I like galaxies, but.... - Forums

Topic starter

17 days ago

I'm a noob but it seems in my bortle6 with very average backyard seeing, maybe 2", and I think galaxies and clusters, eg m51, m106, maybe down to Stephans quintet are reasonably achievable astrophotography targets for me one day. Depending on your definition of reasonable of course.

Most cameras are 3.76 microns and my weather sucks, so gathering more photons in less time is important.

This means about 1000mm to avoid over sampling? So a 12 inch f3.3 would be ideal.
What would be a more realistic scope without too much compromise on aperture, weight, and focal length?
My mount is probably ok for a 8 inch mirror, maybe a 9.25 with a counterweight. Guides around 0.7
Currently using a C6 at f10

Craig Towell

17 days ago

I was in this kind of position a while ago and went for a 200PDS, along with BYU CNC spider and primary mask. Total under £700 though would be even less with the CYCK stuff, haven’t regretted the choice one bit, an 8” F/5 newt is a very versatile scope.

TiffsAndAstro

Topic starter

17 days ago · Edited: 17 days ago

I was in this kind of position a while ago and went for a 200PDS, along with BYU CNC spider and primary mask. Total under £700 though would be even less with the CYCK stuff, haven’t regretted the choice one bit, an 8” F/5 newt is a very versatile scope.

I think a 10" newt would be too heavy, and would still need too many upgrades I'm unlikely to be good at doing

The package with the f3.45 coma quatro corrector is especially attractive though.

Also Im not keen on image train hanging on by compression rings or screws

Médéric Hébert

17 days ago

TiffsAndAstro · Nov 8, 2025, 12:45 PM
I think a 10" newt would be too heavy, and would still need too many upgrades I'm unlikely to be good at doing

Not sure what mount you have or looking to get. But I’m getting good results with a 10” newt on an EQ6-R Pro.

That said, gotta be carefull of the wind. I know I’m pushing my mount past it’s designed limits

Craig Towell

17 days ago

TiffsAndAstro · Nov 8, 2025 at 12:45 PM
Im not keen on image train hanging on by compression rings or screws

Me neither, mine is fully screwed together, no thumbscrews anywhere

andrea tasselli

Frequent contributor

17 days ago

Only thumbscrews here and none the worse for it, for 25 years I'd reckon.

Kristof Vandebeek

17 days ago

Médéric Hébert:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 8, 2025, 12:45 PM

I think a 10" newt would be too heavy, and would still need too many upgrades I'm unlikely to be good at doing

Not sure what mount you have or looking to get. But I’m getting good results with a 10” newt on an EQ6-R Pro.

That said, gotta be carefull of the wind. I know I’m pushing my mount past it’s designed limits

I have a 10" newton on an AZ-EQ6. I wouldn't call it "heavy" but the 10" newton is at the edge of being "easily moveable". My AZEQ6 that it rests on is on the lowest position and this makes it fairly easy to lift the 10" tube on it on the Losmandy style clamp that sits on top.

I agree: you have to be careful of the wind, but other than that the mount can comfortably handle the weight of the OTA + the imaging train. It's usually wrong to assume, but I guess the EQ6R and the AZEQ6 are in the same class of mounts. I don't use it in AZ mode though, back in time I had a great opportunity to purchase the AZEQ6 (while I was looking for an EQ6) and that's the sole reason of purchase.

Helpful

Tony Gondola

Frequent contributor

17 days ago

andrea tasselli · Nov 8, 2025, 03:03 PM
Only thumbscrews here and none the worse for it, for 25 years I'd reckon.

I 2nd this, just thumbscrews and compression fittings and never had an issue. I do have the backend of the imaging train on a tether in case I do something really dumb but I’ve never needed it. One plus is that I can easily change rotation without needing a rotator. It’s not the end of the world if you have to work this way.

Craig Towell

17 days ago

When it comes to thumbscrews what kind do you have? Single, double or triple screws? I do have a moonlite focuser on my 12” newt that has a three thumbscrew compression ring on the drawtube, that is extremely secure as the screws are large and you can really torque them up. I would definitely trust that if it was on my 8”, but definitely not the skywatcher version it did have, that didn’t feel like it could hold much at all without tilt.

Helpful Engaging

Tony Gondola

Frequent contributor

17 days ago

Three and two screws although I have used configs where there was just one with a compression ring.

Stargazer66207

17 days ago

Before I could render an opinion, I’d need to know what type of camera you are planning to use…OSC or MONO. Also, chip size and pixel size.

Ron Abbott

TiffsAndAstro

Topic starter

17 days ago · Edited: 17 days ago

Before I could render an opinion, I’d need to know what type of camera you are planning to use…OSC or MONO. Also, chip size and pixel size.

Ron Abbott

533 likely but maybe 571. a 585 mono combo is appealing smaller pixels but binnable.
This is just for galaxies m51, m106, NGC 891 ish size. Occasional excursions to groups.

Ty everyone for suggestions.

I'm not keen on newts, as while I like the results of sorted ones, I fear mine would never be

200mm at f4 seems a reasonably happy compromise for either sensor size, but seems restricted to newts?

TiffsAndAstro

Topic starter

17 days ago

Médéric Hébert:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 8, 2025, 12:45 PM

I think a 10" newt would be too heavy, and would still need too many upgrades I'm unlikely to be good at doing

Not sure what mount you have or looking to get. But I’m getting good results with a 10” newt on an EQ6-R Pro.

That said, gotta be carefull of the wind. I know I’m pushing my mount past it’s designed limits

Ioptron Hem15. I think more than 8 inches would be pushing my luck

Carrying it in and out so easily to dodge rain makes it a photon bucket ;)

andrea tasselli

Frequent contributor

17 days ago

TiffsAndAstro:
Ioptron Hem15. I think more than 8 inches would be pushing my luck

You would already doing it.

TiffsAndAstro

Topic starter

16 days ago

andrea tasselli:
TiffsAndAstro:
Ioptron Hem15. I think more than 8 inches would be pushing my luck

You would already doing it.

My C6 and accessories is too much for it already?

andrea tasselli

Frequent contributor

16 days ago

TiffsAndAstro:
My C6 and accessories is too much for it already?

...If you were to mount an 8" Newt on it.

Craig Towell

14 days ago

I think with your aversion to newts and the mount you have, you already have your ideal galaxy scope in the C6.

TiffsAndAstro

Topic starter

14 days ago

I think with your aversion to newts and the mount you have, you already have your ideal galaxy scope in the C6.

You could be right. I Just need to get the most from it.

Doug Crowe

14 days ago

TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 08:14 AM
I think with your aversion to newts and the mount you have, you already have your ideal galaxy scope in the C6.

You could be right. I Just need to get the most from it.

That is what I use. A C6 with asi533mc on an Eq6r. I use a celestron .63 reducer. The C6’s are aprox. f/11 instead of f/10, it gives me a focal length of 1058. I enjoy imaging with it. Only drawback to me is if I want to image a larger target, I have to do a mosaic. But it is not that big of a deal. It also has a great fov for lunar.

Helpful Concise

TiffsAndAstro

Topic starter

14 days ago

Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 08:14 AM
I think with your aversion to newts and the mount you have, you already have your ideal galaxy scope in the C6.

You could be right. I Just need to get the most from it.

That is what I use. A C6 with asi533mc on an Eq6r. I use a celestron .63 reducer. The C6’s are aprox. f/11 instead of f/10, it gives me a focal length of 1058. I enjoy imaging with it. Only drawback to me is if I want to image a larger target, I have to do a mosaic. But it is not that big of a deal. It also has a great fov for lunar.

Ty for this, about to look at your images.

At "F10" I seem to have about 1660mm so deffo f11

1000mm ISH with 533 gets me 0.81 arc seconds pixel scale.

Doug Crowe

14 days ago

TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 05:39 PM
Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 08:14 AM
I think with your aversion to newts and the mount you have, you already have your ideal galaxy scope in the C6.

You could be right. I Just need to get the most from it.

That is what I use. A C6 with asi533mc on an Eq6r. I use a celestron .63 reducer. The C6’s are aprox. f/11 instead of f/10, it gives me a focal length of 1058. I enjoy imaging with it. Only drawback to me is if I want to image a larger target, I have to do a mosaic. But it is not that big of a deal. It also has a great fov for lunar.

Ty for this, about to look at your images.

At "F10" I seem to have about 1660mm so deffo f11

1000mm ISH with 533 gets me 0.81 arc seconds pixel scale.

I am getting 0.73 arc seconds pixel scale with mine.

TiffsAndAstro

Topic starter

14 days ago

Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 05:39 PM
Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 08:14 AM
I think with your aversion to newts and the mount you have, you already have your ideal galaxy scope in the C6.

You could be right. I Just need to get the most from it.

That is what I use. A C6 with asi533mc on an Eq6r. I use a celestron .63 reducer. The C6’s are aprox. f/11 instead of f/10, it gives me a focal length of 1058. I enjoy imaging with it. Only drawback to me is if I want to image a larger target, I have to do a mosaic. But it is not that big of a deal. It also has a great fov for lunar.

Ty for this, about to look at your images.

At "F10" I seem to have about 1660mm so deffo f11

1000mm ISH with 533 gets me 0.81 arc seconds pixel scale.

I am getting 0.73 arc seconds pixel scale with mine.

Checking tekescopius my image scale is 0.78 but maybe that will match your 0.81 when I get the reduce close enough.
So are you binning in hardware, software or neither? I'm dubious about binning a osc like ours.

I'm in nw England, I doubt my seeing ever drops as low as 1.5 arc seconds though.

Doug Crowe

14 days ago

TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 06:54 PM
Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 05:39 PM
Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 08:14 AM
I think with your aversion to newts and the mount you have, you already have your ideal galaxy scope in the C6.

You could be right. I Just need to get the most from it.

That is what I use. A C6 with asi533mc on an Eq6r. I use a celestron .63 reducer. The C6’s are aprox. f/11 instead of f/10, it gives me a focal length of 1058. I enjoy imaging with it. Only drawback to me is if I want to image a larger target, I have to do a mosaic. But it is not that big of a deal. It also has a great fov for lunar.

Ty for this, about to look at your images.

At "F10" I seem to have about 1660mm so deffo f11

1000mm ISH with 533 gets me 0.81 arc seconds pixel scale.

I am getting 0.73 arc seconds pixel scale with mine.

Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 05:39 PM
Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 08:14 AM
I think with your aversion to newts and the mount you have, you already have your ideal galaxy scope in the C6.

You could be right. I Just need to get the most from it.

That is what I use. A C6 with asi533mc on an Eq6r. I use a celestron .63 reducer. The C6’s are aprox. f/11 instead of f/10, it gives me a focal length of 1058. I enjoy imaging with it. Only drawback to me is if I want to image a larger target, I have to do a mosaic. But it is not that big of a deal. It also has a great fov for lunar.

Ty for this, about to look at your images.

At "F10" I seem to have about 1660mm so deffo f11

1000mm ISH with 533 gets me 0.81 arc seconds pixel scale.

I am getting 0.73 arc seconds pixel scale with mine.

Checking tekescopius my image scale is 0.78 but maybe that will match your 0.81 when I get the reduce close enough.
So are you binning in hardware, software or neither? I'm dubious about binning a osc like ours.

I'm in nw England, I doubt my seeing ever drops as low as 1.5 arc seconds though.

I have never used anything other than bin 1. I have thought about trying binning just out of curiosity.

TiffsAndAstro

Topic starter

14 days ago

Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 06:54 PM
Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 05:39 PM
Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 08:14 AM
I think with your aversion to newts and the mount you have, you already have your ideal galaxy scope in the C6.

You could be right. I Just need to get the most from it.

That is what I use. A C6 with asi533mc on an Eq6r. I use a celestron .63 reducer. The C6’s are aprox. f/11 instead of f/10, it gives me a focal length of 1058. I enjoy imaging with it. Only drawback to me is if I want to image a larger target, I have to do a mosaic. But it is not that big of a deal. It also has a great fov for lunar.

Ty for this, about to look at your images.

At "F10" I seem to have about 1660mm so deffo f11

1000mm ISH with 533 gets me 0.81 arc seconds pixel scale.

I am getting 0.73 arc seconds pixel scale with mine.

Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 05:39 PM
Doug Crowe:
TiffsAndAstro · Nov 11, 2025, 08:14 AM
I think with your aversion to newts and the mount you have, you already have your ideal galaxy scope in the C6.

You could be right. I Just need to get the most from it.

That is what I use. A C6 with asi533mc on an Eq6r. I use a celestron .63 reducer. The C6’s are aprox. f/11 instead of f/10, it gives me a focal length of 1058. I enjoy imaging with it. Only drawback to me is if I want to image a larger target, I have to do a mosaic. But it is not that big of a deal. It also has a great fov for lunar.

Ty for this, about to look at your images.

At "F10" I seem to have about 1660mm so deffo f11

1000mm ISH with 533 gets me 0.81 arc seconds pixel scale.

I am getting 0.73 arc seconds pixel scale with mine.

Checking tekescopius my image scale is 0.78 but maybe that will match your 0.81 when I get the reduce close enough.
So are you binning in hardware, software or neither? I'm dubious about binning a osc like ours.

I'm in nw England, I doubt my seeing ever drops as low as 1.5 arc seconds though.

I have never used anything other than bin 1. I have thought about trying binning just out of curiosity.

Me too. You first

Erlend Langsrud

14 days ago

I think the best choice for those galaxies is a very large refractor. Esprit 150 maybe.

The sensible choise is a 8” newtonian.

The practical choise is a 8” SCT or RC. Easier to handle than the newt and less affected by wind