Chose a $200 tracker over a $800 mount for my astrophotography rig

I was saving up for a proper equatorial mount but kept missing the Milky Way shots because I couldn't keep my DSLR steady. So I grabbed a used Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer instead, just a simple tracker on a tripod. First night out in Joshua Tree last month, I got a 2-minute exposure of the Andromeda Galaxy that actually came out sharp. It's made me realize I could be getting decent galaxy photos for months while saving for the mount. Anyone else found that a basic tracker opens up more than you expected?

3 comments

3 Comments

joelwells1mo ago

The Star Adventurer is a solid choice for getting started. I picked up a used iOptron SkyTracker a few years back and was surprised how much detail I could pull from the Milky Way core with just 90 second subs. That little tracker kept me shooting clear widefield shots while I saved up for a real EQ mount.

the_margaret1mo ago

Read an article in Sky & Telescope a while back that basically said most people quit astrophotography because they buy too much gear too fast. Makes sense to me. Those little trackers force you to actually learn framing, polar alignment, and processing without a crutch. Saw a guy on CloudyNights who spent 5 years with nothing but a Star Adventurer and a 135mm lens before upgrading. His stuff was gallery quality by the end. Better to master the basics on a $400 tracker than burn money on a mount you don't understand yet.

miamitchell1mo ago

Had a buddy pick up a beat up Star Adventurer at a garage sale for 40 bucks and he pulled Andromeda with 60 second subs that looked better than my first attempts on a proper mount. @joelwells you're spot on about it being a solid way to get your feet wet without breaking the bank.