Which DSLR? Newby Advice needed

[StarDome1]

Hi everyone, bit of advice needed here.

Though I am not new to astronomy... been involved for 35 years, I am new to wantiing to take astro pics, I have always been a visual astronomer really when time allows and I admire the stuff you guys do greatly.

I am planning on buying a DSLR soon for both everyday use but also for astronomy.

I am thinking of:

Canon 7D

Canon 550D (as a second camera)

Canon 5D Mk1 - (Got a good offer on one)

Nikon D700

what are your thoughts and advice on these?

many thanks for your help

Andy

[Psychobilly]

Nice selection of cams all superb for day to day use

For Astro use the Canon cams have better support and come with the apps you need to get you going in the box when you add in a few extra "free" apps like DeepSkyStacker

I would be inclined to buy a cheap Canon 1000D body and remove the IR filter for astro use - in fact i am on the lookout for another 1000D to do just this...

Peter... AKA Billy "Six" DSLR's...

[StarDome]

Many thanks, still debating the virtue of full frame etc

I like the 7D and the D700 but I've been offered a 5D MK1 with pistol grip and extra bettery still boxed and hardly used for £800.

I do like the Nikon D700 though as thats full frame too with all the technology.

The 5D MK 1 doesnt have sonic sensor cleaning etc.

It's doing my head in at the moment!

anyone got any astro examples of pics using the camera's I listed before?

many thanks

Andy

[Digz]

I think you need to decide whether the DSLR is going to solely be for AP or not.

If the answer is yes then Canon is the way to go. If not then consider the Nikon, that isn't to say the Canons aren't any good. I am a Nikonian and whilst I have seen some good AP images produced by Nikons I do concede that Canons are far better equipped for this kind of work.

Hope that helps a little.

[Uranium235]

1000d.... nuff said.

Cheap enough to abuse, and the results speak for themselves (especially when modded).

[Psychobilly]

What scope(s) are you going to be using - a full frame sensor takes a lot of "filing"... even APS-c sized sensors usually require the use of field flatteners etc with most of the "normal" scopes... the larger full frame camera will require a beefier focusser to handle the weight...

Peter...

[StarDome]

1000d.... nuff said.

Cheap enough to abuse, and the results speak for themselves (especially when modded).

Can you point me in the direction of some examples please, cheers Andy

[Glider]

A vote for the Canon 1000D, there are hundreds of examples in the Deep Sky and Wide Field imaging threads.

What scope and mount do you have?

[LukeSkywatcher]

1000d.... nuff said.

Cheap enough to abuse, and the results speak for themselves (especially when modded).

You must be a rich guy. I certainly would not consider the 1000D "cheap enough to abuse". Yes it IS the cheapest entry level DSLR and yes the results do speak for themselves but as for it being "cheap enough to abuse"........................

I find that comment pretty flippant and offensive and not very constructive to this thread.

The 1000D is a pretty expensive camera by most peoples wallet and it takes brilliant images.

Sorry.....but i just had to point this out.

[Keithp]

I've got the Canon 500d, not much experience yet. Few pics up though. Been working on other projects. The time I have used it though I've been pleased with the results..must admit seemed a bit weird spending about £569 (few months/years ago) on something I only now use for astrophotography compared with £120 for a Fuju S5700 for everyday use seems a bit extravagant. But the Canon rules.....for astro work.

Regards

Keithp

[fatwoul]

The D700 in a fantastic camera, and if it had existed when I bought my D3, I would have saved myself £1500 buying that instead!

Like others have already said above, the D700 (or any other Nikon DSLR) is not as well adapted/adaptable for astrophotography. They'll knock a Canon into a cocked hat during the day, but once night falls, it's a different story.

[Uranium235]

You must be a rich guy

Far from it, but what I was getting as is that id rather have a 1000d than a 500d going anywhere near a telescope. That way, when you do eventually end up getting it mucky/damaged it wont be too big a loss.

[GuillermoBarrancos]

Far from it, but what I was getting as is that id rather have a 1000d than a 500d going anywhere near a telescope. That way, when you do eventually end up getting it mucky/damaged it wont be too big a loss.

Still it was an arrogant post and he was right to point that out!

And no worries tho. You are sertainly not the only one on these forums.

For the average person, with the average salary, with the average mortgage, family, etc, etc.

Then £300, $400, 300 euros, 3000 NOK, etc. Is a lot of money to just spend on a camera!

Especially in these economic troubling times, for most that's easily 3 weeks food on the table.

I myself I'm not poor either. Both my gf and me got a good job and salary. No kids. Not too high of a mortgage.

So I can save up some cash in two months time and go buy it and get it modded if I wanted to.

Doesn't give me the right to brag about it, throw it in everybody's faces here and expect everyone else being able to do the same.

And don't take this personal. I am pointing this out to everyone else on these forums who are acting like a "rich guy/girl" from time to time here and throwing it in everybody's faces, like it's the most natural thing in the world for everyone.

------------------------------

Back on topic:

I myself have the Canon 400D for several years now. It's a great DSLR!

The Canon 1000D is it's successor as entry level DSLR camera, has Live View (mine has not) and I can highly recommended it for both Daytime use as potential Astro use (even unmodded).

[ashworthacca]

Far from it, but what I was getting as is that id rather have a 1000d than a 500d going anywhere near a telescope. That way, when you do eventually end up getting it mucky/damaged it wont be too big a loss.

I didn't get the impression that others did with your original post. The OP was suggesting camera's in excess of £1000 and I took the point of your post as being why spend that sort of money when something in the £200 -£300 reqion will do just as good a job.

That's how I read it anyway.

[GuillermoBarrancos]

I didn't get the impression that others did with your original post. The OP was suggesting camera's in excess of £1000 and I took the point of your post as being why spend that sort of money when something in the £200 -£300 reqion will do just as good a job.

That's how I read it anyway.

It's the way he said it. And the way how sertain others are frequently posting in other topics.

So I know exactly what Luke means and why he reacted like that.

[ashworthacca]

It's the way he said it. And the way how sertain others are frequently posting in other topics.

So I know exactly what Luke means and why he reacted like that.

I've obviously been looking at different threads as I've not come across that sort of thing. Or maybe I don't read too much into things and get uptight about people's so called bragging posts. I've been a member of forums for as long as I can remember so I've seen it all before, very easy to brag when you're sat behind a keyboard.

Although, I still didn't get that impression from his post.

[LukeSkywatcher]

Sorry Uranium. Maybe i was being a bit over sensitive or something. No hard feelings?

Personally, i STILL would not like any camera (no matter of cost) to get so messed up that i have to dispose of it.

P.S.~~~I didnt take your post as "bragging". Just slightly flippant in these lean times.

[GuillermoBarrancos]

I've obviously been looking at different threads as I've not come across that sort of thing. Or maybe I don't read too much into things and get uptight about people's so called bragging posts. I've been a member of forums for as long as I can remember so I've seen it all before, very easy to brag when you're sat behind a keyboard.

Although, I still didn't get that impression from his post.

Ofcourse. It's the internet afterall. And I have seen all myself.

Doesn't take away the fact that it's annoying.

Astronomy already has a bad name due to the fact that many many people still think it's an overexpensive hobby for the rich.

You would be shocked to know how many people still think you need to spend thousands and thousands of dollars, euros, pounds, whatever to get into astronomy and being able to see anything. And so still think it's a rich man's hobby (my own mother included lol).

That's why I don't think it's wrong to point out to people now and then to keep their bragging in check. If we ever want to change people's perception on this hobby.

[ashworthacca]

Ofcourse. It's the internet afterall. And I have seen all myself.

Doesn't take away the fact that it's annoying.

Astronomy already has a bad name due to the fact that many many people still think it's an overexpensive hobby for the rich.

You would be shocked to know how many people still think you need to spend thousands and thousands of dollars, euros, pounds, whatever to get into astronomy and being able to see anything. And so still think it's a rich man's hobby (my own mother included lol).

That's why I don't think it's wrong to point out to people now and then to keep their bragging in check. If we ever want to change people's perception on this hobby.

I'm too laid back to get annoyed:p

Anyway, he did explain what he actually meant so no biggie for me. For every bragging post on these forums I'd hazzard a guess at thousands of informative posts being made so I'm not sure that people can get the wrong impression of this hobby from what is posted here. A quick read should let newcomers know that it's not a rich man's hobby by any means.

Just my 2 cents.

[ashworthacca]

Anyway, back on topic.

I agree with the others who recommend the 1000d. I recommend this one on the basis that the more you get into taking astroimages the bigger possibility is that you will want to mod the camera. I wouldn't really be happy modding a £1k plus camera but an entry level one.......well I did.

[fatwoul]

I didn't get the impression that others did with your original post. The OP was suggesting camera's in excess of £1000 and I took the point of your post as being why spend that sort of money when something in the £200 -£300 reqion will do just as good a job.

That's how I read it anyway.

Same here. I took "abuse" to mean things like the cold, or leaving the camera's chip exposed to the elements by sticking it onto the end of a reflector - potentially a tube full of dust and moisture. Not to mention ripping the filter off the chip to alter the wavelength sensitivity.

Astrophotography is unavoidably cruel to DSLRs, and that's what I took from his post; that a 1000D is cheap enough that if something should go wrong with it, it's less of a financial disaster than if a 5D MkII or a 1D were to fail.

I don't really understand the accusation of bragging on a website where most of us have our equipment listed in our signatures, and where people post photographs of enormous Takahashis without anybody being offended.

[Shibby]

Same here. I took "abuse" to mean things like the cold, or leaving the camera's chip exposed to the elements by sticking it onto the end of a reflector - potentially a tube full of dust and moisture. Not to mention ripping the filter off the chip to alter the wavelength sensitivity.

You've made me nervous about the fact I use my friend's D70 now!

...which, incidentally, I've finally (just) started taking images I'm happy with. (see Imaging with Nikon (in July)

However, it's been a struggle and I also would suggest you go down the Canon route. You can even buy them pre-modified.

[Tinkerbell]

Lo Andy

The 7D and 550D will both accept the clip in filters also the both have better red response than the earlier Canons. The only person I know personally using the 5D is Gain Lee and his images are fantastic. The Nikon for daytime is a no brainer but for Astro use You would be putting yourself at a disadvantage from the outset as Peter mentioned. The mount being used in conjunction with a particular model should also be taken into consideration as the 5D, 7D and D700 are heavier than the 550D so balance and flex will come into the mix.

[Uranium235]

S'ok Luke, im chilled

From my point of view, taking a DSLR and making it do things it isnt designed to do (ie: exposing the sensor for 10's of minutes to open air, cold, moisture etc) is technically abuse. Ashworth read it how it was intended and wasnt meant to be a brag of any kind, Ive tried to do things as cheaply as poss and made a few mistakes on the way. If i had made the same mistakes with more expensive equipment - I really would be crying into my beer.

I was just probably fed up of cleaning mine at the time, and had just entered a stage of acceptance that if youre going to use a DSLR it has to be just for one or the other application - not both.

[brantuk]

"Cheap enough to modify without worrying about messing up a more expensive camera"

Thats how I took it - perfectly good advice for the price range of cameras being considered, and not offensive in the least.