Cheap vs. Expensive for Beginner?

Hey everyone! I am planning on buying my first telescope for Astrophotography and am at a stuck point. For someone who is just getting started, is it better to get a cheaper telescope or a nicer one that I can grow into? The telescope I am looking at buying soon is the Orion Sirius 8 EQ-G--Found here: http://www.telescope.c​om …To-Controller/p/24729.uts

To clarify a few things, I am wanting to take photos of planets and Nebula's (If both are possible on this telescope?). If my camera equipment is important to know, I use a Canon EOS 60D with a 70-200mm F/4 L and a Sigma 18-35 F/1.8 DC HSM lens. Also, I know the question of "Will I still be into Astrophotography down the road?" will pop up, but I can honestly say that Astronomy is my life (I went to school for it, then Photography) and this is something I know I wouldn't get bored of doing.

All in all, what is the appropriate route to take for someone new like me? Also, what else is required to do Astrophotography? I swear I read somewhere about a mount and the Canon timelapse remote? I can't thank you guys enough for taking the time to read this!

Good question and you are looking at a good start.
I am happy that you are so determined as, if you are not sure about astro, all that a cheap telescope do is to permanently dry your interest and one expensive one may do the same in addition to drying your wallet...
In general we are told that, its best to start with a cheaper but quality Refractive glass and I see you are looking at Reflective one. Meade and Celestron have plenty of good choices and I strongly advise Meade to all that are excellent both in quality and in price with good post sale service.

But what I would suggest is that before getting hand on telescope itself (That needs quite a good deal of knowledge as to how initiate, track, etc etc), get yourself familiar with challenges of the way. One best way is to join your local star club and you can find the list by searching on web. Next best thing is to start with wide view astrophotography using a wide or an ultra wide lens (Your F1.8, 18mm Sigma should be a very good start, by taking images of wide dark sky, milky way, meteor showers etc and get yourself familiar with sky map and challenges of the night including focusing and how to keep yourself care for and then how to process your images. A tracking device such as iOptron or Vixen that are in mid 3 to upper 5 hundred dollar range are excellent companion and a day and night difference to quality of your images.
Then any 400 mm or longer lens may be a good way to catch Moon and at least two of 4 better visible planets (Jupiter and Saturn). Only next with the knowledge you gain so far, you surely can make that best choice of right large glass and tracking device, accessories you actually need.

If by any chance you are in CA for memorial day holiday, check this event on post number 41 of THIS LINKthat is one wonderful chance to put hand on all kinds of telescopes to see which one is right for you, ask all your questions from marketing telescope manufacturers at the site (Event has Free admission), see very famous world known NASA people and astronomer or listen to their free lectures on 2 days event, and event is in the honor of famous John Dobson (Who unfortunately passed away early this year), the genius Californian who invented Dobsonian version of Newtonian telescope and great concept of teaching astronomy in a simple and affordable way, father of Side Walk astronomers, and you will be actually taught how to build your own telescope from scratch by grinding your own mirror. But that might be too much or too far, so look at other options as said and best of luck.

Not sure if my advise was of any use to your specific question of what to buy instead of general guidance and see no reply from you so let me rephrase and give you one simple answer.
To stay close to you budget and glass power, I say go for:

LX90-ACF 8" f/10 with Standard Field Tripod

LINK

Yes it is not refractive beginner type but it is all you may need as you get more advance and a great companion all the way of road. Its construction including smaller format of Schmidt-Cassegrain then adding excellent coma free (patented Meade Advanced Coma-Free (ACF)) high price design of Ritchey-Chrétien makes it very attractive, then add a Sony GPS. lots of power at 2000mm focal length and relatively quite fast at F10, Ultra-High Transmission Coatings (UHTC),then even a talking astronomer to you from inside of your telescope.... Did I mentioned that mount and tripod and autostar is included all for under 1.6K $!
Can't see anyone can match it for the price. And though it is not the easiest glass to start with, it is one of those keeper to the end of the line even if buy a bigger glass later on.
So have a look in case you are serious about buying a glass fast.

Sorry Samsen, but I strongly disagree with your recommendation. I'd agree if it was for purely visual use.
The alt-az mount requires the use of a field rotator for anything other than the moon and bright planets. The f/10 focal ratio is slow for DSO's and the long focal length means that your guiding has to be spot on, which usually means an off-axis guider with a SCT.

The o/p's selection is quite good for both visual and photography. Generally, I'd suggest an ED80 over the newtonian to start as it has a few less things that can catch you out. It will also compliment most upgrades as a guidescope, etc. If you go with the newt, check that you can reach focus with a DSLR as many won't have enough in-focus. Those sold as 'astrographs' will and they're also good visual scopes. However, the faster you go with a newtonian, the more important collimation becomes.
The mount you've selected is also good, although the 8" newt is probably the most you'd want to put on it for photography. Again, the ED80 would probably be a bit more conservative on the mount.
If you have a bit more cash and can cope with the weight, upgrading the mount to the Atlas (I think that's American for EQ6-Pro) or the CGEM would give you a mount that will also serve you on your next upgrade.
The bottom line for astrophotography is to spend your money on the mount.

Steve.

I concur with Steve. The field rotation in the SCT would make astrophotography a pain. He'd need to invest in a wedge, and at that point the LX90 mount is getting to be a little light weight for the load it's carrying if you want to maintain stability.

Personally, I think that 8" Orion Newt is a good, solid scope that is significantly better than a mere "starter" scope. It's "fast" as far as Newtonians go, at f/4.9, so it should be easier to get something decent with (relatively) shorter exposures. It's focal length is 1000mm, so it would act like a 1000mm lens (or a 1600mm lens accounting for the crop factor of your 60D). You'll be able to get some planetary images, but these faster Newtonians are generally referred to as "Rich Field" or "Wide Field" scopes. They do not do well when you try to magnify 100x, 200x, 300x like you'll hear with people who use slower refractors, Newts and SCTs. This scope will excel at rich star fields and some of the larger nebula out there--the Orion complex, the Veil, Andromeda galaxy, etc. Smaller, more distant nebula, galaxies and clusters will be a lot more challenging, if not impossible. Remember, magnification dilutes the amount of light actually reaching your sensor (inverse square law) so you exposures would have to grow correspondingly longer...

...which brings us to the biggest issue: The mount. The Sirius is rated at 30 pounds, which is about what Meade's old LXD75s were rated. It will be excellent for visual observation. The steel OTA (good durability there) weighs 16-17 lbs., which is right about at the maximum you'll want for astrophotography, but that doesn't take into account the weight of your camera, guidescope, additional lenses (if you do piggyback) etc. You *can* do AP with this mount--it's a good mount--but you'll have to be patient and avoid conditions where there's more than just a little breeze. The Orion Atlas EQ-G is more robust, and there's a reason why many backyard astrophotographers go with that mount. The downside is that the Atlas is 54 lbs. whereas the Sirius is 32 or somesuch. That makes a BIG difference for hauling it around, setting it up, etc. The best scope for you is the scope you use. It'd be a shame to leave it inside all the time because it's too much a hassle to set up.

My recommendation to you is go ahead with your plan to get the 8" Newt on the Sirius. Learn the mount and the controls and all the goto whistles and bells. Practice your AP skills on easy targets where you can get away with stacking a bunch of short exposures for impressive effect. Stack video of Jupiter and Saturn to get some solid images there. At the point you feel really confident in your AP skills and know--not *think* but know--the mount is holding you back, then you can invest in an Atlas or a Losmandy or other higher-end mount. The 8" Newt will work well on those, but you'll want to keep the Sirius as a grab-and-go, maybe get a nice 80mm APO refractor to go along with it. But that's all speculation and dreaming. The setup you're looking at now will be a good start.

Your money is better spent on a mount right now. The 70-200 will get you a reasonable set of wide field multi-galaxy or multi nebula shots. The wide angle lens you have will be good for stars capes. Either way you need a good mount.

I chose an ioptron zeq25, and have been quite happy with it. I shoot a 60d with a 300f4L and a 2x teleconverter.

You aren't going to do much planetary imaging with a 60d, they're too small. You need a sensor with much more pixel density. Think Iphone camera, but made for astronomy and takes the place of an eyepiece.

Once you have some sort of setup, or even now, go to a star party to telescope meet. See what the locals are doing. Please understand though that many people have $3000 invested from 10 years ago into something that you could beat (imaging) for $700 plus what you have now. And know that everyone will try to talk you into doing whatever they did.

A lot of good advise here but not sure if OP is anymore here as I don't see any input from that side.
Well let me thanks "Jblaschke" and "mpbowyer" for their valuable insights in behalf of OP and surly this is a good thread for anyone who wants to step into shoe of OP.
To add a list what are options in general for any price range and size for anyone interested on "Astrophotography", let me add this:

- - - - L I N K - - - -

Enjoy when sky it the only limit.

Thanks for the link, Samsen. Lots of good scopes on there in a wide price range, and even the cheapest will give good results if paired with a solid mount. I've long been tempted by that Astro-Tech Ritchey Chretien, myself. Curious to see if that hyperbolic mirror lives up to its reputation...