Beginner Unguided Setup (DSLR)

[quantumpanda]

Hello all,

I am looking to start imaging, with a particular interest in deep sky shots. As I am a beginner in generally astronomy anyway, I need your advice in a few areas.

Firstly, I won't be able to do very long exposures as I will not have a guided setup. In terms of the scope, I intend to buy either the Skywatcher Explorer 130P or the 150P. I am told that if I buy the 150P, I will need to invest in the EQ5 mount as opposed to the EQ3 mount that is generally supplied with it, for imaging stability. What difference will I get between the 130 and 150?

Finally, what DSLR should I be looking at? I've heard alot about the Canon 1000D, which from what I've seen online, is about the maximum I want to spend on a camera at the moment. Is this a good choice?

Thank you in advance for any help you can give me.

[Bizibilder]

Mount, mount mount and did I mention ...mount!! That's what imaging is all about. You can use a pretty basic scope and the 1000D is an exellent camera but you must have a good mount (there I said it again!!)

Seriously though - get a book like "Making Every Photon Count" from FLO (usual disclaimer) and read and re-read it - it will save you a vast amount of time and money by explaining exactly what you need and what NOT to buy to get you imaging. Most folk on this forum(and others!) recommend it.

[pete_l]

Just in case there's any doubt deep sky work is all about the mount.

One other thing to consider is that a lot of DSOs are actually quite big. So if you glue your camera onto a scope with too long a focal length you will only get parts of your targets.

One thing I like to do is use my Canon 20D (which I modified the filter on to get better H-alpha sensitivity, see DSLR Modification Comparisonfor details) with a 200mm prime lens. That gives a field of about 3° which is nice for framing the larger DSOs and means the shortcomings of my mount have less effect. This is further helped by taking lots of short exposures (say 30 - 60 seconds) and "stacking" them to bring out the faint detail. Depending on how much lihgt pollution you enjoy, you may well be limited to short exposure times anyway.

[quantumpanda]

Thank you for the replies.

You both mention the mount. Is the EQ5 suitable for the 150P then?

Also, Bizibilder, you say that a basic scope is ok. Would the 130P be sufficient? Visual observations aren't critical for me, as I am lucky enough to live with someone who owns a 200P.

[Bizibilder]

I also have a 200P and bought it originally on an EQ5 for visual work. As soon as I could I upgraded to an HEQ5PRO Syntrek (I knew I would have to -the EQ5 is now my "portable" mount). I really would not want to image with less. You could use the EQ5 - motorised at least - for a camera + lens or a small refractor but the 200P (or 130P or 150P) really needs the larger mount.

Additionally my HEQ5 is on a pier solidly bolted to a large concrete pier base of about a cubic yard. Solid it is.

[Black Knight]

I have a 200p mounted on an EQ5 and the best I have been able to achieve is 60 seconds unguided with my Canon 500D, and that's after a lot of faffing around with good polar alignment and drift aligning as well.

I'm looking to upgrade in the near future to either an HEQ5 or an EQ6.

[ollypenrice]

HEQ5 or CG5 would be my minimum mounts. Personally I would go for a short fast refractor for imaging on the grounds of ease, but that's maybe another issue.

Olly

[dph1nm]

I

have a 200p mounted on an EQ5 and the best I have been able to achieve is 60 seconds unguided with my Canon 500D, and that's after a lot of faffing around with good polar alignment and drift aligning as well.

I'm looking to upgrade in the near future to either an HEQ5 or an EQ6.

Unless you have done PEC training, 60secs is impressive for an EQ5 at 1000mm FL. The periodic error on my HEQ5 restricts exposures to about 30sec at 1250mm, and that is with a 1000D, which I think has slightly larger pixels than the 500D.

NigelM