>>2856641will it work, yes, it will. The poor high-ISO performance of that ancient sensor will give you grief, though. If you have a modern APS-C body, and a decently fast lens of the FoV you prefer to go with it, it'd probably do a better job despite the smaller sensor. ISO 3200 or 6400 really helps.
You can take dark frames though. Shoot your picture, then take a picture of the inside of a lens cap at the same ISO and shutter speed. (do this in raw, btw) When you get home, you use software to "subtract" the dark frame (which contains no image, just noise) from the real picture. Is it magic, no, but it does help and you don't need to buy more gear.
>>2856690if your camera does magnified live view you should use it, focus on a bright star. It's going to be unavoidably finicky because all modern lenses assume that everyone uses autofocus and rarely if ever focuses manually, so they typically have an extra-short focus throw (kit and consumer lenses especially) since that makes AF faster, all else equal. They also typically focus past infinity.
You can also buy or make bahtinov masks that you put over the front of your lens to focus. It's a plate with a bunch of slits in it that causes big diffraction spikes around stars, looks like an X with a vertical line through it. When that line perfectly splits the two sides of the X, you're properly focused.
Typically you don't want the moon out when you take these pictures, but if it is, its bright enough for autofocus to lock on to. Use live view since you're more concerned about it being accurate than fast.
