Telescope - Any help/recommendations?

[RobinSchouten]

Hey all, thanks for looking in! :)

I was searching the web for a decent telescope to start some astrophotography with.

I found a few affordable ones similar to this one:
http://www.astroshop.eu/skywatcher-maksutov-telescope-mc-90-1250-blackdiamond-eq-1/p,14982?sid=e140f16e311ce0fbd715e2d2261b0bf6#tab_b ar_1_select

So would I be able to put a 1000D on that with the right mount?

Feel free to post other telescopes and stuff, it's highly appreciated! :)

[Nighthound]

Please be more specific about the objects that you want to photography. The telescope you linked here would be OK for Lunar imaging but not much else. The mount for this scope is not motorized/computerized to track deep sky objects as they cross the night sky so long exposures are not possible. Another problem would be the scope's focal ratio, nearly f/14.

[RobinSchouten]

Well.. I guess I would start off with some lunar shots, but after a while I would try some planetary shots. I'm aware of the fact that nebulae and galaxies are not possible. Could you suggest an affordable lens with a tracking device?

And what would a proper aperture be?

Thanks :)

[RobinSchouten]

Sorry I meant telescope instead of lens.

Anyone? :)

[Adrena1in]

Telling us your budget will really help to be honest. You can get telescopes for anything from tens to thousands of ounds/dollar, and you can buy tracking mounts for anything from a hundred to tens of thousands. You generally pay what you get for, but a telescope for a few hundred and a mount for a little more is what you want to be thinking about really.

Maksutov Cassegrain telescopes, like the one you posted a link to, have very long focal lengths and therefore are slow. High magnification for lunar and plantary work, no good for dim deep space objects. Something like an "ED 80 APO", (ED means Extra Dispersion, a type of high quality optic; 80mm objective lens; APOchromatic refractor reduces lens distortions), would be a good place to start. They're faster scopes, good for shooting deep space objects, but also can handle the moon, especially if you whack on a good Barlow or Teleconverter.

Tracking mounts...well, spend what you can really. For a few hundred you can get a decent enough EQ5 or secondhand EQ6, which are good intermediate mounts.

Really does depend what you want to shoot and how much you can spend.

[RobinSchouten]

Well since I'm only 16, I guess ~400 euros would be my max. Maybe an extra 100 euros for adapters and stuff. ;)

I was thinking about focussing on the moon and planets and maybe some deep space objects in the future. So a tracking isn't necessary at the moment.

[MintMark]

Well, if you don't track that means you're limited to short exposures of bright objects. Moon and planets.

If that's OK to start with, then think of a telescope as though it were a camera lens. Those 80mm refracters have focal lengths around 500-600mm and focal ratios of f6 or f7. Those f numbers are slow for camera lenses but fast for telescopes. The telescope acts like a manual focus prime lens with a fixed aperture. It's cheaper than the corresponding Canon lens!

Some of the scopes have a normal tripod mount (especially the smaller 72mm and 66mm ones). You can use a telescope in daylight too for wildlife shots. Even better, you can get a diagonal and eyepiece and use it visually. It really is very flexible. Later on you can save up for a tracking mount and that opens up a world of fainter objects.

The other way to do longer exposures without tracking is to go very wide. The wider you go the less star trailing you have. But I guess that's not so interesting.

The 1000D is a good camera for this. It may not have the best sensor, but the camera is small and light which is an advantage.

[RobinSchouten]

Thanks MintMark this really helped me.

So I would just be able to buy a tracking mount and use it on that refractor?

I see that this refractor has a long focal length but the aperture isn't that good.
Could anyone recommend me an other scope?

[Adrena1in]

You know, I've just noticed you've got a Prinzgalaxy 400mm f/6.3. No idea what these are like, but you could always give that a bash. Can you tripod mount it? I've got a 420mm f/6.2 telescope, and it can take half decent moon shot (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=753485)s at prime focus. If you were also to get a 2x or 3x Tele-Extender then you could get really close to the moon, and shoot for some planets too.

So I'm thinking it might be worth looking at a Schmidt-Cassegrain (SCT) or Maksutov-Cassegrain (MAK). Small ones of these aren't too much, they've got long focal lengths and are suited to lunar and planetary imaging. If you're lucky and can get one secondhand and on an Equatorial Mount rather than an Alt-Az mount then you're most of the way there.

[RobinSchouten]

You know, I've just noticed you've got a Prinzgalaxy 400mm f/6.3. No idea what these are like, but you could always give that a bash. Can you tripod mount it? I've got a 420mm f/6.2 telescope, and it can take half decent moon shot (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=753485)s at prime focus. If you were also to get a 2x or 3x Tele-Extender then you could get really close to the moon, and shoot for some planets too.

So I'm thinking it might be worth looking at a Schmidt-Cassegrain (SCT) or Maksutov-Cassegrain (MAK). Small ones of these aren't too much, they've got long focal lengths and are suited to lunar and planetary imaging. If you're lucky and can get one secondhand and on an Equatorial Mount rather than an Alt-Az mount then you're most of the way there.
Well that Prinzgalaxy really isn't that great opticallly. I took your advice and looked for a SCT telescope. So far I've found this one: http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=1-599-49-59-8811&tb=2

So would this work in combination with my 1000D?

[RobinSchouten]

Could someone help me out ^?

[SteveInNZ]

That telescope would work with your camera. However, I think that it is probably the wrong approach for you at the moment.
I assume that you are fairly new to photography in general and that you are keen on the other aspects (landscape, portraits, macro, etc) as well. Is that correct ?
Do you have a sturdy tripod ? If not, I think that would be a wise place to spend your money at this stage. You'll get more satisfaction out of a good tripod than a poor tripod plus an incomplete telescope setup. You can use what you currently have to get good moon shots and a tripod is universally useful.

I would then look for a complete telescope setup and choose based on the mount. You want a German Equatorial mount with a RA motor drive and probably a Newtonian (to keep the price down). Make sure it takes 1.25" eyepieces (not 0.965").
You're not going to be getting anything too flash, but that doesn't matter because you're going to use it to piggy-back your DSLR and the lenses you already own. You're using the telescope to provide the tracking and to aim at things you can't see.
That simple setup will get you shots of nebulae, galaxies, etc. More importantly, you'll learn about polar alignment, how to find your way around the sky and all the little bothersome things about astrophotography. You can buy things like a cable release as you need them and it's relatively portable so you can take it to dark skies and enjoy some visual astronomy.
You can also use it to photograph planets using eyepiece projection or a modified webcam.

Doing it this way, you have something that you can sell with "I took these with this telescope" photos to help sell it. That covers you for when you want to upgrade or if you loose interest.

I'm sure many will disagree. Some people like see how much they can get out of what they have and others can't see the point unless the results are going to be publishable quality. It depends on where you find your satisfaction.

Steve.

[RobinSchouten]

Wow thanks Steve. This really makes me look at this from a different angle.

I guess I'll have to agree with you that a sturdy tripod is worth its money.

Now I need some time to process all the information you gave me. ;)
I'm still looking for a decent scope setup, but I will give it some more time.

[Adrena1in]

Some people like see how much they can get out of what they have and others can't see the point unless the results are going to be publishable quality.

I think you're absolutely right. When I first shot the Cygnus region, with my camera and cheap 28-105mm lens, piggybacked on my 4.5" Newt which I was guiding manually, I got an amazing sense of ahievement, even though the result was crud. Same for when I shot Andromeda with my cheap 75-300mm after putting motorised drives on my EQ1.

Sadly, I think coming to these forums and seeing the sort of things some people can produce with the right gear has made me a bit lazy and "Quality Hungry". I don't want to go out and try shooting unless I can get something impressive to post here...which invariably leads to me not going out and imaging at all. Instead, I'm trying to build up my arsenal until I'm ready. (Autoguiding being the next thing I want to get working...read "Lazy" ! ;) )