Is such an astronomical telescope good?

Telescopes play an extremely important role in astronomical observation. Naturally, as long as the action is proper, it can also achieve unparalleled results in other aspects in celestial photography.

The most famous and extreme example is Hubble, which has been in the sky for 25 years. With the advantages of 2.4-meter caliber, no atmospheric interference and long exposure, human cognition of the starry sky has taken a big step. Of course, I also took a lot of beautiful photos (in order to please the public, get support, and finally get funds ~), one of the most famous examples, the creation column of Eagle Nebula (M 17):

However, the telescope has a huge disadvantage because it is short in feet and long in inches. From an aesthetic point of view, it is generally used to photograph planets, comets, binary stars and deep space objects.

Jupiter photographed by a small telescope

Comet Hale-Bopp

Andromeda nebula (M3 1, actually a galaxy larger than the Milky Way)

The above works can be shot with a small telescope. However, the imaging quality of Jupiter is relatively poor, so it is necessary to explain to novices not to expect too much from the photographic effect, especially novices. I can almost guarantee that even the first picture was difficult to achieve in the past few months.

Since we have said that we can shoot, let's talk about incompatibility. That is, celestial photography requires works with a wide perspective, such as the Milky Way, stellar orbits or meteors. It's not that these things can't be photographed by a telescope, but that these things are difficult to find in a telescope, and even if they are forcibly photographed (such as a meteor passing by), they have no aesthetic value.

Playing photography for three generations, playing celestial photography ... anyway, it takes more time and money than simple photography. In addition to the necessary camera, if you want to shoot celestial bodies with binoculars, if you want to shoot celestial bodies other than the moon, you need at least one single-axis electric follower in theory (in fact, they are all equipped with two-axis electric followers, unless you can ensure that the polar axis is adjusted to the maximum). While shooting in the suburbs far away from the city, a photo needs at least a few minutes of exposure time (that M3 1 has been exposed for at least several hours), which is unacceptable in terms of difficulty and sacrifice.