|
Your camera type is referred to as a "bridge camera" because it is similar in operation to a (D)SLR but doesn't have the optical viewfinder or interchangeable lenses found on a true DSLR. Bridge cameras are very versatile and you get a lot of camera for your dollar but there's quite a jump in performance from a bridge camera to a DSLR, especially when it comes to astrophotography.
So if budget wasn't a consideration, getting a DSLR would be the first step.
However, I think that you would be better off to put your money and effort into getting the most out of what you have.
Do you have a tripod ? A good, sturdy tripod will allow you take nightscapes and shots of the milky way, magellanic clouds, etc. You can take multiple exposures and learn how to stack them.
If you are handy, you can make a barn-door tracker to put on your tripod and that opens up more deep sky objects like M42, etc.
Because your telescope doesn't have tracking, you are limited to the moon and brighter planets but the video recording function on your camera is very capable of doing the job when used afocally. So spend a few of your dollars on a sturdy afocal adapter or afocal eyepiece. Again, you'll be able to learn how and why video is used and get some shots of bits of the moon.
Afocal is taking a shot through the eyepiece with a lens on your camera. The trick is to make it mechanically solid.
If you have a bit of the geek in you, you can load CHDK onto your camera which will give you the ability to capture raw files, increase the exposure times and control the camera through scripts.
IMHO, the biggest thing is to set realistic expectations. If you go out each night with the goal of getting something on the cover of an astronomy magazine, you'll be disappointed quickly. If your goal is to improve on your last effort, you'll get a lifetime of satisfaction.
Just a different opinion.
Steve.
|