Your mak-experiences

[swedonator]

I would like to know what you think about maks, your experiences and why you think they are good or bad. What you watch with them and how the optics are. Tell the manufacturer of the scope. Would be exciting to hear how different they are.

[RikM]

I was a little disappointed with mine but I think it may be that the collimation was off. I had a 127 and it was pretty much blown out of the water by an old 8" Dob on any target I cared to try. It was never as sharp as I hoped for lunar / planetary, which was the reason I bought it. Fortunately I only paid £80 including the mount and my Son is quite happy with it now. I might have a go at collimating it but the air is rarely stable enough for a proper star test.

[dweller25]

I had a poor experience with a 180 Pro - very fuzzy on the planets - collimation looked OK - the main issue was cool down.

[Astro_Baby]

http://www.astro-baby.com/reviews/Skymax%20180/Skymax%20180%20Review.htm

s

cise the laziness of posting from my site but I just did a big post that the forum ate and as I am knacked I couldnt be bothec to type it all out all over again...soz

[JamesF]

I think a 127 Mak is going to struggle in comparison with an 8" dob pretty much any time.

I have an old (blue) Skywatcher 127 Mak that had clearly been used a fair bit when I bought it. I stripped it down, rebuilt it, collimated it and now I mostly use it for planetary/lunar/solar imaging. It's been a lot of fun and it's my holiday scope of choice. The mirror shift when focusing is a little irritating, but I'm toying with the idea of making a new mirror carrier that's a slightly better fit on the baffle tube to see if I can get rid of some of that.

James

[John]

I've owned 2 maks.

1. A Skywatcher maksutov-cassegrain 127mm which was a nice scope, compact, light and great for planetary / lunar views. It did take quite a while to cool fully from room temperature and a dew shield is an absolute "must" with this design, which makes it a bit less compact of course !.

2. An Intes maksutov-newtonian 150mm which was a superb scope in terms of optical performance, matching a 5" apochromat. It was quite long and pretty heavy though and needed more cooling time than some other designs. It came with an integrated dew shield.

So I liked both the mak designs that I have owned but, as I keep my scopes in the house, scopes that cool more quickly eventually got my preference.

Also I wanted a 10" / 12" aperture scope and a mak of that aperture is extremely expensive and heavy - observatory instruments really.

[mikehab]

I've been very pleased with my Celestron Nexstar 4SE. It's a compact entry-level GoTo scope which gives excellent views of the moon & Planets - and I've also been able to see some DSOs through it, and also more than capable of astro-photography using either a webcam or DSLR. I consider it an ideal scope for someone like me who wanted a good quality portable entry-level motorised GoTo / tracking scope without breaking the bank. Very easy to set up, and the tracking is more than satisfactory for my purposes - even comes with a wedge mount for polar alignment in addition to the usual Alt-Az tracking.

I'm thinking about upgrading to a bigger scope and better mount now - but for my first year's introduction to the hobby it's been a great little scope.

Mike

[nightfisher]

I have the skymax 180 pro and its a superb scope, with a focal length of 2700 mm its a planet killer, best views of Jupiter, Luna and planets, an 18mm ortho gives me x150 mag, very good on double stars, from a dark site it will blow the trapezium wide open, and maks have a little benefit of darkening the sky, so the 180 is not shoddy on deep sky objects, cool down is an issue, but as i donr have central heating this is less of a problem for me. As john says, you need a good dew shield, mine is about 2` long and does a great job, also the 180 needs a decent mount, i have fitted a crayford dual speed focuser so get zero mirror flop

[E621Keith]

I owned two mak

1. Skywatcher Skymax 150 Gregory Mak Cass. Originally bought as an replacement for my C6. Very sharp image once cooled down. Smooth focuser, good finder. Keeps collimation very well. Sold it because it takes too long to cool

2. Intes MN56 Mak Newtonian. Very nice sharp field. Planetary image is sharper and has better contrast than the Skymax 150 or C6. Best dew shield I've come across, even the dew shield has baffles. Vignette with 2" wide field eyepieces. Sold it because I found I didn't like Newtonian on a EQ mount. Would have kept it if I had a large Alt-Az mount.

I kept the C6 because it's the fastest to cool.

[dark knight]

My first scope was a Celestron 4SE with starbright coatings which I still have, I found it a great little scope for planets, my first view of Saturn still sticks in my mind, clear and sharp. This OTA has never disappointed me and it's performance is incredible for it's size. The downside is the mount, I had to tighten up the internal alt shaft gear for use when trying astro photography as with a DSLR on the back it slipped, once tightened up it was fine, there is also not much clearance at the back of the scope when imaging near the Zenith, the camera could hit the mount. Still a great scope foe visual stuff, including some DSO's.

[badgerchap]

Good thread, cheers - would love a Mak at some point, this gives plenty of insight.

[Steve Ward]

Nicely timed thread this ,

I'm just about to get myself a Mak180Pro after plenty of research so glad to see the good comments , especially Astrobaby's review.

[Macavity]

I have owned a MAK90, MAK127 and (currently) a MAK150.

The MAK90: Was very impressive. It was just so SHARP! Moon, Planets... simply great. It was the first scope with which I split the "double double" (in Lyra)! Capable of "ludicrous" magnifications, but "runs out of light", except on brighter DSOs.

The MAK127: Versatile! Sufficient aperture to now show many DSO's. Globular clusters, notably! Can use a 2" diagonal / eyepieces to advantage. A "grab & go" scope in the USA <chuckle> but can get quite heavy, once you add 9x50 finders, 2" diagonals etc. Can strain (oft partnered) Synscan mount? My first "serious" telescope!

The MAK150: Shares many characteristics w/MAK127 - f/1800 (versus f/1500) is not excessive? Supports 2" adaptation for increased FoV. Mine is a GOLD Mk.I, so has some mirror shift. Not unknown in MCTs? <G> I added a 2" (TS) electric focusser. My main obsy. instrument for VIDEO astronomy - 6" is a useful aperture, whatever!

Generally: MAKs are "indestructible"? I dropped my MAK127 onto a (wooden) floor and the collimation survived! More versatile than their "planetary only" detractors claim. Focal lengths (Excepting the MAK180) are not THAT much greater than a typical Dob / Newt! Require a little thought... Cooling? Overall, they are are great!

Aside: If I ever get enough dosh, I would buy an Intes (Yelena?) MAK. They have "certified" optics, integral 2" adaptation. But in the interim, my Skymax (150) will do just fine! Actually thinking of getting a MAK102 as a truly portable (budget!) 3" APO substitute...

[nightfisher]

I like maks that much that even though i have the 180, i am sort of looking for a 150 or 127 for grab an go on the AZ4 mount

[spektrumdx8]

Love my mak 127 but definitely have to allow for cool down time- find with the higher power lenses that it can take up to 90 mins before images are stable

[chiltonstar]

I have a 127 Mak (SW) which I use on an EQ mount.

Cooldown: an issue sometimes, but I put the scope out earlier and let it reach equilibrium naturally

Resolution: stunning - reaches theoretical on double stars and eg Mars.

Contrast: not as good as my 'fracs (I am a frac-man by inclination)

Other points: colour is slightly blueish compared with fracs, which alters double star colour contrast a little and washes out the colours somewhat of eg Jupiter

Portability and stability: excellent - take it out of the bag after a car journey and use it - no knob twiddling required cf many dobs!

Light grasp: it's a 5" - what do you expect. Has given me some stunning views of more difficult M objects though like M1 and M51.....

Overall: I like it!

Chris

[Pete Presland]

i sold my MAK180 a couple of weeks ago, the only reason was more aperture and a C9.25 became available, at the right price, in the right place.my MAK180 was a great scope, the do not call it "the planet killer" for nothing! it is certainly not "one scope to rule them all" though. amazing views of the planets, the moon, pretty good on some of the brighter more compact DSO's as well. cool down not a problem in an obsy

image shift was a bit annoying, (nothing a crayford would not sort ) especially when increasing the power when imaging. if i was going to use one word to describe the MAK180 it would be POWER!

[Doley68]

Always been a frac man but last October I bought a 180 pro. I have an obsy so I can't comment on cool down but it has changed my outlook on scopes.

The best planetary and double star views I have seen although I have never owned a large apo but then again, one would be four times the price!

Good on compact dso as well. A 2" diagonal and eyepieces helps the field size to. Also it is more user friendly to physically use with a nice eyepiece height.

Can you tell that I like it?

Chris.

[Bodkin]

I have had an Intes 6 inch mak newtonian for about 15 years and still love it. These scopes are often regarded as having apo-like qualities at a low price and they are excellent on planets and the moon. However, I tend to use mine to just roam around, picking off deep sky objects in the pin-sharp, low power view. It is hardly a perfect scope as it is quite heavy for a 6 inch and difficult to mount compared to a Mak Cassegrain; mine is on a Losmandy GM8 and I would consider this to be a bare minimum. Also, the stock focuser is very poor and the scope will certainly not win any beauty contests, so people who drool over high-price apos should look elsewhere. What you pay for is the optics and these are excellent.

[dave armeson]

http://www.astro-bab... 180 Review.htm

s

cise the laziness of posting from my site but I just did a big post that the forum ate and as I am knacked I couldnt be bothec to type it all out all over again...soz

This scope is the most incredible powerhouse of a telescope I have used in a 30 Year observing career.

This review goes a hell of a long way in dispelling the myths about a Big Maksutov.

I have had mine a year after selling a wonderful 4 inch VixenED refractor I had for10 years.

My Mak180 does it all and more. Ask the members of the York Astronomical Society when we are out observing.

It gives outstanding deep sky performance on most objects: 5th & 6th Trapezium stars, mottling in M57 the Ring Nebula, spiral arms in M51 etc etc etc...the list goes on and on. As for Solar System objects its like having a 7-inch Apo. Mine absolutely HAMMERED a £3000 William Optics APO.

You are cooking with gas about 1/2 an hour for cooldown. Long 2 to 3 hour cooldown times are a complete Myth.

This is the best £750 you can spend on an OTA.

WELL DONE ASTROBABY ON A BRILLIANT REVIEW.

CHECK OUT MY LUNAR IMAGES ON THE YAS FORUM IN THE SOLAR SYSTEM SECTION. www.yorkastro.org.uK

Bests

Dave

[dave armeson]

Nicely timed thread this ,

I'm just about to get myself a Mak180Pro after plenty of research so glad to see the good comments , especially Astrobaby's review.

BUY IT BUY IT BUY IT...ITS AMAZING ...!

[Earl]

I had a 4se which was a great grab and go scope, and also had a 180 which was fantastic, the views of Jupiter where amazing.

Maks are specialized beasts though, and this needs to be taken into account.

[neil phillips]

Personally i think the advantage of a mak really is the fact thats its farily easy to transport, and is compact. I had A meade 7" f15 on two occassions the first was ever so slightly better than the second but both i would rate as excellent. On lunar the images i got were nearly as good as my Orion 245 mm Newt. Problem was as soon as i imaged Saturn i instantly became aware its still only a 7" scope. Basically the 245mm Orion killed it stone dead on planets i havent looked back since. large quality optics are always going to out do smaller quality optics, no matter what the design or make. size for size a good mak will likely out do most Newtonians on planets. problem is price, you can get a bigger newt for the price of a smaller mak. And if its performance you want, and not just ease of use. Im afraid a good bigger newt will win. Still would like a 10" Mak with fans fitted in a outside obsy mind. Dream on at those prices

[username]

I have a Skymax 102 on eq2. I like it because it's small, light and easy on eyepieces. I observe mainly from a balcony and the small form of the scope is really apppreciated.I haven't found cool down to be too long with this size either although I haven't anything to compare it too. I don't like it as the aperture is pretty small although ok for solar system/double stars. In it's defence the seeing round here is normally pretty atrocious especially from the balcony and the built up area so not sure how big in aperture I could actually go.

Looking at upgrading but think I will always keep it for solar/grab and go.

[Macavity]

Maybe the MAK102 has many of the characteristics of Sir Patrick's "Three-inch Refractor"?

I always imagine that was an 80mm / f=1000mm achromat??? Lose a little light in MAK mirrors,

gain in colour correction and portability? Back to my 1963 "Observer's Book of Astronomy"!