Advice on new telescope/accessories

[kkara4 (Krishan)]

OK so bit of a noob when it comes to telescopes and have never owned one other than a Tasco 900mm 4 inch which my dad got as a birthday present back in the late 1980's!

Anyway feel the time is right to get one of my own now

I have done a fair bit of internet/forum trawling, so have come up with a list I think of what will be right for me, but looking to get advice from more knowledgable folk as to whether I am looking at the right things. There is a lot im not sure on, so ill start with what I know and then follow up with questions:


1) So in terms of use, I intend to never use an eyepiece and focus on using my Canon 5D MK III for photography or use the viewfinder/Live View for the viewing side of things.
2) I plan to get a scope around the 2000mm focal length mark. My thinking is that without an eyepiece that the magnification is purely a function of the focal length (could be wrong!) So 2000/50 = 40x magnification, which would mean something like the moon will fill the frame in the 5D viewfinder. I am judging this based on the 240-600mm lens I have at present which I use for all my astrophotography.
3) I plan to image primarily the moon and planets, and some of the smaller nebulae/DSO's.
4) I dont want anything rediculously heavy (<40Kg total would be nice).
5) Budget limit is $6K, but flexible.
6) High optical quality is essential, ie flat field, coma free as possible and aberration free as possible.

So based on these requirements, and looking at results that people have got , I am thinking the Celestron 925 HD is the right choice since:
-not too heavy
-not too expensive
-excellent image quality
-enough aperture to resolve detail on Jupiter/Saturn
-designed for use with DSLRs,
-2032mm focal length should be just right for imaging the moon
-Getting equilbrium temperature shouldnt take too long (<1.5 hours?) due to the vented tube (I am in Bellbowrie, Brisbane and the furthest I would go would be to Roma and that would be very rare, Wivenhoe dam would be much more common, but primarily backyard use. So I dont think dew/large temperature variations would be a big problem like they have in the USA or more colder/humid parts of AUS?)

along with a Televue powermate 5x and associated T ring/canon adapter since:
-general concensus is they are quality bits of gear they make
-not too expensive
-effective magnification (again not 100% sure if im right) would be 200x which should be generally useable in average-excellent seeing, and put a big enough image on the 5D sensor to get enough pixels on the target.
- I can always take it off when I want to image the moon.

After that, I kind of have no idea what else I need!

a) Due to the large magnification, I assume I will need some kind of motorised mount and tracking. Would Celestron's CPC GoTo mount be a good choice? I would like the whole tracking and alignment process to be as easy and smooth as possible.
b) I have heard that perhaps Celestron CGEM DX mount would be best since it is equatorial and motorised, but no idea what other equipment I would need in terms of tripod and scope mounting hardware?
c) Is the 9.25" aperture required to resolve good detail on Jupiter/Saturn? Would 8" be sufficient? I realise that the extra 1.25" would be welcomed for dimmer DSOs, and the approx 3.5kg difference in weight (telescope itself) isnt a big deal for me.
d) this could be a very silly question (so please forgive me) but is it possible to get a mount fast enough to track something like the ISS?
e) If neither of Celestron's mounts are a good choice, would it be worth getting just the optical tube assembly that they offer, and going to other companies for mounts/tripod?

Thanks in advance!

[astro744]

Note, focal length of C9.25 is 2350mm not 2032mm. That latter is for the C8.

A mount with an EQ platform would be better (dare I say essential) for astro-photography.

You can get a Meade LX80 8" OTA on HEQ5 mount for about $2.5k or a Meade LX600-ACF 10" f8 for about $7.3k. The latter has been designed for astro-photography and comes with many features especially for those imaging.

Both telescopes available from Bintel.

[kkara4 (Krishan)]

Originally Posted by astro744

Note, focal length of C9.25 is 2350mm not 2032mm. That latter is for the C8.

A mount with an EQ platform would be better (dare I say essential) for astro-photography.

You can get a Meade LX80 8" OTA on HEQ5 mount for about $2.5k or a Meade LX600-ACF 10" f8 for about $7.3k. The latter has been designed for astro-photography and comes with many features especially for those imaging.

Both telescopes available from Bintel.

Ah yes thanks for the pickup RE: focal length!

If the mount is fully computerised like the Celestron CPC, does that not track in the same manner that an EQ would? More for my understanding than suggesting id rather get fully computerised!

I will take a look at that Meade, for some reason I completely forgot about Meade's offerings!

[julianh72 (Julian)]

Originally Posted by kkara4

If the mount is fully computerised like the Celestron CPC, does that not track in the same manner that an EQ would? More for my understanding than suggesting id rather get fully computerised!

A computerized AltAz will tracks stars fine for visual use, but you will get "Field Roattaion" http://www.celestron.com/support/kno...and+imaging%3F which means that for long exposures, all stars will leave curved star trails around the centre of the image. For long exposures, you NEED an equatorial mount, and preferably with an auto-guider set-up attached.

[kkara4 (Krishan)]

Originally Posted by julianh72

A computerized AltAz will tracks stars fine for visual use, but you will get "Field Roattaion" http://www.celestron.com/support/kno...and+imaging%3F which means that for long exposures, all stars will leave curved star trails around the centre of the image. For long exposures, you NEED an equatorial mount, and preferably with an auto-guider set-up attached.

Thanks Julian. This makes sense now. What would the maximum exposure time realistically be for an altaz? I realise the answer to that probably depends on your magnification as well hmmm

[Amaranthus (Barry)]

kkara, you can get away with about 25 sec exposures before field rotation starts to really bite and stars become too bloated from uncorrected random mount movement. I find 30 sec is pushing it a little too far and 15-20 sec is a bit underexposed.

Here are some examples of what I did on my alz-az mount with my 8SE.
http://www.astrobin.com/users/Amaranthus/

I doubt I'll be doing any more on this setup though, as I've now got my AZ-EQ6 mount up and running!

[kkara4 (Krishan)]

Originally Posted by Amaranthus

kkara, you can get away with about 25 sec exposures before field rotation starts to really bite and stars become too bloated from uncorrected random mount movement. I find 30 sec is pushing it a little too far and 15-20 sec is a bit underexposed.

Here are some examples of what I did on my alz-az mount with my 8SE.
http://www.astrobin.com/users/Amaranthus/

I doubt I'll be doing any more on this setup though, as I've now got my AZ-EQ6 mount up and running!

Thanks Barry, those pictures are great! With your Saturn/Mars pictures I see you used a 2.5 Powermate, how is that enough magnification to get Saturn at such a good resolution? Or does the Neximage that you used have some kind of magnification associated with it?

[el_draco (Rom)]

Just a few points, wont come close to answering all your questions but may help.

- The 9.25 inch HD is good scope and you have option of trying Hyperstar work at about F2 I wouldn't go 8". A bit small, C11 even better
- You'll also need to consider a starizona Microfoucser.
- Powermate 5X gives you a hell of of focal length and you miight like to consider the 2" 4x as an alternative. You can use it with 2 inch eyepieces as well.
- You can use the starizona cooling system to significantly reduce cool down time.

- Mount is going to be a balancing act. Long focal lengths require grunt and there a few alternatives.
a) dont know about CGEM's and don't know about the tracking of ISS
b) dont know about the build quality.
c) I owned and didn't like the EQ6 and I believe the EQ8 is problematic for some. Build quality may be an issue but I can't comment from experience. There are threads on IIS that talk about it.
d) I own a G11 G2. The build quality is beautiful but the operating system is a bit of a work in progress. They have been a workhorse for many people for many years for very good reasons, including flexibility and upgradability. Good news is they are pretty cheap at the moment and I think there are a couple in the classifieds. Bad news is they take some learning and you have to be prepared to do the learning. There are a lot of support resources available as well. I temporarily sold mine, then bought it back, which I guess says something. (Let the abuse begin )
The G11 is incredibly stable as well and will carry a lot of mass. It also separates in to a couple of easily managed units. The field tripod is a good option if you can get it.

- Undoubtedly, some will suggest an Astrophysics or TAK mount. I dont know much about either. Astrophysics makes good gear.

- C9.25 and G11 G2 are well within your budget and there are plenty of Losmandy plates for mounting everything

Overall, you are planning a good scope with a lot of potential to be a workhorse.

Man, you'll sure notice the difference over a 100 mm scope; wish I could be there when you see Saturn for the first time

Rom

[kkara4 (Krishan)]

Originally Posted by el_draco

Just a few points, wont come close to answering all your questions but may help.

- The 9.25 inch HD is good scope and you have option of trying Hyperstar work at about F2
- Powermate 5X gives you a hell of of focal length and you miight like to consider the 2" 4x as an alternative. You can use it with 2 inch eyepieces as well.
- You can use the starizona cooling system to significantly reduce cool down time.

- Mount is going to be a balancing act. Long focal lengths require grunt and there a few alternatives.
a) dont know about CGEM's and don't know about the tracking of ISS
b) dont know about the build quality.
c) I owned and didn't like the EQ6 and I believe the EQ8 is problematic for some. Build quality may be an issue but I can't comment from experience. There are threads on IIS that talk about it.
d) I own a G11 G2. The build quality is beautiful but the operating system is a bit of a work in progress. They have been a workhorse for many people for many years for very good reasons, including flexibility and upgradability. Good news is they are pretty cheap at the moment and I think there are a couple in the classifieds. Bad news is they take some learning and you have to be prepared to do the learning. There are a lot of support resources available as well. I temporarily sold mine, then bought it back, which I guess says something. (Let the abuse begin )
The G11 is incredibly stable as well and will carry a lot of mass. It also separates in to a couple of easily managed units. The field tripod is a good option if you can get it.

- C9.25 and G11 G2 are well within your budget and there are plenty of Losmandy plates for mounting everything

Overall, you are planning a good scope with a lot of potential to be a workhorse.

Man, you'll sure notice the difference over a 100 mm scope; wish I could be there when you see Saturn for the first time

Rom

Many thanks for the reply Rom! I will look into using the 4x instead of the 5x, and agree I will need a rock solid platform to avoid vibrations and the like. Thanks for your opinions on the mounts, those Losmandy look pretty nice!

I just finished looking at the Meade's and that route is looking awefully expensive, while as you say the Celestron route comes in a bit cheaper.

I forgot to mention the scope is unusable at the moment, completely out of alignment after being shipped in a container from the UK when we moved here, and havent bothered aligning it!

Saturn comes up pretty good @ 600mm f/5.6 on my current unguided astro setup, but cant wait to make it a detailed view that doesnt have Saturn as a 25 ish pixels across size!

[Amaranthus (Barry)]

kkara, you won't see planetary images like that visually - you need to use a planetary cam and take 1000s of frames, then stack the best ones. But visually, the C9.25 will still show really nice planetary views.

The NexImage 5 has a chip with a diagonal of 7mm, so on my f10 C8 the magnification was about 290x (or 720x at f/25)

[kkara4 (Krishan)]

Originally Posted by Amaranthus

kkara, you won't see planetary images like that visually - you need to use a planetary cam and take 1000s of frames, then stack the best ones. But visually, the C9.25 will still show really nice planetary views.

The NexImage 5 has a chip with a diagonal of 7mm, so on my f10 C8 the magnification was about 290x (or 720x at f/25)

Thanks Barry, oh yes I assumed that you did a big stack, I use DSS for my widefield stuff and had a small play with Registax for some AVIs that I did but need a lot more practice I think! I guess what i meant to say was how great it looked in terms of the size in the image and the resolution you got it at, which makes perfect sense given you were magnifying at 290x effectively!

Since the 5D is a full frame sensor I need the powermates to boost up my effective focal length to get me an equivalent resolution image to perhaps what some of the CCDs can achieve...currently I get about 20 pixels across the rings edge to edge at 580mm = about 12x magnification. With the 2350 C9.25 and 4x powermate = 9400mm = about 188x magnification, I should get about 300 pixels across on Saturn. Just my initial calcs/thoughts!

[kkara4 (Krishan)]

Originally Posted by el_draco

Just a few points, wont come close to answering all your questions but may help.

- The 9.25 inch HD is good scope and you have option of trying Hyperstar work at about F2 I wouldn't go 8". A bit small, C11 even better
- You'll also need to consider a starizona Microfoucser.
- Powermate 5X gives you a hell of of focal length and you miight like to consider the 2" 4x as an alternative. You can use it with 2 inch eyepieces as well.
- You can use the starizona cooling system to significantly reduce cool down time.

- Mount is going to be a balancing act. Long focal lengths require grunt and there a few alternatives.
a) dont know about CGEM's and don't know about the tracking of ISS
b) dont know about the build quality.
c) I owned and didn't like the EQ6 and I believe the EQ8 is problematic for some. Build quality may be an issue but I can't comment from experience. There are threads on IIS that talk about it.
d) I own a G11 G2. The build quality is beautiful but the operating system is a bit of a work in progress. They have been a workhorse for many people for many years for very good reasons, including flexibility and upgradability. Good news is they are pretty cheap at the moment and I think there are a couple in the classifieds. Bad news is they take some learning and you have to be prepared to do the learning. There are a lot of support resources available as well. I temporarily sold mine, then bought it back, which I guess says something. (Let the abuse begin )
The G11 is incredibly stable as well and will carry a lot of mass. It also separates in to a couple of easily managed units. The field tripod is a good option if you can get it.

- Undoubtedly, some will suggest an Astrophysics or TAK mount. I dont know much about either. Astrophysics makes good gear.

- C9.25 and G11 G2 are well within your budget and there are plenty of Losmandy plates for mounting everything

Overall, you are planning a good scope with a lot of potential to be a workhorse.

Man, you'll sure notice the difference over a 100 mm scope; wish I could be there when you see Saturn for the first time

Rom

Rom is this the focuser you were referring to:
http://starizona.com/acb/Feathertouc...P2994C654.aspx

And the cooler:
http://starizona.com/acb/Cool-Edge--...5-P3497C0.aspx

Both very reasonably priced (in the USA at least) i must say, I thought they would be a lot more expensive/lot more complicated!

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by kkara4

Rom is this the focuser you were referring to:
http://starizona.com/acb/Feathertouc...P2994C654.aspx

And the cooler:
http://starizona.com/acb/Cool-Edge--...5-P3497C0.aspx

Both very reasonably priced (in the USA at least) i must say, I thought they would be a lot more expensive/lot more complicated!

Yes. There are also replacement motorised vents for the HD scopes that vent air around the primary. You can leave them on all the time. If you get fancy, the microfocuser can be powered using a Starizona temperature compensation motororised setup. This connects directly to the microfocuser. You can also get dedicated focusers such as the Moonlight Crayfords to attach to the back of the scope. Pricey, but beautiful. You'll need to watch for the loss of backfocus if you go this way.

I have had a number of Celestron OTA's. All good; Meade has been hit and miss in the past. You may also consider a fast imaging Newtonian and there are lots to chose from Some amazing stuff I have seen from a few of them as well. G11 will cope with a 30cm F4 Maybe not as good for planetary though.

Rom

[kkara4 (Krishan)]

Originally Posted by el_draco

Yes. There are also replacement motorised vents for the HD scopes that vent air around the primary. You can leave them on all the time. If you get fancy, the microfocuser can be powered using a Starizona temperature compensation motororised setup. This connects directly to the microfocuser. You can also get dedicated focusers such as the Moonlight Crayfords to attach to the back of the scope. Pricey, but beautiful. You'll need to watch for the loss of backfocus if you go this way.

I have had a number of Celestron OTA's. All good; Meade has been hit and miss in the past. You may also consider a fast imaging Newtonian and there are lots to chose from Some amazing stuff I have seen from a few of them as well. G11 will cope with a 30cm F4 Maybe not as good for planetary though.

Rom

Thanks Rom, I can see this hobby can spiral out of budget control pretty fast haha!

I have looked at the Newtonians but is IQ a fair bit lower than an Edge HD setup?

Also what would your suggestion be for the mount as opposed to the G11?

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by kkara4

Thanks Rom, I can see this hobby can spiral out of budget control pretty fast haha!

I have looked at the Newtonians but is IQ a fair bit lower than an Edge HD setup?

Also what would your suggestion be for the mount as opposed to the G11?

Yes, well, we dont talk about budgets here. Some of us would have paid the mortgage out a LOT sooner but for astronomy... me included.

IQ? I am assuming you mean image quality. Well, that'll cause a brawl for sure

Its a matter of debate amongst amateurs that refractors are better than reflectors and SCT's because they dont have the central obstruction of a secondary mirror. But there is a lot more to it than that, including optics quality, aperture, seeing, mount, alignment, observer etc etc etc. You can look at a lot of images from different scopes and make up your own mind on that one. I have seen, recently, some shots through fast 8inch newts that make my jaw drop and images through big scopes that make you cringe. Many factors influence the result.

Most will say a TAK 150 is the ultimate bang for bucks in refractors but the competition aint far behind, and a lot cheaper! (TAK owners, I don't care and I am not telling you where I live ) but from a beginners point of view, its not an issue; play with the top shelf stuff when you know you are in this for keeps.

I like the versatility of the HD's in terms of Hyperstar options F2, and long or medium focal length, (you can look that stuff up easily) They have a smaller visual FOV but lots of advantages including compactness. My C14 is about 1m long, (try doing that with a big refractor) and that has advantages for mounting.

I have built and used lots of scopes with the exception of an RC., ranging in size from 10"-29" (yes) newtonians; 2"-6" refractors and 8" to 14" SCT's. They all have their merits and image quality can vary dramatically in all of them. My first "big scope was a 12" F5 newtonian, and I loved it to death, (dropped the mirror)

As far as mounts go, for your budget, and acknowledging that my knowledge of most mounts is limited, I would go G11 every time but there will be a range of opinions and some will vehemently disagree with me. History, however, looks favourably on the G11. Look in the equipment and reviews sections. See what others are using / saying. My last scope was C11 on a G11, G2 but I am currently "upsizing" and the dome is slowly rising. If you want to be mobile, I would not go bigger than this.

After decades of this hobby the one thing I have learned, and I still ignor it , is to keep it simple. This hobby will eat you alive if you let it.

[kkara4 (Krishan)]

Originally Posted by el_draco

Yes, well, we dont talk about budgets here. Some of us would have paid the mortgage out a LOT sooner but for astronomy... me included.

IQ? I am assuming you mean image quality. Well, that'll cause a brawl for sure

Its a matter of debate amongst amateurs that refractors are better than reflectors and SCT's because they dont have the central obstruction of a secondary mirror. But there is a lot more to it than that, including optics quality, aperture, seeing, mount, alignment, observer etc etc etc. You can look at a lot of images from different scopes and make up your own mind on that one. I have seen, recently, some shots through fast 8inch newts that make my jaw drop and images through big scopes that make you cringe. Many factors influence the result.

Most will say a TAK 150 is the ultimate bang for bucks in refractors but the competition aint far behind, and a lot cheaper! (TAK owners, I don't care and I am not telling you where I live ) but from a beginners point of view, its not an issue; play with the top shelf stuff when you know you are in this for keeps.

I like the versatility of the HD's in terms of Hyperstar options F2, and long or medium focal length, (you can look that stuff up easily) They have a smaller visual FOV but lots of advantages including compactness. My C14 is about 1m long, (try doing that with a big refractor) and that has advantages for mounting.

I have built and used lots of scopes with the exception of an RC., ranging in size from 10"-29" (yes) newtonians; 2"-6" refractors and 8" to 14" SCT's. They all have their merits and image quality can vary dramatically in all of them. My first "big scope was a 12" F5 newtonian, and I loved it to death, (dropped the mirror)

As far as mounts go, for your budget, and acknowledging that my knowledge of most mounts is limited, I would go G11 every time but there will be a range of opinions and some will vehemently disagree with me. History, however, looks favourably on the G11. Look in the equipment and reviews sections. See what others are using / saying. My last scope was C11 on a G11, G2 but I am currently "upsizing" and the dome is slowly rising. If you want to be mobile, I would not go bigger than this.

After decades of this hobby the one thing I have learned, and I still ignor it , is to keep it simple. This hobby will eat you alive if you let it.

Thanks again for the reply Rom! Yes IQ was image quality, and I can understand the debate it will cause! I like all the images people have gotten with the C9.25 HD, that is one thing I did was to trawl around and look at what images I was happy with and the ones I wasnt. This was based on looking for basic things like coma, aberration, etc, and then sharpness. A lot of this has to do with the final CCD/camera choice I know, but I simply dont know enough people with scopes or have the time to go to star parties and things.

I really think I want to avoid a Newtonian, primarily due to the sheer size of it to meet my requirements. This will mean I will just look at it, and not ever use it. The same will happen if whatever I buy weighs as much as me. And that would be the worst buy ever since it would basically be a several thousand dollar display piece!

The G11 looks great, I think with the G2 version ill be blowing the budget though. I guess I have to decide on whether go to is really important or not to me. One feature I like is the ability to control the scope by ethernet/internet with the Gemini system though, that is awesome. I wonder if people on the other side of the world would be able to control it that would be pretty cool!

I havent looked into dedicated astrographs, I wonder if that is a route worth considering given that the camera will essentially be the eyepiece...hmm

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by kkara4

I havent looked into dedicated astrographs, I wonder if that is a route worth considering given that the camera will essentially be the eyepiece...hmm

Yep, CCD does have a big impact on the final result. You'll also need to deal with the mono V colour issue. Many buy one shot colour and regret it because it precludes more complex imaging, Tri-colour, LRGB for example. Mono's more versitile in the end but you have to get a filter system at some point ... ah more $$.

You are correct in that newt's are physically bigger with issues around balance as well as size.

Originally Posted by kkara4

I really think I want to avoid a Newtonian, primarily due to the sheer size of it to meet my requirements. This will mean I will just look at it, and not ever use it. The same will happen if whatever I buy weighs as much as me. And that would be the worst buy ever since it would basically be a several thousand dollar display piece!

ah ha. Been looking at boxes for over a year. Very wise move

Originally Posted by kkara4

The G11 looks great, I think with the G2 version ill be blowing the budget though. I guess I have to decide on whether go to is really important or not to me. One feature I like is the ability to control the scope by ethernet/internet with the Gemini system though, that is awesome. I wonder if people on the other side of the world would be able to control it that would be pretty cool!

One of the biggest mistakes newbies make is under-rating the importance of a good mount. Spend a fortune on any OTA and whack it on something dodgy and you'll regret it terribly. Conversely, a good mount will make a less than ideal OTA better to use. I'd rather a 80mm refractor on a SB MX than a TAK 150 on an eq6. I finally entered the PME set last year. It meant I could not afford to set it up straight away but the payback will be in the fact that I wont need another mount, ever.

Goto is not so important and until relatively recently, (20 years ago), goto was not available. We went "star hopping" However, tracking accuracy is paramount and a good G11 does that well. Yes, you can use it over the net, world wide.

A G11 at Bintel is about $5k but you can get them second hand cheaper:

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...d.php?t=118101 (Good price @ $2800 if the tripod is with it) Same applies to the C9.25; they come up occassionally.

You might ask some questions of the owner or advertise in the wanted section for a G11. They come up surprisingly often.

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

Depending on your climate, a SCT may or may not be suitable. Down here in Sydney, I find that the corrector starts dewing around 85% humidity. So long as it stays around that it can be somewhat controlled with heaters, but at that point you're introducing additional local thermals that could affect your image quality.

I also have the Tempest fans fitted to my C11 Edge HD and they're great for equalising temperature gradients but have also found I need to watch the dew situation as they push so much air - and potentially moisture - thorough the tube, I've had it dew up on the inside a couple of times I've just learned to use them sparingly. They are great though and don't introduce any discernible vibration into the image.

Take a look at the RC scopes such as http://www.bintel.com.au/Telescopes/...oductview.aspx they cost less at least in the smaller sizes than SCTs and have no corrector to dew up. I'm very happy with my Edge HD scope, but I'm mostly into visual...

Also, I'm no DSLR expert, but for planetary you might be better off with one of the faster frame rate CCD cameras, but a 5D should be nice for DSO imaging and at f/8 the RC-8 should give you a wide choice of the fainter targets to work on

Just a suggestion, but an RC-8 on AZ-EQ6 might be an interesting place to start, but the mount is everything as the focal length increases...

[kkara4 (Krishan)]

Originally Posted by Camelopardalis

Depending on your climate, a SCT may or may not be suitable. Down here in Sydney, I find that the corrector starts dewing around 85% humidity. So long as it stays around that it can be somewhat controlled with heaters, but at that point you're introducing additional local thermals that could affect your image quality.

I also have the Tempest fans fitted to my C11 Edge HD and they're great for equalising temperature gradients but have also found I need to watch the dew situation as they push so much air - and potentially moisture - thorough the tube, I've had it dew up on the inside a couple of times I've just learned to use them sparingly. They are great though and don't introduce any discernible vibration into the image.

Take a look at the RC scopes such as http://www.bintel.com.au/Telescopes/...oductview.aspx they cost less at least in the smaller sizes than SCTs and have no corrector to dew up. I'm very happy with my Edge HD scope, but I'm mostly into visual...

Also, I'm no DSLR expert, but for planetary you might be better off with one of the faster frame rate CCD cameras, but a 5D should be nice for DSO imaging and at f/8 the RC-8 should give you a wide choice of the fainter targets to work on

Just a suggestion, but an RC-8 on AZ-EQ6 might be an interesting place to start, but the mount is everything as the focal length increases...

Thanks for the reply Dunk. Those RCs look great, I will have to browse the specs/reviews on their 250 (10 inch) versions to see what they come with and what extra things I may need.

I really dont want to go towards CCDs, and instead try and utilise what I have to keep things simple and easy (and still potentially achieve great results). I think I will have to do some more reading on CCD vs DSLR imaging, because as I see it the 6.25 micron pixels on the 5D MK III should be able to get me good enough sampling on the planets provided the optical magnification is high enough. Basically need to understand for myself I guess why people use CCDs vs DSLRs. Later on down the line I suppose I can always go to a CCD if needed.

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

Absolutely..try it...the 5D III is quite a camera

I use a little CMOS camera on my scope, magnification works out around 1000x (assuming my calculations are correct ) based on C11 focal length along with a 2.5x powermate. This is my first season experimenting and it's a lot of fun