On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 08:01:21 -0600, Chris L Peterson
wrote, in part:

So the fact that using better equipment (which is, unsurprisingly,
more expensive) allows imagers to produce better images introduces
some sort of "class system"?

I will tend to agree with that. After all, the 200-inch telescope on
Mount Palomar was quite expensive.

And deep sky photography requires long exposures. So the usual
inexpensive deep sky telescope, the Dobsonian, is right out.

A 14" Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope... a CCD from SBIG... you're talking
serious money.

So the fact that some expensive SLR has come out that works better for
astrophotography is neither here nor there.

In any event, for deep sky astrophotography as opposed to planetary
astrophotography... well, _of course_ one has to have money.

One has to own a *car* to get out to where the dark skies are.

John Savard
http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html