I want to buy a DSLR camera, but don't know what to go for. I have a budget of MAX £400 and plan on using it on astronomy, such as using the camera on its on to take wide field photos, and also connecting to a telescope to take some close-up photos. I don't currently have a good telescope. I have a 70mm refractor, but I think it is not a good quality one, so I plan on selling it off and buying something better.

I am interested in deep-sky objects and want to photography such things as Nebula, galaxies, and star clusters. Plan on using long exposures to get nice colourful pics.... (I have Registax, but no idea on how to use it.

I live in London, England, so light polution is a problem. Any suggestions to overcome this?

I just broght a Kodak C875 point and shoot camera, but cant seem to get much from it in terms of astrophotography.

Any help and advice is very much appriciated.....

Very interested in the heavens.... but cost can be frightening.....

You want a camera with low noise and the ability to capture unprocessed 12-14 bit RAW images (this is a little tricky apparently on the Nikons). Most amateurastronomers who use DSLR cameras have Canon or Nikon consumer/prosumer cameras. I use a Canon 400D but wouldn't buy one now since the new 450D has a larger 14 bit color space, live view update (very useful for finding the right focus) and apparently has lower noise. Other important features is mirror lockup and gentle shutter action (a bit of a problem with Canon).

If you are interested in shooting emission nebulae be aware that the IR cutoff filters in all DSLR cameras also remove 75% of the light from the H-alpha emission line. This filter can be removed or replaced with a narrower filter but this is a risky and/or costly operation that usually voids the guarantee and makes it trickier to use the camera for regular photography. Some companies sell pre-modified cameras or perform modifications but that is probably outside you stated budget.

I haven't tried light pollution filters but I know several people that shoot surprisingly good images from balconies in central Stockholm. Again such narrowband filters cost a bit of money.

If you you want take images of DSOs you need a stable equatorial mount preferably a motor driven or GoTo mount. When it comes to telescopes there a more knowledgable people around but a refractor or Newton of around 1 meter focal length is a common starter scope.

I have found http://www.ayton.id.au/gary/Science/...toDigital1.htm to be a good resource.

I'm pretty much a beginner but I have attached a image I took of the double cluster low over the horison above Uppsala, Sweden (in a somewhat lit area during the full moon). It's a 3.5 min total exposure using a 20 cm Newton, no filters and an unmodified Canon 400D. As you can see I haven't so far) been able to completly remove gradient in the image.

Cheers
/Patrik

Attached Images

doublecluster2.jpg (45.7 KB, 28 views)

I have a 350D (Digital Rebel XT). I love it, it does great astrophotography. Canon now has the 450D, which is what I would recommend. Or the 350D or 400D, if you're on a budget.

__________________
You can't really tell the difference between drunken rambling and sober blogging.

I have the 450D/XSi, it is fantastic!

Live view makes life simple, just hook up to laptop, hit live view, focus on bright star, and you are done with focusing all night.

I love it, and its great for land too.

Get it, I returned my XTi for it.

Hi tamer,

Looking at the large number of hits, this question is a popular one. The answer is not as simple as it seems, what may be the 'best' may well be way out of your budget range, also, the equipment you have, telescope, mount, drive etc. may influence your choice.

Your 70mm refractor is seriously going to limit your astrophotography if it is of the simple achromat type. For deep sky work you need the best mount you can afford and one of the better 80mm short tube well corrected refractor's, or a 6"-8" reflector - depending on the size of EQ mount you use.

Given the above, and it is a familiar story of newcomers wanting to get into astrophotography, you need some research and sound advice, here are my comments:

If you are on a budget, a Canon 350D is an excellent camera for both everyday use as well as astro and it should be available at a good price as it is a superseded model. It does not have live view etc and the latest model is an improvement in many areas - at a price. Buying the latest technology is always the most expensive way to go.

If you look through past reviews and other peoples images, the 350D has been and still is, extensively used. I bought one when they first came out, light weight, which is good if used on a small scope. I am very pleased with it and subsequently had it modified (Peltier cooled & enhanced filter) - but just not the opportunity to really give it serious use.

Many astro programs are geared up towards the 350D, shutter control & image processing in Images Plus & Nebulosity etc, so no shortage of good capture & processing software.

I also have a filterless Nikon D50 for full spectrum work, plus the D100, D200 & D300 in the Nikon range-the D300 is way ahead of the other two but at a price!

I hope this helps you and anyone else starting out, the only silly question is the one that is never asked, so ask as much as you can and look at what others have done.

Regards
Shevill

__________________
Shevill Mathers, Southern Cross Observatory - Tasmania 42 South.
Associate Editor 'Sky and Space' Magazine Est.1988.
http://www.astrotasmania.com-a.googlepages.com/home