What is the general opinion on the best scope for astro photography for a budget of $1000, I have a Sky watcher star adventurer and would like to use that if possible, something better than the sigma 150 - 500 lens I currently use with my Nikon D7200?
Sadly there isn’t a perfect scope for deep space AND planets although some do both pretty well. The challenge is the mount and I think most will agree it’s where most of your money should go if you’re pursuing astrophotography. Given that AP is an addiction for most of us, it’s worth setting yourself up for further upgrades early on. The star adventurer is not a bad mount but it really suffers from lack of payload capacity and it’s tracking smoothness isn’t fantastic for AP applications however it can be quite serviceable with short focal lengths. Unfortunately without going down the avenue of eyepiece projection photography, this really isn’t going to feed your Planetary thirst. Another option is to get a small SCT or MAK. You can use it for planetary but the long focal lengths on that mount are going to be no good for deep space objects.
My advice to you would be to extend your budget by a couple of hundred and pic up a HEQ5 pro second hand and either a small doublet refractor or Newtonian. There’s plenty that come and go in the classifieds here. Once you’ve got a taste for it, at least you’ll have some room to grow.
Remember the whole reason you’re asking this is because you want more than the camera and lens that you already have, that want for more doesn’t stop lol !
Good luck with which ever direction you decide to go
I have had some success with the adventurer and camera but feel my cheapish lenses let me down, so i am looking at the above mentioned scope as it will go on the tracker i have
I'm thinking that an ED100 would likely be too heavy for a star adventurer.
Perhaps you could make it work but you might just be setting yourself up for a whole lot of frustration.
There are plenty of quality ED refractors in the 65 - 80 mm range that might be a better bet. Remember you'll need a field-flattener with most refractors too (although there are some scopes like my Astrotech 65mm EDQ that have them built in).
The ED 100 that I am looking at is 3.9 kg with rings I have a cheap tasco 60mm that is not very good, is there a lot of difference at 60mm for quality, or am I being being naive and the difference is very noticable between cheap 60mm and expensive 60mm
Thank you all.
I am going on the focal length of the lens I have, I don't know if I am thinking on the wrong track.
I have the Sigma f/5-6.3 150-500 mm (225-750 mm 35 mm equivalent), the Nikkor f/3.5-5.6 18-300 mm (27-450 mm), the Nikkor f/1.8 50 mm (75 mm) and the Sigma f/3.5 10-20 mm (15-30 mm).
I want to use the longest lens as this get close enough to bring out some detail in planets and nebula, the other lenses are just too wide to get any thing close enough for any detail, I assume that i need to get 1000 mm focal length or so for some decent shots.
The only decent shot I ever got of Saturn was with a Nikon coolpix 510 at 360 mm (2000 mm equivalent) Just a white disc with clearly defined rings protruding, I got an almost decent Jupiter with some blurred cloud bands with the sigma at 500 mm (750 mm), I have an acceptable Orion Nebula with the Sigma and a decent omega centaurus.
I think my alignment is ok most of the time. so I am thinking a 1000 mm equivalent scope would get me some better clarity.
You are all welcome to educate me if I am way off track I can take criticism, I am a slow learner but getting there.
So how is the focal length determined, I have a 600mm long refractor with a focal length of 600 but my sigma 150-500mm is no where near 500mm it is just over 350mm long
Hi Peter
First up - welcome to IIS - you will learn a lot from the people here (as I have!).
Ryan's advice about the HEQ5 Pro as a starting mount is spot on. Many would consider this to be the starting point for a mount capable of taking long exposures. I have one of these mounts and SW120ED Back Diamond scope to go with it. Coupled with an Orion ST80 guide scope I have successfully been able to take 600" subs (light frames) on various DSOs without having the scope set up permanently in an observatory.
Before buying anything though could I recommend to you that you attend an astro camp or two and have a look at what other amateur astronomers are using and why they use the gear they do to image what they do. In SA you have: https://www.assa.org.au/
Although it's a bit of a lengthy travel, you have the Snake Valley Astro Camp coming up here in Vic in two weeks (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...d.php?t=174084) and I believe that the VIC South Star Party run by the ASV is also on that weekend. So as much as you may want to get started - refrain, research and save for quality gear that will help you achieve want you want.
Hopefully this info will be of use to you.
Kind regards.
Paul
Peter
Welcome to IIS
I started 3 years ago with a Bintel 6” f6 newt on a HEQ5 mount for my 9 year old Canon 600D and still use it now
It’s a great all round kit under $1500 for lunar , planetary and DSO
Here’s some of my images taken this year from Bortle 8 skies in Sydney
Cheers
Martin
So how is the focal length determined, I have a 600mm long refractor with a focal length of 600 but my sigma 150-500mm is no where near 500mm it is just over 350mm long
The focal length of an optic is the distance it takes the optic to cause a parallel bundle of light rays entering the optic to all come to pass through one point: the focal point. Different optical designs: reflectors or refractors or refractors with more glass or glass with higher indicies of refraction will bend the light more and hence focus in a shorter distance and therefore not need to be physically as long.
Peter
Welcome to IIS
I started 3 years ago with a Bintel 6” f6 newt on a HEQ5 mount for my 9 year old Canon 600D and still use it now
It’s a great all round kit under $1500 for lunar , planetary and DSO
Here’s some of my images taken this year from Bortle 8 skies in Sydney
Cheers
Martin
Hello martin and thank you for your response, Are all of the photos you show above taken with the 6"?
The focal length of an optic is the distance it takes the optic to cause a parallel bundle of light rays entering the optic to all come to pass through one point: the focal point. Different optical designs: reflectors or refractors or refractors with more glass or glass with higher indicies of refraction will bend the light more and hence focus in a shorter distance and therefore not need to be physically as long.
Peter
Yes all images were taken with my Bintel 6” f6 newt
Photos attached of my set up in Sydney ( poly tarps used to block direct glare from both neighbours outside lights which stay on until late most nights )
It’s a struggle but my 6” and Canon 600D do a great job and the proof is in the final processed images
Cheers
Martin
What is the general opinion on the best scope for astro photography for a budget of $1000, I have a Sky watcher star adventurer and would like to use that if possible, something better than the sigma 150 - 500 lens I currently use with my Nikon D7200?
There is no best scope which is why many have three/four scopes, I have SCT for planets, 120 triplet refractor for Moon, and reflecting for general, and a 150-600 Siggy sports for general use
My opinion is that you need to look to what you have and try try try again
There is no best scope which is why many have three/four scopes, I have SCT for planets, 120 triplet refractor for Moon, and reflecting for general, and a 150-600 Siggy sports for general use
My opinion is that you need to look to what you have and try try try again
I am still using what I have, when the clouds let me, I would like to upgrade soon though as I cannot use my scope and camera with the star adventurer, I want use a tracker so if i am going to upgrade the tracker i will ipgrade the scope with it
