Quote:
Originally Posted by overlord
Two things I have learned from the above:
1) Technology is advancing so quickly that actually some of you are unsure as to whether the deep sky is possible. Now I would actually expect that it WOULD be possible. Though I understand that even a DSLR is not sensitive enough for the fine details. I've done Jupiter on Registrax with an SLR and NO TRACKING, just pointing it down the tube of the 8". In fact I can't remember how I did it.  But regardless it seemed to work but not the greatest I have to say, so I understand say a DSLR would not be greatest at picking up details without a slow exposure. So Hmmmmmmmmm. I get the feeling there is a piece of technology out there to make this practicable. |
You are being given a lot of advice from some very knowledgeable people. In the absence of the knowledge that there is a big difference between the way you take planetary ( which you’ve done ) and deep sky imaging ( which you have not ) i think you are being very dismissive. I image with a DSLR as many accomplished astrophotographers do. It is not a matter of the sensitivity of a DSLR per say that limits your ability, it’s the time it takes for enough photos to be received by your sensor. Hence long exposure acquisition times. During this time the earth rotates on its axis which doesn’t match the axis of rotation of a non equatorial setup. Yes you can get field rotators which compensate for this but you are adding yet another axis to the system which increases the margin of error. There are situations where this may be more practical given the size and weight of an incredibly large objective but for the most part, an equatorial mount is the practical solution.
All I’ll say is that as I’m sure you are aware, this is not a cheap hobby and ignoring experience could be a great way to empty your bank account.