ED80 or ED100 for photography

[Grantj]

Hello all, complete newbie here (besides some basic visual a long time ago) looking to get into DSO photography. Looking at the Skywatcher 80EDPro and 100EDPro (on a HEQ5Pro mount) and wanting to know if the extra $500 spent on the 100ED is worth it (with its slower f/ratio). I have seen some amazing photos from the 80ED's which is pushing me in that diretion and maybe freeing up some cash for the DSLR. Also on the topic of DSLR's again trying to decide between the more budget friendly Canon 350d and the higher priced 40d and would like opinions here too.

Thanks in advance.

[dugnsuz]

Use the force Grant, use the force!!!

Welcome to IIS from another SA boy with similar tastes!

Skywatcher ED80 Pro is my imaging scope and I love the widefield views achieved with it.(Also use a 40D and love that too!)
The ED100 is going to get you "closer in" to DSOs - probably worth considering if you need the extra focal length for imaging galaxies, planetary nebulae etc.
All the best
Doug:thumbsup:

[Grantj]

HAHA oops, I should pay attention to what I am typing.

Your photos were the first I saw using a ED80Pro and pushed me down this path. At this point my budget will probably allow an ED80 Pro and Canon 40d (which quite clearly is a good package) or a 100ED Pro and a 350d.

[mark3d]

the camera is good for other stuff too so i'd choose the package with the best camera :)

(i know nothing about astrophotography though :))

(the cool breeze must be waking the adelaide folk up lol)

[dugnsuz]

Some of the 40D features make it a great camera for Astroimaging as I'm sure you're aware. Having used a DSLR without the features I can only say go the 40D over the 350D.
Liveview is a Godsend for consistent, accurate focusing - it has made that side of things so easy.
The EOS Utility is a simple to use piece of software allowing control of the camera and setup of automatic exposures.
Some may try and sway you towards the ED100 as a scope choice, but I can recommend the ED80/40D combo.
Although, (theres always an 'although' or a 'but' isn't there?) you could hang out for the 450D - 40D features, cheaper price...out really soon.

Cheers
Doug:thumbsup:

[iceman]

I'd definitely get the ED80 and 40D/450D. The only downfall of the ED80 is that you'll want more focal length for "in your face" images of galaxies like NGC5128 or 4945 or M83 etc.

An ED100 will get you a little way there, but really you'll want to go to an 8" or 10" newt or (cough) SCT (gasp did I just say that! :lol: ) for the longer focal length.

Just be aware that the longer the focal length, the more challenges you face - in terms of accuracy in guiding and focusing. And with an SCT of course you've got the slow focal ratio as well meaning you double your exposure times.

I use an ED80 with 350D now, and it's great for widefield views - fit the entire Orion's sword in the FOV. But my next DSO imaging scope will be an 8" or 10" newt or fast SN. The ED80 will always come in handy for widefield images like Orion, Eta, etc.

[Bassnut]

Theres not a lot of difference in FL bettween the ED80 and 100, but a lot in price. For wide field the ED80 is a classic, go with that.

Im with Mike tho, an 8 or 10" newt or SCT is the go for in-yr-face DSO, but the mount requirements then become the big money, much more than the OTA.

So, the ED80 would be an excellent start.

[Rainsey]

With regards to the focal length issue, what is the concensus of using something like a 1.5 or 2 X converter between the camera and the T mount as one would do with a normal camera lens or have I lost the plot? This way you could use the ED80 and if getting closer was a requirement, the converter would pump up the magnification. Albeit reducing the amount of light comming in but could this not be catered for by longer exposure?

Cheers

Graham

[citivolus]

I asked about this once and the response was that the camera may not shoot with a teleconverter with no lens electronics attached. I'll have to give it a try with the Canon 40D and a 2x tc.

[dugnsuz]

Check this thread out Graham...can be done but using a 2x converter, it'll turn a f7.5 scope into a f15 one!!! Not good!
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=28833

Cheers
Doug:thumbsup:

[Rainsey]

Hmm.. thought I would give it a go with just my 2X converter on with no lens.... yep get the following:-
Err 01
Communications between the camera and lens is faulty
Clean the lens contacts.

This is on my Canon 40D

Cheers
Graham

[Rainsey]

... Also, checked in the custom settings on the 40D and there appears to be no way of bypassing the smarts in the camera when a converter is mounted. I do not have one but I guess the T Mount has no smarts hence... this answers my original question....

A teleconverter is a no go with a 40D and a scope mounted.

Cheers

graham

[citivolus]

Thanks for checking that. I guess you'd be limited to something like a 2" 2x Powermate then, in front of the t-ring. Of course, this is probably most useful for fast targets like the sun.

[Grantj]

Thanks for all the help guys. Now the proud owner of an Skywatcher ED80 and Canon 40d :D with a HEQ5Pro mount, Skywatcher 80mm short tube guidescope and plenty of other bits and pieces on their way (poor bank account has taken a bit of a hit). Now for the steep learning curve to begin.

[[1ponders]]

Re the teleconverter. You may be able to bypass it by placing some glad wrap between the camera contacts and the teleconverter contacts. Then the camera will think it is just an ordinary T adapter.

Another issue with the Teleconveter is it won't improve your resolution. i.e. it can't improve what is not there. Your ED80 for example is sampling a particular area of sky. The teleconverter doesn't change that, it just takes a section of that area that the objective is passing on to it and blowing it up. By that I mean if your pixel resolution with ED80/camera combo is 2 arcsec/pixel adding a 2x teleconverter won't change that. It will just take that 2 arcsec and spread it out so that you will get an "infered" 1 arsec/pixel, your resolution won't have been improved at all.

I hope this is making sense :P I guess another analogy would be if you imaged the moon with an ED80/400D combo and printed it and then scanned and upscaled the image by 2 and printed it you haven't improved your resolution. You have simply taken what you already had and made it larger with a cost to sharpness and detail.

[[1ponders]]

btw, technically the same is true with barlows and powermates. To truly reduce your arcsec/pixel scale you have to increase the actual focal length of your imaging system.

[Jen]

:hi::hi::hi:Grant
:astron:
:welcome: