Celestron Astromaster 130EQ Vs Skywatcher Explorer 130

[SussexRob]

Hi all,

Yet another scope question, so thanks in advance for your time.

I've been looking at scpoes recently, as I am loving the time I am spending in the garden with my binos, and the wife is interested too, so we'd both like a scope.

I've been looking at the Skywatcher Explorer 130/130p/130m scopes, and had all but decided, until I came across the Celestron Astromaster 130EQ-M. On the face of it, the spec seems identical, but the celestron is around £40-60 cheaper, depending on where you look.

Is there much difference? I see that Currys and the likes sell the Celestron, so it is more of a "toy" scope?

I appreciate that you get what you pay for, don't get me wrong, but, for a starter scope, for me and the wife, plus eventually one that my boy can use (ok he's not even 1, but, hey!), the celestron price is quite attractive.

[Cornelius Varley]

There are a lot of plastic parts on the Astromaster that are metal on the Skywatcher.

Peter

[Tribal-Wolf]

The 130EQ Celestron is potentially a good scope, it has a parabolic mirror even though their website says it doesn't, and it certainly looks the part. The main issues seem to be a rubbish red dot finder that is not removable and there is no centre spot on the primary mirror making collimation impossible unless you remove the mirror in mark one on. The general build quality is not quite as good as Skywatcher which is probably why they're only £125 brand new. I would go for the Skywatcher 130P if that's your limit but a couple of month ago I was where you are now and decided to save a bit more for something bigger. Why not go for a 150P Dobsonian or even better a 200P, you wont regret it.

[Stargazer_00]

Odd, I always thought SkyWatcher was the poorer cousin of Celestron :/ I have a SkyWatcher scope and always saw it in this respect.

[SussexRob]

Thanks guys.

I thought about a Dobsonian, and am tempted, and would have to sae a little longer if I decided that is the way I want to go.

I am bnig into my phoography as well though, and I am a little concerned that I'll find myself getting into AP, and then find a Dobsonian limiting.

[rowan46]

if you want to get into imaging neither the astromaster or the 130 are the way to go. Although the mount is the right type neither are steady enough with a camera on the end.

[pel]

Hi Rob ,

I had a Celestron 130eq and had to return it because the mount literally started falling apart, so I'd go for the Skywatcher. I have a SW 200p/eq5 and that is brilliant.

Neither scope would be capable of Astrophotography with a DSLR due to the weight. You would be able to use it for AP with a webcam for planets or a long exposure modded webcam for DSO's.

Perry.

[onesmallstep]

Hi and welcome to SGL

Both Celestron and Skywatcher come under the Chinese optics company Synta which is why both offer identical spec scopes. A lot of the decision making comes down to personal preference, I've used both makes and can't really tell the difference although I'm a visual observer so don't have the AP factor to consider. Skywatcher seem to offer 'better' quality scopes for the price although Celestron is also a good make.

Sorry if I'm being vague but trying to compare these scopes is like comparing lemons and oranges, i.e. no real difference!

BTW, you may have problems finding Dobsonian scopes at the moment as there is a shortage in the UK until new stock arrives.

HTH (although I've probably just muddied the waters, sorry)!

[drkrell]

I own a Celestron 130 and as mentioned the red dot finder is useless. I removed it and bought a telrad finder instead. The tripod is pretty ropey. I broke the tripod bracket (flimsy plastic) pretty easily and apparently this is quite common. The problem is you cannot get that part I had to buy it off ebay at a very high price. So if the Skymaster is more robust and has a better scope I would pay the extra for it.

[SussexRob]

Thanks everyone. I'm not desperate to go down the AP route yet, and if it will involve a lot of investment to use my DSLR, then that side of it probably isn't for me.

It seems to me, that a dobsonian may well be a better "family" scope, with the logic of adjusting an Alt Az mount being easier to understand than an EQ mount.

I think on Friday I'll take a trip to Telecope House, and have a look at what they have.

[drkrell]

Hi Rob, I have only just started using my Astromaster and reading what you say about ease of use I have to say as a beginner it took a lot of practice to get the mount set up correctly......if I have

[Beardy30]

i would go for the SW 130M the motar is a better option than th 130p which only has a very little impact ona scope of such apature, the RA motar on the 130M will allow you to track moving onjects such as planets , i have one and it's a first class scope, First Light Optics are selling it for £169.00 you wont be disappointed:)

[Special K]

Just a note to all on the forum thanking for contribution on this topic as it helped me decide what to get. I just bought the SW130P over Celestron 130EQ and really pleased thus far. I'm in the blessed honeymoon period with a new scope and haven't come across the disappointments yet!

I opted for the parabolic lens of 130P over having a motorized version. Doesn't appear to come with a 2x Barlow however I've seen posts that indicate it wouldn't be worth much anyway. Next investment will be eyepieces no doubt and could do with a recommendation on a Barlow suitable for a 5.1" f/5. Not sure whether to get a 2x or 3x.

I struggled with choice of focal ratio and consider myself an absolute beginner even though I've tried the hobby before when I was 19. Had dept store Tasco 2" reflector that was absolute piece of junk!!! Did lots of reading back then so I'm conversant with terminology and concepts. My interest is more with deep sky so hope the scope will be pleasing in that regard over a higher focal ratio. It's literally out of the box so too soon to know yet.

[Planetary Geologist]

I am having this problem too. The SW 130m has a motor with a handset, is this worth it? Also the pointer on the SW looks better than the Celestron's, and as they both come with an EQ mount I feel the SW has an edge.

[inedible_hulk]

I am having this problem too. The SW 130m has a motor with a handset, is this worth it? Also the pointer on the SW looks better than the Celestron's, and as they both come with an EQ mount I feel the SW has an edge.

I opted for the Skywatcher 130P and I haven't had any problems learning to set up and use the EQ mount. TBH I found it pretty intuitive. I've added an RA motor, but only because I've started playing about with a modded Xbox web cam. I believe you can get the 130P with an RA motor, 130PM I think. The red dot finder has a variable brightness control and does the job.

[inedible_hulk]

?.....could do with a recommendation on a Barlow suitable for a 5.1" f/5. Not sure whether to get a 2x or 3x.....

I have the Revelation astro x2.5 Barlow which works for me on my 130P and isn't too pricey

[Astro_Baby]

Actually theres quite a lot of difference between the Celestron Astro Master and the Skywatcher 130P and I would always tell people to get the Skywatcher version - heres why.......

Focuser

The Skywatcher 130P has a plastic focuser that can be tuned toi be quite nice. The astromaster has a horrible clunky focuser that looks the part but is very dog like, it might well be tunable but....well I couldnt be bothered to find out because....

Spider Vanes

The Skywatcher 130P has very thin metal spider vanes - the Celestron Astromaster has horrible thick plastic ones (so does the current skywatcher 130 non-P although I am sure the older version of the long tube 130 didn't)

Secondary Holder

The Skywatcher 130P has a decent holder with adjustment screws for tilt - The Astromaster has horrible over long screws with no adequate secondary mirror support. Its a pig to collimate. The sceondary mirror just dangles on the end of some long screws with little to give it support.

Primary Mirror Adjustment

The 130P has/had philips screws at the back end for adjustment - the Celestron has more professional looking thumb screws BUT they are hideous and ususally so tight you have to take mole grips to them to adjust them. They lack feel and add to the horror of learning to collimate the thing.

Finder & Finder Shoe

The 130P comes with a red dot finder mounted on a standard Vixen accessory shoe. The red dot is fine, its a bit plastic but this is a beginner scope after all. If you cant get on with the red dot the scope has a standard Vixen accessory shoe so you can always swap it out. The celestron has a hideous built in finder where the red dot is waaaaay too bright and the finder is hopeless mechanically. To get a decent finder you have to fit an accessory shoe - not a hard job but scary for those who may be not good at DiY and lets face it no one wants to drill holes in their new toy.

Mount

The Astromaster mount looks strong but in reality is so full of plastic its about as steady as a jelly trifle. The Skywatcher EQ2 looks a bit Meccano but it does actually work and its plenty strong enough for a 130P.

Collimation - General

The Skywatcher 130 has a collimation spot installed at the factory - the Astromaster doesnt. Again a bit of mirror spotting is not hard stuff for the hardened newt owner but its all bit unnerving for the beginner.

I have had two Astromasters to mess with and both were horrible - I am also the ex owner of a 130P and the 130P was a superb small scope to start with. A far more polished product wnad why Skywatcher ever stopped selling it with the RA motor is a mystery to me because the packagae price for a decent scope with good optics on a basic EQ2 with tracking was such a good deal.

Its a mystery to me why Celestron keep the Astromaster going when Celestron are owned by Synta who own the SKywatcher brand and the 130P is so capable. Perhaps someone at Synta likes the Action Man orange colors of the AstroMaster.

Sorry if any Astromaster owners are offended by this.

[Twiggles]

Recently got the 130m and I'm very happy with it. Still getting used to it of course but its not too difficult and for a first scope has met all my requirements so far.

[Special K]

Excellent comparison Astro—Baby, that's very useful information. Makes me certain I chose the correct outfit!

[crazyjedi]

Both scopes come from Synta but there's a lot of difference in build quality. The Celestron my brother law has is very cheap looking compared to my SW and has an abundance of plastic parts makes it feel like more of a toy than a scientific instrument

[Astro_Baby]

I couldnt over rate the 130P as a starter scope, hell 20 years ago it would have been a pro instrument. The optics on mine were superb. Its sad that so few people, inlcuding me, probably ever take one to the max because people either decide astro isnt their bag or they upgrade very quickly to something else.

One of the sharpest views I ever had of Saturn was with the 130P under great seeing conditions.

Its a beautiful little scope and a great scope to start, or restart the hobby with.

[Cubemaster]

I got the 130pm, had it 3 years and love it

Very steady now on an EQ3-2..

[Special K]

Yes I forgot to mention that the mount was a huge factor in my choice. I saw the astromaster mount and thought I could do better than that. The SW is downright heavy!

Its sad that so few people, inlcuding me, probably ever take one to the max because people either decide astro isnt their bag or they upgrade very quickly to something else

I plan to keep mine for some time to come as it is portable

[Terrynak]

Great review of the two 130" F/5 scopes Astrobaby! I bought an Astromaster 130EQ just before I went to Dublin for the holidays, which still sits inside its box unopened as of today. From previous reviews, I knew about the mount, built-in finder and the primary mirror without the center spot, but went ahead and purchased it anyways because it was on sale. I didn't know about the other problems with the OTA, especially the secondary holder.

Anyways, I plan to test out the OTA and see how it fares. I already own a Bushnell Ares 5 130mm F/5 tabletop (discontinued now), which is identical to the Skywatcher Heritage 130p tabletop, so I can do a shootout between the two. I also plan to use the CG3 mount on some of my smaller scopes - at least it comes with a dovetail saddle.

Surprised that the Republic of Ireland only carries the Celestron brand, mainly Astromasters (see pic) - no Skywatchers here. In the States, Skywatcher kept their Dobs and discontinued everything else.

[nephilim]

+1 again for the Skywatcher 130, Ive had mine for 4months & altho i've just upgraded my kit, the 130 is a very capable scope, its helped me get used to the workings of an EQ mount & for a newbie (which I still am) its worth every penny, I've never used the celestron but it sounds awful. Even though iv just bought the Skywatcher 200p on an EQ5 mount im still keeping the 130 scope to pop on now & again. I think all the above posts tell it how it is really, buy the Skywatcher!!! you wont be dissapointed.

Steve