Anyone here into Astrophotography?

[OIO]

Speak up geeks! Im enlisting in the ranks!

Im looking to buy a telescope under $600 that would let me see planets & deep sky objects.

Problem is, I know as much about telescopes as I know about cars. I turn the key, put gas and take it to its oil changes and thats all I know (to give you an idea).

I know there's 3 kinds of scopes, reflectors,refractors and those Casselgrain (sp?) ones.

Reviews online seem to be written for people who know WTF all those terms of optics and mathmumbojumbo mean, even the "newbie guides" are full of it. None of them puts things in laymans terms.. they shall burn in hell


Ive read many recomendations: get a 6" or better aperture (so far I think more aperture means they gather more light which means better image quality... or something like that), then I see that the Casselgrains are better for novices since they dont require much maintainance on their optics+ they dont have color-aberration or image screwing-up things that the other 2 scopes are prone to... and such.

but ive heard the reflectors end up having much better images. So right now im torn between a reflector and a casselgrain. Too bad the casselgrains seem to be only 5" or smaller.

In any case, here's what is a MUST for me:

1) GO-TO feature.
2) See planets in good detail (ive read that if a scope can see several rings in saturn its got good detail, those that see only the rings as a single-blur around the planet aint good).
3) $600 or less
4) Ability to mount a camera on it & have it track the "target"

Nice bonuses:

1) Would be neat if you could see the image on the scope in your PC.. dont know if thats possible.
2) Require little maintainance... my ignorance on this subject scares the heck out of having to take the thing apart to..oil it or something
3) Ability to get decent detail in deep-sky viewing. Im a nutcase for the hubble pics of galaxies and nebulas, but im well aware they are color enchanced pics, so I dont expect to see that stuff on the scope.

So far the scopes ive been looking at are:

SkyView Pro 8 EQ

Optical Specifications
Type Reflector
Diameter (Mirror or Lens) 203mm
Light Grasp 50.1 sq. in.
Focal Length/ F Ratio 1000mm, f/4.9
Magnification
(w/ included eyepieces) 40x, 100x
Highest theoretical magnification 480x
Accessories
Eyepieces Sirius Plössl 25.0mm, 10.0mm
Finder Scope 6x30
Focuser 2" Rack-and-pinion
Diagonal N/A
Other included items Collimation cap
Optional Electronic Drive TrueTrack single axis, dual ax
Other Features 2" Focuser  
Physical Parameters
Mount type SkyView Pro
Tripod Steel
Weight, assembled 62 lbs. 0 oz.
Tube Length 38.0 in.

Also looking at:

Meade 6" f/5 (SN-6EC) LXD55 w/Electronic Control

Includes 6" f/5 schmidt-newtonian optical tube assembly with EMC super multi-coatings; quick attach cradle ring assembly with locks; 6x30 achromatic viewfinder; all-metal rack-and-pinion focuser with eyepiece holders for both 1.25" and 2" eyepieces; Super Plossl 26mm eyepiece. LXD55 equatorial mount with worm gear drives and electric slow-motion controls; micrometric controls; illuminated polar alignment finder with reticle; variable height field tripod with accessory shelf. Autostar dual-axis control system with 9-speed drive controls, 30,223-object database and GO TO locating; battery pack accepting eight (user-supplied) D-cells (optional power cords available separately); instructions.

Meade 8" f/4 (SN-8EC) LXD55 w/Electronic Control

Includes 8" f/4 schmidt-newtonian optical tube assembly with EMC super multi-coatings; quick attach cradle ring assembly with locks; 6x30 achromatic viewfinder; all-metal rack-and-pinion focuser with eyepiece holders for both 1.25" and 2" eyepieces; Super Plossl 26mm eyepiece. LXD55 equatorial mount with worm gear drives and electric slow-motion controls; micrometric controls; illuminated polar alignment finder with reticle; variable height field tripod with accessory shelf. Autostar dual-axis control system with 9-speed drive controls, 30,223-object database and GO TO locating; battery pack accepting eight (user-supplied) D-cells (optional power cords available separately); instructions


Meade DS-2114ATS

Supplied complete with Autostar #494 Computer Controller for observing 1,500 objects automatically (accepts 8AA user-supplied batteries), aluminized and multi-coated primary mirror and matching elliptical flat secondary mirror (D=114mm, F=1000mm f/8.8); aluminum tube assembly; giant rack-and-pinion focuser with sleeve lock and 1.25" and 2" eyepiece holders; altazimuth mount with variable-tension locks on both axis; cradle ring assembly; #492 Dual-Motor Electronic Control System with control motor and cord for each telescope axis, battery pack accepting ten AA-size (user-supplied) batteries, control panel, and 4-speed Electronic Controller; Meade StarNavigator PC-compatible astronomical software with database of over 10,000 celestial objects, full-length adjustable heavy-duty aluminum field tripod with accessory shelf; 6x30 viewfinder,; two eyepieces (1.25") - MA25mm, MH9mm; operating instructions.

So Geeks, Any suggestions?

(all the above scopes i can find priced below or just above $600 in reputable stores)

[Udie]

  About 10 years ago a buddy of mine from work had a cool telescope.  Sucker was big, about 4' high or so with the thingy you look in down at the base. I have no idea if it was a reflecter or refractor or any of that mumbo jumbo.  But I do know that he said it had an 8" lense.  We were able to see Jupiter and 3 of it's moons with it.  BUT  Jupiter looked smaller than a marble and the moons where just points of light.  It looked black and white too and I couldn't really make out any of the cloud shapes on the planet.  And it moved off screen freakin fast, so if you get one make sure to get a motor on it.

 The moon looked really cool with this though.


[edit]

 Oh yeah I think they do have things so you can hook them up to your PC.  That would be sweet.  Set the thing up outside w/ the motor and object finder and go in to the PC and look

[OIO]

ach please edit the post and cut all that empty space!

Oh wait.. I get it.

(do edit it pls, my mouse dont have scroll thingy.. and i hate you btw hehe)

[CptTrips]

Hi.   I just received my new toy a couple of weeks ago.

My baby

Of course I've had new scope owners curse.  Cloudy weather for weeks after my scope arrived.  I did get a breif respite from the clouds the other weekend and took the beast out to a great dark sky site.  WOW.  It was great.  I had a little trouble initially with the GPS system but that was expected.  The purpose of that trip was to break it in and work out the kinks.  Once I actually read a little of the manual (always a last resort for me) it didn't taken to  long to get it working.  Now there will be some idiots that will try and tell you that using "goto" isn't "real" astronomy.  Thats roadkill.   I've had a lot of scopes over the years and I've done my share of star hopping.  If you're in to that fine.  But don't try and tell anyone else their not a real "man" if they don't spend 30 min trying to find some dim object with charts.  

With "goto" you spend your time observing, not searching.  I gauruntee you that they don't star hop with the hubble,  they dial in the coordinates and go straight there. Duh!

There was another guy at the dark sky site when I was there with a large manual Dob.  In the time it took him to 3 objects I had zipped through 20-30 Messier objects.  I could point to any object in the universe I wanted within seconds, effortlessly.  I some times enjoy star hopping.  I can always do that by manually slewing if I choose.  But it sure is nice just to go straight to what you're interested in if you want.


I gotta goto meet someone for lunch but I'll answer some more of your questions when I get back.

Wab

[SOB]

Hmmm, while we're on the subject...is a Meade LX/50 any good?


SOB

[OIO]

Hope you come back soon

While ye at it, here's some Q's ive wanted answered for a long time:

1) The focal ratio F/4 F/5 on the scopes..the lower the better for astrophotography right?

2) Whats the relation between the aperture, focal length and magnification (10X, 50X, etc) in the performance of the scope?

The casselgrains look really great, but I began looking into reflectors because almost every review said they got better images than the casselgrains.. yet most of said reviews did mention the casselgrains performed "equiivalent" to the reflectors in most areas. So ye see im very confused between the two. The reflectors are said to have issues with false colors or something like that.. well, I really dont care about that, im already color blind so getting the "right" colors is not really a factor for me

[CptTrips]

OK. Back.

Typing up some answers but here are some pics of my baby.

Some with the new video mounting I just got, and also some of my previous home made scope.  And I mean HOME MADE!  Ground and figured the mirror myself.  But that was when I was younger and crazier.  Now I just buy the damn thangs.

http://66.169.128.146/telescope/smaller/

Wab

[JimBear]

Very Very nice Wabbit!!

[OIO]

I think i hooked the biggest geek in the barrel! whoohoo!

Teach me meister!

[CptTrips]

OK.  Hmmm where to begin....

My first suggestion would be to see if there is an Astronomy club in your area.  I would join it.  This gives you a lot of people to talk to before making a buying decision.  You can join even if you don't have a scope yet.  Most clubs have some "loaner" scope s you can use and try out.  Generally, other members will be glad to talk with you and let you look through their scopes.  This lets you get lots of first hand experience with a broad range of brands and designs.  A good telescope is a fairly signifigant investment and I'd suggest you take some time first to make sure you make the best choice for what you're interested in.  There are a heck of a lot of different choices out there.

At the highest level, there are only really 2 main designs for optical telescopes.  Refracter and Reflector.  It depends on what they use for their primary optical element, a mirror or a lens.  Even though Schmidt-Cassegrains have a corrector lens up front their primary optical element is still a mirror in the rear cell.  Some people argue Schmidt-Cassegrains is a third hybrid because of the front corrector lens but I think their wrong.  The primary "light collecting" element is the primary mirror so its really a reflector.

I generally don't like to give direct advice but I'll go out on a limb.  HOWEVER YOU SHOULD REALIZE EVERY THING I SAY IN ONLY MY SILLY OPINION.

The main factor you need to clarify to know what kind of scope you should go with depends on the type of astronomy you're interested in.  You seem to be more oriented towards solar/lunar/planetary type observing.  As opposed to hunting  "dim fuzzies" like nebula's and galaxies.  The price range you mentioned with the features you desire is a difficult equation to balance.   Refractors are generally the best for planetary work.  They provide the crispest image quality and are sealed systems that require little maintenence.  However, they are usually signifigantly more expensive per inch of apeture.  (PLEASE AVOID THE CHEESY DEPT STORE REFRACTORS!!!!)
 
Newtonian reflectors are your best bang for the buck, but they require periodic maintainence like aligning the optical elements.  Not terriblely difficult, but not trivial.  You have to keep the mirrors clean which is not easy with an open tube system.  Occationally you have to take the mirror out of the tube, clean it and put the whole thing back together again.  You get the most apeture for the buck, but they are higher maintainence.

"Goto" is sure nice but is going to require other sacrifices given your price range.  Mainly you'll be sacrificing apeture.

I think you need to seriously think about your photography requirement.  Most of the scopes you're talking about aren't all that useful for astrophotography.  Although people are starting to get into astrophotography using modified webcams that might interest you in.  (I'll post link later.)

If your main interest is solar/lunar/planetary you might can do without tracking and goto.  The moon, sun, and planets are very easy to spot and not hard to follow manually.   If you do your planetary photography with a webcam you don't tracking.  There are comprimises you can make to gain additional benefit.

to be continued...

[OIO]

Hmm.. well a 6" LDX55 from meade with the ultra-high-transmission-coating runs for $780.

the 8" LDX55 without UHTC runs for $839

the UHTC is said to increase the light gathering by 15%.. so I dunno which is better in the end, the 6" with the UHTC or the 8" without it. Somehow my logic says the 8".

both reflectors with the go-to.

The 8" one without the go-to is $699. So I dunno maybe I could get this one and later on get the go-to system. Decisions decisions....

http://www.optcorp.com/cart/ProductList.asp?SearchBy=PK_KWID&SearchFor=76&SearchRestrict=PR_CATID&SearchRestrictID=1

is where im looking them up.

[CptTrips]

Unfortunately, like most things in life, it’s hard to have everything all at once.

Generally, scopes that are optimized for planetary work and less good for galaxies and nebulas and vica versa.  You really can’t optimize for both.  You can make various compromises but you have to give something up.

For solar/lunar/ and planetary work I think your most import variables are: closed tube, minimize central obstruction, long focal ratio, aperture.  Roughly in that order of importance.

For deep sky work: aperture, aperture, and aperture, oh and maybe short focal ratio.  

For photography or visual the general rule is:

   Solar/lunar/planetary – longer focal ratio is better.  The objects are already pretty bright and the longer focal ratio gives you better image scale.  Eyepieces have an easier time handling long focal ratios.

   Deep sky – shorter focal ratio is better.   Concentrate light on dim objects, shorten exposure time.  Objects are usually pretty extended so the wide field of view of shorter focal ratios help out.  However short focal ratios can start introducing artifacts and distortions around the edges of the field like “coma” and field curvature.


As far as the aperture/focal ratio/magnification go:
Magnitude = Main optical focal length/ eyepiece focal length

So a single eyepiece can give two different magnifications on two scopes with different focal lengths.  

I have a 26mm eyepiece.  My SMT has a focal length of 3048mm so that eyepiece gives me a mag of ~117x.  But on my other scope, of focal length only 1400mm, that same eyepiece gives a mag of ~53x.  

The only effect aperture has is to limit the reasonable amount of mag you can use.  The general rule is ~50x/per inch of aperture with a max limit of 500x for most observing conditions.

So with my 12” SMT I can safely go up to the 500x limit if the weather permits.
But a 3” refractor won’t benefit from anything over 150x no matter how good the “seeing” is.

To be continued…

[CptTrips]

Hmm.. well a 6" LDX55 from meade with the ultra-high-transmission-coating runs for $780.

Heh, well now is $600 a hard limit or a soft limit?  It can make a big diff in what I would suggest.


I know how you feel.  You saw my monster 12"?  Heh, I was originally only looking for an 8".  


Questions:


1.  IF you had to make trade offs give me a percentage of your interest in solar/lunar/planetary vs deep sky nebulas and galaxies.  (i.e. 60%/40%  50%/50% , 90%/10%)

2.  Do you have a laptop?

3.  How intimidated would you be about doing optical alignments periodically and maybe once a year pulling the mirrors out for cleaning and reassembly?  Would you be willing to give up some aperture for very low maintainence?  Or is pure aperture more important and you're willing to open a book and roll up your sleeves?

4.  Is $600 a hard limit?  If you got a range, give me the range.  



Wab

[OIO]

1) planets 70% anything else 30%. For galaxy pics i go to the hubble website.. its my personal gazillion" scope you know

2) no I dont. However I do live in the outskirts of the city and usually get very nice, dark nights..so traveling to viewing spots to get a better sky aint a problem for me. I was planning to wire my PC (close to window) to the scope outside.

3) Heck if its once a year or twice a year that aint a problem. If its once every month though, I got a problem with that.

4) well, $600 is the ballpark, but as im sure you can relate, if a 6" is 780 and the 8" is just ~$60 more.. and so far ive read that increasing aperture exponentially increases perfomance...well, you know how it goes. No movies or happy meals for 3 months to squeeze it in hehe.

So no its not a hard limit but I definetely dont want it over $800 (ok ok $839 geez ).

I started looking at a scope that was $399 with the go-to feature, the DS2114ATS from meade (on list in first post). Then I read a lot more into it and saw people suggesting 6" or more for best viewing experience/longevity of the item and of course, photography.

Remember im just starting at this, if you look over the $399 one and think it can handle a camera and give me a nice image of stuff, that will probably be the one I take. However if you think the 6" one is so much better than the $399 one I got no problem going a couple hundred to get it. I can develop a distaste for personal spending for a few months for that scope .

BTW, if you have YAHOO INSTANT MESSANGER, drop me a line.

daniel_londono_84160 <---YahooIM ID

[CptTrips]

Well, here is my opinion, and please remember, its only that.


Given everything you've told me... I think (if I were you) I'd look very carefully at getting the Meade AR-5 with Autostar ~$695.

This is a 5" refractor.  It has a nice long focal length.  Decent aperture.  Its a sealed system and will require almost no maintainence.  There is no alignments to do or mirrors to take out and clean.  Supposedly this model is fairly well corrected for chromatic abberation.  You won't be able to beat it for solar/lunar/planetary stuff.  For what you're interested in, the 5" refractor will beat the 6" Schmidt-Newtonian like a stick.  Its an equatorial mount with autostar so it it will "goto" and track.  The 5" aperture is not grand, but its fine for the planets and can still see some of the brighter deep sky stuff.  For the other stuff there is always Hubble.  Also the refractor has no central obstruction like the Schmidt-Newtonian so you'll have a much cleaner, higher contract image.  The most important thing for planetary stuff.

So for what you're interested in, given your price limit, that would be my best recomendation.


I have been very happy with my meade.  I didn't go thru OPT but I've heard good things about them.


Hope it helps.

Wab