I hope this is an appropriate place to put this thread. I didn't see a "general astrophotography" section. 

I have used telescopes periodically since I was about 10 years old(that was 31 years ago). I have never been extremely impressed with what I saw. That is mostly because a) I was always using small cheap scopes b)I was always comparing what I saw in the viewfinder to pictures in books and magazines.

Until this evening I hadn't pulled out my latest telescope (Celestron Nexstar 130GT) in nearly two years, but over the weekend I put my Canon 20D camera with a 70-200mm 2.8 zoom lens on a tripod and photographed the Pleiades and the M43 in Orion. This is somethng I had never done before, but I was more pleased with the results of my shots from a 200mm lens on M43 than I have been with any visual observations I have ever made through a scope. This evening I pulled the 130GT out of its box and put it together and I tried viewing it with a 26mm, 16mm,10mm and 10mm + 2X Barlow and though I could make out the nebula, I didn't get as much out of the experience as I did with the digital image. I have ordered a T adapter for connecting my camera to the 130GT so I will give that a try later this week when it arrives, but I am pretty certain that I will not be impressed with the results. The 130GT just does not track very well at all. It barely works to keep an object in the visual range for long, much less centered in the same place.

I am now interested in getting back into astronomy, but from an imaging perspective rather than live viewing. I am particularly interested in galaxies and nebulae. I am not all that interested in the planets and the moon. I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions on equipment as far as a scope and mount. I do have the 130GT, but unless I put it on a different mount I doubt it will be of any use at all. Are there any mounts that can do decent astrophotography work without requiring a mortgage? I have been looking around the web a lot, but sometimes the information is a bit contradictory and a lot of times it appears that the information seems biased.

If anyone is imaging galaxies and nebulae I would be very interested in hearing about your equipment setup.

Thank you for your time,

Darrell

That would depend on how much you are willing to spend. The mount is the foundation to good astrophotography. You want a mount with enough instrument load capacity(stability) to handle about twice the amount of equipment you intend on mounting on it.  

There are going to be a few other considerations too besides the load capacity and precission of the mount. Does it have PEC(periodic Errror Correction) or not?  What and how are you going to guide the telescope through the exposure time if needed?  What kind of telescope are you placing on it. The larger the telescope and the longer the focal length the more critical things get.  

Minumum mount Would be a Celestron CG5 with a smaller telescope. Or I would go for a Celestron CGE mount, Losmandy G-11 or Titan, Paramount ME or something similar with the precission and capacity for all the equipment and astrophotography.  But you are talking some big bucks for those mounts.  

As for the telescope.  A nice SCT and required accessories to use depending on what objects you are photographing.  Something like a Celestron C9.25 or larger. However, it all depends on your available funds that you're willing to put into it.

Is your telescope the 130 MAK GT that is on the CG5 Mount or is it the Nexstar 130 on a single arm alt az goto mount?

If it is on the CG5 mount and you take the time to properly balance level and polar align the mount, And have some way of guiding such as a guide scope or autoguider you can get some very nice images as long as you do not over load the mount.  Generaly you don't want to exceed 50% to 60% of the maximum instrument load capacity. For the CG5 that is 35 lbs, fine for visual use but not really much for astrophotography.  

Just My

Have A Nice __________ 

Hello Tim,

Thanks for the reply. I will have to look into the CG-5 mount. At this point a $3,000+ mount is just not realistic at this point, though I certainly would not mind having one.

The 130GT I have is the NexStar on the single arm alt-az. Mostly just a pain. I usually don't do any aligning with it when I use it. I just use the finder scope to point in the direction I want to look and then use the hand controller to position the scope and manually keep the object in the viewer. There is no way I could see doing any astrophotography with it except maybe of the moon since the exposures are very short.

If you do decide on the CG5 mount I wouldn't suggest putting as much weight on it as I have on mine..

And even though the mount is pretty accurate at tracking when you take the time to balance, level and polar align properly, you will still need to guide. 

For a telescope with the CG5 mount, maybe the Celestron C6 S-GT

http://celestron.telescopes.com/products/celestron-c6-s-gt-schmidt-cassegrain 

Then a small refractor as a guide scope,  Or dare I say maybe even an OAG (Off Axis Guider).  Then if you have a laptop, a web cam can be used along with something like Guidedog for autoguided images.  Or you could just guide them like I do with Micro Guide Eyepiece and the hand control in one hand. 

Have A Nice __________ 

tkerr wrote:

If you do decide on the CG5 mount I wouldn't suggest putting as much weight on it as I have on mine.. And even though the mount is pretty accurate at tracking when you take the time to balance, level and polar align properly, you will still need to guide.  For a telescope with the CG5 mount, maybe the Celestron C6 S-GT http://celestron.telescopes.com/products/celestron-c6-s-gt-schmidt-cassegrain-wxlt-coatings-38338.html Then a small refractor as a guide scope,  Or dare I say maybe even an OAG (Off Axis Guider).  Then if you have a laptop, a web cam can be used along with something like Guidedog for autoguided images.  Or you could just guide them like I do with Micro Guide Eyepiece and the hand control in one hand.    Have A Nice __________

I'm considering buying the Celestron C8-SGT (XLT) with astrophotography in mind for the near future. Here is the link:

http://www.celestron.com/c2/product.php?CatID=11&ProdID=60

Do you think that the 8" scope will be too bulky for that type of mount? Although I'm interested in lunar and planetary photography, I don't want to be limited to them. DSO photography is what I would really like to do. As an aside, would you happen to know if the Meade Deep Sky Pro CCD fine to use with Celestron? From what I've read, it seems like it would be, but then again advertisers will say whatever.... Thank you.  

KBO wrote:

I'm considering buying the Celestron C8-SGT (XLT) with astrophotography in mind for the near future. Here is the link: http://www.celestron.com/c2/product.php?CatID=11&ProdID=60 Do you think that the 8" scope will be too bulky for that type of mount? Although I'm interested in lunar and planetary photography, I don't want to be limited to them. DSO photography is what I would really like to do. As an aside, would you happen to know if the Meade Deep Sky Pro CCD fine to use with Celestron? From what I've read, it seems like it would be, but then again advertisers will say whatever.... Thank you.

The CG5 or similar is about the minimum mount you would want for most DSO photography with anything other than smaller telescopes.. For Lunar and planetary photography with the 8" SCT on the CG5 mount, you should be just fine. For that purpose that would be a nice setup to have.   However for long exposure DSO photography you will want some way of guiding. And that is were we start running into problems. The CG5 only has a 35 lb instrument load capacity.  I can tell you from my own experiences that I have to work at it with my current setup and the way I take pictures.   Althogh I would prefer the CGE and a digital SLR camera, nevertheless, with a little patience and work I can still get some nice pictures as is.  I believe I have proven the CG5 is a capable mount.  Just don't over exceed the limits. 

The Meade DSI ccd camera will work with any telescope. They are not specific to Meade Telescope. To their software though,  but not any particular telescope.    Just as any other CCD camera, they fit into or thread onto the focuser.  However, when you start getting into serious CCD imaging you want to match the CCD camera to the telescope or vise versa the best you can. 

When it comes to that People like Jay Ballauer or Chipdatajeffb can explain that better than I.  

Have A Nice _________ 

tkerr wrote:

KBO wrote:   The CG5 or similar is about the minimum mount you would want for most DSO photography with anything other than smaller telescopes.. For Lunar and planetary photography with the 8" SCT on the CG5 mount, you should be just fine. For that purpose that would be a nice setup to have.   However for long exposure DSO photography you will want some way of guiding. And that is were we start running into problems. The CG5 only has a 35 lb instrument load capacity.  I can tell you from my own experiences that I have to work at it with my current setup and the way I take pictures.   Althogh I would prefer the CGE and a digital SLR camera, nevertheless, with a little patience and work I can still get some nice pictures as is.  I believe I have proven the CG5 is a capable mount.  Just don't over exceed the limits.    The Meade DSI ccd camera will work with any telescope. They are not specific to Meade Telescope. To their software though,  but not any particular telescope.    Just as any other CCD camera, they fit into or thread onto the focuser.  However, when you start getting into serious CCD imaging you want to match the CCD camera to the telescope or vise versa the best you can.  When it comes to that People like Jay Ballauer or Chipdatajeffb can explain that better than I.     Have A Nice _________

Thank you for the insight. Things can get complicated rather quickly. I have been flip flopping between scopes for a few months now. I was also looking at the Meade 8" LX90 GPS. It's a more expensive setup, and with a wedge, even more so. It opens up the Fork vs GEM mount debate all over again. What is your take on the fork mount assuming the optional wedge is included? My limited understanding is that the GEM mount is sturdier. The LX90 has PEC, I'm not too sure if the Celestron CG5 mount has something similar. I assume that the GPS capability would make for accurate tracking, although autoguiding will be required for longer exposures?? What constitutes longer exposures? > 30 sec??

KBO wrote:

Thank you for the insight. Things can get complicated rather quickly. I have been flip flopping between scopes for a few months now. I was also looking at the Meade 8" LX90 GPS. It's a more expensive setup, and with a wedge, even more so. It opens up the Fork vs GEM mount debate all over again. What is your take on the fork mount assuming the optional wedge is included? My limited understanding is that the GEM mount is sturdier. The LX90 has PEC, I'm not too sure if the Celestron CG5 mount has something similar. I assume that the GPS capability would make for accurate tracking, although autoguiding will be required for longer exposures?? What constitutes longer exposures? > 30 sec??

The Fork Vs Gem has been a good debate. With the current technology of many cameras, Both CCD and DSLR, and the methods such as taking more shorter exposrures, then stacking the individual images/frames can overcome most any of the issues that may be caused by any mount among other things.  

One particular reason that I know of why a GEM is considered a better choice by many,  is because they are designed to track smoother in the exact same arcing motion as the night sky using clock drives to counteract the motion of the Earth.   A fork mount is nothing more than a Alt Az mount using stepper motors that move the mount in very small increments.  One step over one step up and so on or vise versa..  However, like I said newer methods and newer technology overcomes this kind of thing.  Personally I would still prefer a good EQ mount.  Especially when you start getting into large telescopes. Balance and stability seem as though that could be another issue, and getting them up onto tripod and wedge could prove to be challanging if by yourself.  But then the same could probably be said of any large telescope on any mount when lifting a large telescope.

Fork and Wedge or GEM, I think it is more of a personal issue than anything else these days.  

I just bought a Nexstar 130SLT and also have a Canon 20D.  How did you attach the camera to your telescope?  Do you have any kind of adapter you recommend?

-Bob

Yes! you require an adapter to attach the camera to a telescope.  Depends on what type of astrophotography you're planning.  Typically most people prefer prime focus photography, and for that you will require at the least a T-Ring, and depending on the telescope you may also require a T-Adapter along with it.

review the following link to learn a bit more.
http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/t/19319.aspx

Have A Nice _________

dman65:

I put my Canon 20D camera with a 70-200mm 2.8 zoom lens on a tripod and photographed the Pleiades and the M43 in Orion.

This is a good approach for "getting your feet wet" with astrophotography. Before you run out and spend a bunch of money on a completely different setup, take a look at the websites of various people that have been actively pursueing astrophotography through, at least, an intermediate level. Everyone begins with a less expensive setup then either stagnates, or moves to mid range, or better equipment. A few good sites to look at results and the low to mid range equipment used to achieve the results are:

www.astroshed.com

www.heavenlyview.com/astronomy.htm

www.rwstanley.com

www.starrywonders.com

www.baskies.com.ar

If you find that the cost of a preferred setup exceeds your present budget, the camera lens approach, with a short, low cost guide scope, a little guide cam, on a low cost mount like the Celestron ASGT, on the CG5 tripod can provide what is required to make some nice widefield shots.

Robert

www.galacticphotography.com

I didnt read through the other posts, but I have a Meade LXD75 and it works fine for imaging. You can pick up one on astromart.com used for a few bucks. Might be a consideration. Also the CG5 isnt bad either. the only thing I really like is the goto function. Makes life a ton easier.

Steve

Thank you for the insight. Things can get complicated rather quickly. I have been flip flopping between scopes for a few months now. I was also looking at the Meade 8" LX90 GPS. It's a more expensive setup, and with a wedge, even more so. It opens up the Fork vs GEM mount debate all over again. What is your take on the fork mount assuming the optional wedge is included? My limited understanding is that the GEM mount is sturdier. The LX90 has PEC, I'm not too sure if the Celestron CG5 mount has something similar. I assume that the GPS capability would make for accurate tracking, although autoguiding will be required for longer exposures?? What constitutes longer exposures? > 30 sec?? 

There's really no debate...go for the GEM mount...

1.)  The GEM gives you versatility to use various scopes should you want.   With a fork (especially an LX90), you've got one option.

2.)  The standard wedges are trash.  You'd want a superwedge...or something that sturdy...and if you do that, you'll need to upgrade the tripod.

3.)  Using a wedge with an SCT is extremely sensitive to wind...and piggybacking stuff on top makes it worse.   What happens is that the system begins to oscillate, and it's hard to stop.

Piggybacking wider lenses works fine, but scopes, not so much.  Not that you can't do it with the LX200...you can, but even then it's a fight...and the LX90 isn't even as sturdy as that.

4.)  While a CG-5 is a GEM, it's not necessarily the best choice.  I'd start with the Orion Atlas-G at a minimum.  However, even the CG-5 can be a better platform if it's loaded right.

5.)  PEC is important.  I believe the newer CG-5 types do have this, though I'm not sure how effective it is with these mounts.  The LX90s and LX200s can respond well to PEC training, so it might have an advantage there.  Regardless, I'd recommend PEMpro (www.ccdware.com) to get best use of PEC.

6.)  GPS is a gimmick.  Don't need it.  It's nice to have if you move the scope around a lot to multiple locations, but that's kinda rare.  And it's not like it's difficult to manually put in the coordinates yourself.  BTW, GPS does nothing for tracking.   Tracking is all about good polar alignment and having a refined mount.   This is also the purpose of a good PEC curve, should the mount be decent enough to take advantage of it.

7.)  If you are curious about what you can do with CG-5 mounts, I've always enjoyed www.andysshotglass.com.  You need to check it out.