Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Budget digital SLRs

starscy

By starscy
in Imaging - Discussion

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 28
  • Created
  • Last Reply
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

I'm surprized no one has replied. Be warned that I am a staunch CCD man but I think your question is easy to answer; Cannon 1000D modified by

Astronomiser. Low noise by DSLR standards, killer price, big Canon astro community and associated add ons, Live View - essential. (I have a 1000D unmodded but I use it by day - apart from the odd foray into constellations.) I think this answer is about as uncontroversial as it gets! Famous last words...

Olly

PS Of course you could always buy a real CCD second hand for a similar price. I only say that to provoke a few more answers to your thread!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
room16

room16

Posted
Posted

By the seems of it, and coming from a noobie standpoint, it all depends on how dedicated you want your camera to be when it comes to astrophotography.

If you plan to use the camera for daytime use aswell then the 1000d has produced cracking piccies unmodded, althought modded definately seems to improve it.

Or as olly says, if your planning to just do astrophotograpy then check out the CCD route.

There are plenty of people here who can advise you but i would suggest putting up what your budget is, including what equipment you already own. Also if your preference is for new or second hand.

Im only just getting into this myself and so far i've found that i need a new focuser for my 10" scope to achieve focus with my new 1000d dslr, so thats another £100 i'll have to spend out lol. But i won't be modding my camera until the warranty is up as i will also use this camera for other daytime & work related stuff. In the mean time i get to learn how to get the best out of my piccies through processing :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bizibilder

Bizibilder

Posted
Posted

I notice Argos are selling the Canon 1000D at £399 with an 18-55mm lens or £499 with an extra lens (75-300mm I think). Anyone know if the extra lens is worth the extra hundred quid? Especially for those on a budget who will be using the camera for regular photography as well as astro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jupiter Martin

Jupiter Martin

Posted
Posted
I notice Argos are selling the Canon 1000D at £399 with an 18-55mm lens or £499 with an extra lens (75-300mm I think). Anyone know if the extra lens is worth the extra hundred quid? Especially for those on a budget who will be using the camera for regular photography as well as astro.

Iwould say yes thats a good deal on the 75-300mm lens good for wide field

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted
With limited experience with compact digital cameras I would chooce a Nikon instead of a Canon. Are there any Nikon digital SLRs worth considering?

I think the consensus is unequivocally in favour of Canon for astronomy, though you can use others.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jgs001

jgs001

Posted
Posted

The Nikon will work, and if you have a preference for Nikon then go for it. It's important, if the camera is going to be used for non astro too, that you're comfortable with the camera. For astro use however, the Canon range is well known, seems to have far better software support, and is easily modded, including a replacement filter that will allow lenses to operate normally, albeit with a custom white balance set. The only mods I've seen for Nikon involve only removal of the filter, and if memory serves this stops lenses being able to focus at infinity.

In fact at least one self confessed Nikonite on here has gone for the 1000d for astro use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LukeSkywatcher

LukeSkywatcher

Posted
Posted
I notice Argos are selling the Canon 1000D at £399 with an 18-55mm lens or £499 with an extra lens (75-300mm I think). Anyone know if the extra lens is worth the extra hundred quid? Especially for those on a budget who will be using the camera for regular photography as well as astro.

I have a Canon 450D. The 18-55mm EF-S IS lens came with it. I was given the 75-300mm lens later as a gift. It cost 300 euro on it own (75-300mm), so the extra £100 is well worth it. Its great for astro stuff and every day stuff. The only bad thing about it is that it is not an IS lens...............it needs to be on a tripod when fully extended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jgs001

jgs001

Posted
Posted
Who would that be then... ;)

Seemed like the best thread to waste my 10,000th post on...

Going passive for a while now... have fun all... :D

Billy...

Hmm let me think :):icon_scratch:;)

I've no experience of the 75-300, but I can say that the EFS 55-250 IS lens is an absolute corker for under £200. I've handheld at 1/30 with it and gotten good results, although I don't normally go anywhere near that low if I can avoid it. There are two flavours of the 18-55 kit lens... The 18-55 and the 18-55 IS. The IS lens is reported to be better, but only having seen the one I can't really comment specifically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
simon84

simon84

Posted
Posted

I use a Canon EOS 1000D everyday for general photography and its a cracking camera, I'm just about to start out using it for some astro work.

I have the Canon EF 75-300mm lens, got a bargain from a friend at work, £45 with a Canon EF 28-80mm lens and an old eos 1000d film camera. New on Jessops its about £210 and it is a lovely lens to use. Canon EF 75-300 Mm f4/5.6 MK3 Non USM - Jessops

The 18-55mm IS lens is great, it lets you get some real low light pictures without a tripod.

As an entry level DSLR it really does give very good value. Check this review out which pointed me towards it, Canon EOS 1000D Review - PhotographyBLOG

Look at me, I should work for Canon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LukeSkywatcher

LukeSkywatcher

Posted
Posted

Thanks arad. I wasnt too sure. I guess now would be a good time to point out that if you are using a camera mounted on a tripod etc that IS....is not needed as you always turn it off when imaging from a tripod/mount because it will be fighting with the stability of the tripod/mount and make the images worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.