A top-flight consumer digital camera, that will allow you to produce
noticeably better pictures in some circumstances will cost $2000-
$10,000. Before, only the lens determined the output for the most
part because 100 ASA/ISO film was 100 ASA/ISO film. So, a $400 SLR
body produced images pretty much the same as a $1500 body. But today,
the top sensors are full frame and low noise and cost considerably
more than the APS sensors in low-cost cameras.
Cutting-edge astrophotography is dominated by mega-thousand dollar CCD
cameras, $1000 filter wheels, and RC telescopes or other large
telescopes. 30 years ago, a big Newtonian, relatively affordable was
all that was needed because film was film, it worked the same way in
most cameras and was cheap. But today, expect to pay at least $10k to
get into the astrophoto big leagues. A class system has always
existed when it came to telescopes. Before AP was Questar and there
has always been Criterion and big dob scope classes. But the
photographic devices are stratified.
So, years ago, a guy with a 10" Newtonian and a basic camera could
theoretically produce near the same results as someone with a much
more expensive rig, but you have no chance today of doing that because
the receiving mechanism and its support componets are variables and
highly different from each other.
It's particularly funny when a magazine runs an astro-photo contest
offering rinky-dink prizes like an entry-level 5" Newtonian worth $400
when the winner of the contest will likely have $10,000+ worth of gear
at his/her disposal. What will they do with the cheap Newt, use it as
a doorstop?