Since this is a better source than the space.com article, I'll repeat this here:
For those interested in astrophotography, when asked how to get into the hobby, most astrophotographers will tell you, "don't".
The setup that he's got in the picture is very conservatively $10,000 worth of equipment. Not to mention the time spent in setup, planning, extensive postprocessing, etc. Personally, with a day job and living in a city (light pollution), I find it difficult enough to get time for visual astronomy, and astrophotography takes a lot more time and dedication. All that for something that the big scopes are going to do a lot better.
Not trying to dissuade anyone who's passionate about it. If you're up for the fun and challenge of it, you'll get some nice results for the rest of us to enjoy. :)
Please don't do that. It makes merging threads a real pain because then we have to worry about duplicate comments and who replied to which. For example, I've moved the replies to this one to the other one.
Also, HN is not a place for copy-pasting. On a site dedicated to intellectual curiosity, repetition is the enemy.
For those interested in astrophotography, when asked how to get into the hobby, most astrophotographers will tell you, "don't".
The setup that he's got in the picture is very conservatively $10,000 worth of equipment. Not to mention the time spent in setup, planning, extensive postprocessing, etc. Personally, with a day job and living in a city (light pollution), I find it difficult enough to get time for visual astronomy, and astrophotography takes a lot more time and dedication. All that for something that the big scopes are going to do a lot better.
Not trying to dissuade anyone who's passionate about it. If you're up for the fun and challenge of it, you'll get some nice results for the rest of us to enjoy. :)