Blew $200 on a fancy star tracker mount and it saved my astrophotography hobby

I was so sure I could just stack images manually (you know, with software) and get decent photos. But after 6 months of blurry smudges of the Orion Nebula, I caved and bought a Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer for $200 used on Craigslist. First night out with it, I got a single 5-minute exposure that was sharper than all my previous attempts combined. It totally burned my wallet at the time, but now I get usable frames every session instead of crying at my laptop. Has anyone else gotten better results from a tracker versus just stacking?

2 comments

2 Comments

eva90823d ago

Totally disagree on this one. Stacking images with software gets you sharp results too, you just have to put in the work. Spent $50 on a used intervalometer and took 200 30-second subs of Andromeda, stacked them in DeepSkyStacker for free, and got a crisp galaxy shot. That $200 could've bought a decent lens or a new camera body instead. Trackers are nice for lazy sessions, but manual stacking forces you to learn proper polar alignment and exposure settings. Plus you avoid the headache of carrying around extra gear and batteries.

thomas.tyler23d ago

Holy crap, 200 subs at 30 seconds? That must have taken hours to capture and then process. I can't believe you sat through all that stacking and still ended up with a crisp galaxy shot. That sounds like pure torture to me, honestly. I tried that route for months and just got frustrated with blurry results every single time. My tracker was worth every penny just to skip that headache and get clean data on the first try. Different strokes for different folks I guess, but no way I'd go back to fighting with polar alignment on every session.