New to forum - just a quick question

[ryn]

Hi guys,

I am new to this forum and noticed it from someones mention on Overclockers Australia Photography forum.

For reasons that beside me, I have taken a HUGE interest in astronomy recently after seeing some spectacular images from the users on here!

My question is;
I would LOVE to get in to astrophotography and stars (and beyond) but I have been looking at Telescopes capable of this, and can't really make a judgement call as I no nothing about what I need. I mean if I need to upgrade my camera then so be it. Currently I have a 400D but any excuse to upgrade is a bonus... so back to the question - what is a good Telescope that I can potentially attach a body to, to take photos with?

Bare in mind I am from New Zealand and I haven't really found a lot around here for this.

Please move if not in the correct section.

Thanks for your help in advance!

Ryan

[Adrena1in]

Hi Ryan, and welcome to the wonderful (and expensive) world of AstroPhotography!

Well, I say expensive...in some respects you've got one of the most expensive bits already...the camera. While you can easily spend hundreds or thousands on telescope stuff and mounts, you're already set up to get started to taking a few initial shots.

Even people with expensive gear still like taking wide-field Star Trails shots. This is where you put the camera on a tripod, point it towards the stars, then hopefully using a remote shutter release, you open the shutter for several minutes and capture the stars as lines as they'll trail across the sky. Needs a good 20 or 30 minutes for some nice trails, but if you don't want to open your shutter for that long then you can take lots of 30s or 1-minute shots and stack them together. (There's free software that can easily do that.)

If you want to start shooting Deep Space Objects, (DSOs), like galaxies and nebulae, the important thing isn't a telescope...it's the mount. What you'd want is an Equatorial Mount. This device sits atop a sturdy tripod, and when angled and positioned correctly will turn your camera/lens/telescope at just the right speed to counteract the rotation of the earth. You can then take long exposures without getting star trails. The mount is generally the most important piece of kit in this type of photography.

Another reason I say a telescope isn't the most important thing is because some deep space objects appear pretty big. The Andromeda Galaxy for example, appears six times wider than the full moon! 200, 300 or 400mm lenses are great for lots of DSOs, and many people here post stunning images taken with their lenses.

If you want to venture to lunar or planetary imaging then a high focal length telescope is favourable, but in these cases the mount isn't so important, because exposures are going to be quite short. Shooting the moon requires shutter speeds of 1/250th or faster. Even shooting Jupiter and Saturn requires 1/100th or so. So accurate tracking isn't always essential.

So, back at you - what exactly is it you want to shoot?

[Chopper Al]

Originally Posted by Adrena1in

Another reason I say a telescope isn't the most important thing is because some deep space objects appear pretty big. The Andromeda Galaxy for example, appears six times wider than the full moon! 200, 300 or 400mm lenses are great for lots of DSOs, and many people here post stunning images taken with their lenses.

Is that really true

I always thought the galaxies were so far away, they were just one of the pin point lights in the sky at night.

Would it be possible for someone to post pictures of the full moon and andromeda in scale with each other?

Thanks...
Al

[cruiser]

Hi Al,

Galaxies can be captured with camera lens's if you can have it on a tracking mount.
Here is a picture I got with my 40D and is taken at 300mm (75-300mm). They are small but they are there.
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_2r9eqlTPDhc/Sc...bdw/s800/5.jpg
Its a shot of the Leo triplet but I cant remember the exposure settings at the moment.
Its true that the mount can make all the difference and should not be skimped on if you plan to take photos on it.

Hi Ryan,
Seeing as you in NZ there is a dedicated astro forum in Aus you might also want to check out. Theres a couple of NZ guys there.
www.iceinspace.com.au

Brett

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

Ryan, you can do some really great stuff with just the camera on a tripod!I must stress first though LEARN YOUR SKY! IT IS PARAMOUNT! It is also not as hard as some might suspect. You have the internet. Use it.

Use your 400D wide angle lens (18-55 I think) for full-sky photos at 30 seconds ISO800. If you use your zoom lens, your exposures will have to be shorter or you will get star trailing. The more you zoom, the shorter the exposure.

Next step up is put that same camera on an equatorial mount that can track the stars for long exposure. This way you can go for really long exposures of even 10 minutes! (Depending on how bad the light pollution is around your site.) A barn-door tracker is a cheap alternative. (Google it)

Next step is to take the lens off your 400D and put a telescope in it's place, I can highly recommend a Skywatcher or Orion ED80 as a terrific start. Cost about $600 Australian. (Google Bintel)

After that it gets expensive. Now way around it. You want good stuff, you simply have to pay for it. Accepting that is the first hurdle.

The next step is to get into CCD dedicated astrocamera's. They are cooled, have lots less noise and are highly sensitive. You can buy colour cameras that make it easy but the best by far are mono camera's (black and white) then the employment of coloured filters, red, green, blue, luminosity and a wide variety of narrowband filters.

After that there is just upgrades. Bigger and better camera's more gear, heavier and more precise mounts, larger aperture telescopes and so on....you really can pour your life into this once you get hooked.

I hope this gives you a few ideas. I have been into this for the past 9 years, started from scratch and have loved the journey, the equipment, the failures and successes. Welcome to the wonder of the universe first-hand!

Baz.

[Adrena1in]

Originally Posted by Chopper Al

Is that really true

I always thought the galaxies were so far away, they were just one of the pin point lights in the sky at night.

Most are pretty "small" to be honest, but I was just using Andromeda to prove a point that deep space objects aren't necessarily small. The Orion Nebula is effectively larger than the moon as well, as are many other nebulae.

(As an experiment I've superimposed a moon shot next to an M31 shot. M31 was taken with a 400mm scope, so I shrunk it to 30%. The moon was taken with a 1200mm scope, so I shrunk that to 10%. Unless my maths is rotten, this should mean they're roughly equivalent in size. Link to image here. And I didn't capture nearly all the dim outer arms of Andromeda either.)

[Chopper Al]

Originally Posted by Adrena1in

Most are pretty "small" to be honest, but I was just using Andromeda to prove a point that deep space objects aren't necessarily small. The Orion Nebula is effectively larger than the moon as well, as are many other nebulae.

(As an experiment I've superimposed a moon shot next to an M31 shot. M31 was taken with a 400mm scope, so I shrunk it to 30%. The moon was taken with a 1200mm scope, so I shrunk that to 10%. Unless my maths is rotten, this should mean they're roughly equivalent in size. Link to image here. And I didn't capture nearly all the dim outer arms of Andromeda either.)

WOW, thanks very much for the image. If only we could see stuff like that with our naked eyes!!

Al

[ryn]

Hi guys, thanks you very much for the great responses! I see now there is a lot to consider but I think I am up for the challange!

Baz, I am going to try it out next time I get a chance (weather permitting) we have had nothing but cloud/rain for the last 3 weeks. Any suggestions I can have a look at on the Bintel website?

I really appreciate the help guys, I do. Astronomy was always something I took for granted up until seeing a lot of it around recently. I have been converted and I am addicted. I tend to get interested in things and then lose it, but this is different.

Thanks again!

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

Mate, I highly recommend the EQ6 Pro for a mount, and one of the ED telescopes, like the ED80 to ED127.

Hands down the best value for money and high quality gear.

[ryn]

Cheers, thanks for that mate. I've had a look and that Mount is around $2600 NZD and couldn't find anything on the scope. Possibly might be a bit steep for my first one, which is a hard thing for me to say cause I like having the best gear I can get. Do you know anything of around $2000 or so?

I hope I'm not sounding disrespectful also, and I apologise if I do.

Ryan

Edit: I have had a look and amight have found the ED80 for around $600/800 if that sounds correct?

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

Originally Posted by ryn

Cheers, thanks for that mate. I've had a look and that Mount is around $2600 NZD and couldn't find anything on the scope. Possibly might be a bit steep for my first one, which is a hard thing for me to say cause I like having the best gear I can get. Do you know anything of around $2000 or so?

I hope I'm not sounding disrespectful also, and I apologise if I do.

Ryan

Edit: I have had a look and amight have found the ED80 for around $600/800 if that sounds correct?

That's right mate. The ED80 is an awesome scope. Solid, heavy, well built, great focusser and top quality ED optics.

I have the ED80 (Gold colour OTA) and the Black Diamond ED120 (Black OTA). Both are fantastic telescopes. I used to own a $9,000.00 Celestron Nexstar 11 GPS, but I much prefer the smaller aperture refractors now.

[ryn]

Originally Posted by A.S.I.G.N. Observatory

That's right mate. The ED80 is an awesome scope. Solid, heavy, well built, great focusser and top quality ED optics.

I have the ED80 (Gold colour OTA) and the Black Diamond ED120 (Black OTA). Both are fantastic telescopes. I used to own a $9,000.00 Celestron Nexstar 11 GPS, but I much prefer the smaller aperture refractors now.

Oh wow, so really the most expencive part is the Mount? Is there anything else I could have a look at? I noticed that the EQ6 Pro mount is about $2600. What about the EQ5 Pro or the standard EQ6? I found on the Bintel website the EQ6 pro rto be $2100 which wasn;t too bad. (just exploring my options)

Thanks.

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

Originally Posted by ryn

Oh wow, so really the most expencive part is the Mount? Is there anything else I could have a look at? I noticed that the EQ6 Pro mount is about $2600. What about the EQ5 Pro or the standard EQ6? I found on the Bintel website the EQ6 pro rto be $2100 which wasn;t too bad. (just exploring my options)

Thanks.

They should do fine mate. I just warn you however, they do have weight limits. As you add telescopes, guidescopes and camera equipment, you can put strain on the gears, making them inaccurate and wear quickly.

My advice is look for the very best you can afford, then wait a couple of months while you save a bit more cash and go one better.

And yes, a mount is the most important bit. You can put the Hubble space telescope on a rubbish mount and you will get rubbish pictures.

The EQ6 Pro is very versatile and can carry a lot of weight. It is also pretty accurate for a budget mount. I say budget, because there are mounts upward of $15,000 out there.

[ryn]

Thank you very much for your help! I really appreciate it.

Edit: Sorry, one last thing.. How are the mounts powered?

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

Plug into car or mains.