[DobDobDob (Ron)]

Originally Posted by iceman

Tailwag, no. All images were with the webcam(s).

Okay, please disregard my ignorance, but wouldn't a webcam be inferior to a camera, in terms of lens quality? I have had a typical 'giveaway' webcam for years on one of my computers, I used it once to see if it worked and it's sat there idle for years now. I realise the better webcams are worth more and are obviously much better than my $30.00 unit.

I googled around and found this quickly: http://www.telescopes-astronomy.com.au/toucam_philips.htm and just looking at the webcam it would seem that a camera is far more expensive and has a lot more physical parts to it.

Seeing you did all those awesome images with a webcam, and assuming you had a proper camera (in the hands of someone who knows how to use it), wouldn't the images be even better?

Once again, please note despite now owing the Canon 300D I still have not taken one shot yet due to the weather, but it's clear today so hopefully tonight I will begin my personal journey into the world of astrophotography.

Correct me if my assumptions are wrong, for I only have a sense that a camera is better than a webcam, but when viewing your images I become confused because it would appear that excellent results have been obtained for a seemingly cheaper price.

Could it be that there is no appreciable difference at the end of the day and the quality of the image is the only consideration that should be made? I wish someone would show me a small selection of images of the same or similar subject taken with different devices and different settings, so that I could actually see the difference.