Quote:
Originally Posted by sunslayr
It's always a good idea to play to the strengths of a telescope, I would not get the 0.73x reducer you will probably find you end up with an unsatisfactory image on newer cmos cameras that have smaller pixels like the qhy163m. If you have a limited budget and still want a wide field, an ed doublet is a really good choice especially if you are shooting in mono. You are already set with your 200mm F5, that will handle most DSO targets, more if you create mosaics, also planetary with a 2-4x barlow. You might find many scopes arriving on the used market with the economy the way it is.
|
In fact i also have DSLR lenses, Canon to be specific, including 300mm f2.8IS a prime, and Canon 135mm F2, 85mm f1.8, 70-200 f2.8IS markII and few more, so i also play with those for wide field, but sounds in many posts around in forums or Facebook groups it sounds that a telescope is still superior to a lens, so i was thinking to stay at wide field, somewhere between 400mm or 500mm up to 700mm only, and a reducer will bring my 8" F5 to something like 730mm F3.65, not sure if that is any good or not, but from those FoV calculator sites i find out that something like 500-600mm is enough until i can afford high end for wider, and the only Newt i can think about in this range is 6" F4 itself, but when i gave few choices i found out people only choosing either 130mm F5 or 150mm F5 instead of 150mm F4, is that because all or most of them are scared to collimate F4 or they think it is too wide for their tastes?