sounds like a good book for beginners in Astrophotography

[red dwalf]

very good scope and very versitile if on a driven eq mount

[Natasha]

Wholehartedly agree with all the advice already given, I started out with a 150mm f8 telescope and whilst it is a fine visual instrument, astrophotography was very difficult, contary to what most people who have never tried is that Planetary imaging is easy because they are relatively close and galaxies and nebula require huge telescopes and very costly equipment.

Almost the converse is true, most nebula are relatively large and planets are tiny requiring extremely long focal lengths to achieve any detail so you need really long focal lengths (effectively 4 - 5 Meters FL) which means big expense.

It was not till I got and ED80 telescope on a EQ5 mount that I understood that wide field telescopes with relatively short focal lengths (500-600mm Typically) are very versatile instruments and there are no end of targets and are really suited to imaging with a DSLR. The short focal length is also more forgiving of tracking errors, the longer the focal length the more difficult to image with it.

My advice would be an EQ5 with an ED80 telescope and a DSLR, makes a great introduction to astrophotography, leave planetary imaging till later when you have mastered the various techniques.

As stated earlier the most important piece of equipment for astrophotography is the mount, this is why it is generally accepted that a HEQ5 or EQ6 Pro mount are required because as you advance in the hobby the mount is usually the first thing you have to upgrade so the best advice is to spend the maximum you can on the mount - as no matter how good the telecsope is, if it is not on a steady mount it will never achieve its potential.

Brendan

Hi Brendan Thank you for your advice on telescopes for Astrophotography I really appreciate it

[Natasha]

very good scope and very versitile if on a driven eq mount

Hi Is the Dual-Axis D.C. Motor Drive the right one for the Skywatcher 200P EQ5? Here's the link for the motor:

Skywatcher - Dual-Axis D.C. Motor Drive for EQ5

Sorry for asking a stuipd question lol, I read that 'you need motors to track objects for Astrophotography'

[Whippy]

You do indeed Natasha. Objects move across the sky during the course of the night and so you'll need the mount to track the object. And yes, those motors will fit the EQ5 mount .

Tony..

[Natasha]

You do indeed Natasha. Objects move across the sky during the course of the night and so you'll need the mount to track the object. And yes, those motors will fit the EQ5 mount .

Tony..

Thanks Tony, do I use the motors to track objects for photography? Sorry for asking a stupid question lol

[Whippy]

Yep!

Tony..

[Sam]

Hi Natasha,

With the 200p, DSLR and eventually a guidescope and guide camera you may find that's all a bit much weight for the EQ5. A HEQ5 would handle it ok and an EQ6 would be even better - it all comes down to budget. One like this would be pretty good.

Reflectors - Skywatcher Explorer 200P HEQ5 Syntrek

I first bought an 8" Orion XT8, which is pretty much the same as a 200p, I put it on an HEQ5 (not the pro or syntrek version - just the base model). I used it in this configuration for mainly moon and planetary images. I then added a little refractor as a guidscope (a ST80) and started doing Galaxies, Clusters etc. The base model HEQ5 wasn't reallly up to guiding very well because the motors didn't have the fine control available in the Pro or Syntrek version. So instead of upgrading the motors (which was an option) I bought the EQ6 Syntrek.

Had I'd known all of this to start with and had the money I would have either got a HEQ5 Syntrek or an EQ6 Syntrek to start with.

Sam

[BlueAstra]

One problem I had with my first Newtonian reflector (SW 1145P) was the eye relief with a DSLR. It was fine for visual and web-camming planets & moon, but wouldn't focus with the DSLR attached because of the relatively short focal distance. Had to use a barlow lens to push the focus out for the DLSR, or resort to eyepiece projection. If you want to use a DSLR with your scope check the scope will focus with the DSLR body attached.

[Natasha]

Hi Natasha,

With the 200p, DSLR and eventually a guidescope and guide camera you may find that's all a bit much weight for the EQ5. A HEQ5 would handle it ok and an EQ6 would be even better - it all comes down to budget. One like this would be pretty good.

Reflectors - Skywatcher Explorer 200P HEQ5 Syntrek

I first bought an 8" Orion XT8, which is pretty much the same as a 200p, I put it on an HEQ5 (not the pro or syntrek version - just the base model). I used it in this configuration for mainly moon and planetary images. I then added a little refractor as a guidscope (a ST80) and started doing Galaxies, Clusters etc. The base model HEQ5 wasn't reallly up to guiding very well because the motors didn't have the fine control available in the Pro or Syntrek version. So instead of upgrading the motors (which was an option) I bought the EQ6 Syntrek.

Had I'd known all of this to start with and had the money I would have either got a HEQ5 Syntrek or an EQ6 Syntrek to start with.

Sam

Hi Sam Thank you very much for your advice on what telescopes to get for Astrophotography, I really appreciate it because I'm starting out in Astronomy, I don't want to spend too much money on my first telescope,I'm going to be sensible lol. Before I look into buying a telescope, I'm going to learn about the night sky first (the stars, the planets and galaxies etc), so I've ordered a book for beginners in Astronomy, also I want to make sure that I enjoy Astronomy/Astrophotography as much as I think I will (before I jump in at the deep end lol), sorry for waffling lol

[Wiltshiresaint]

Not wishing to hijack this thread, but I've found it really useful too. I too would like to start my astronomy journey with a setup that allows for some astrophotography too, although my photographic interest is primarily (though not exclusively) in photographing galaxies as opposed to planets.

I'm slightly confused because after visiting a specialist astronomy retailer and explaining my requirement I was advised with my budget (max. £1100) to invest in a Celestron Nexstar 6SE, power pack, barlow lens and zoom lens. It all sounded okay until I discovered after some online delving that the first thing I needed was an equatorial mount, not an altazimuth mount! This rather made me doubtful of everything I was told...

I already have a decent digital SLR (Canon EOS) and I'm wondering what I should buy. Taking the advice in this thread I'm thinking of an EQ5 mount but I'm struggling with what scope (and extras) within budget. I'd really welcome some suggestions.

By the way, I've already ordered the book suggested (Making Every Photon Count) and eagerly await it's arrival

[Scott Tilley]

Hi, have just taken the first steps to observing and imaging myself. Really didn't want to go mad and spend an absolute fortune at this stage. From looking on the net and discussing with others the minimum workable systems I came up are the following two.

Bresser Messier 127R on eq mount and with additional motor drives

or

Skywatcher 200p on EQ5 with motor drives.

The dealer advised me that the bresser would be the best scope if imaging was all I wanted to do but for a good alrounder then go with the 200p.

As I wanted to observe as well went with the 200p, observing wise I have not been disapointed. Can't comment on imaging yet, surfice to say it isn't as easy as it looks:eek:

I think that the mount will be changed eventually, however, it is a huge jump in price to get either an HEQ5 or EQ6 when starting out.

Scott

[RobH]

You went for thge right choice Scott.

The bresser scope is an achromat, and as such, will suffer from chromatic abberation to some extent, which, while you can put up with it visually, is definately not what you want when imaging.

Cheers

Rob