Orion VX6 vs SW 150p

[milkyjoe]

Almost made my mind up...

I am very tempted to buy an orion optics vx6 ota on either a eq5 or dob mount; obviously there is quite a big price difference, but is it worth it and going from my 4" frac, will I be disappointed with only a 2" upgrade as I could go for the sw 200p and it will still be cheaper than the oo!?

Does anyone have the orion vx6?

Advice much appreciated ;-)

[RikM]

For visual use, aperture matters. A Skywatcher 200P will show you more than either 6" scope.

[Scooot]

I have the OO 10" on a dob mount and I love it but I don't think I'd buy a 6" if I had a 4" refractor. The OOs with the Dob mounts are very user friendly, easy to carry separately and store.

[Dave In Vermont]

While the Orion VX6 is considered a good scope, I concur that aperture rules. A 200mm - or a 250mm  - will serve you much better in the long run. A 200mm (8 inch) is considered a Goldilocks-zone scope as it will show you local objects like planets and comets beautifully, while also putting DSO's well withing reach. Many amateur-astronomers stay at 200mm with no need, or desire, to go up from there. And for good reason. A 250mm or more is also a good choice. Just be sure it's something you can move to your observing site without breaking your back or your transportation.

Clear & Dark Skies,

Dave

[nicoscy]

From a 4" refractor to move to a reflector, 8" + will give you an appreciable jump in what you see. The VX8 (or even VX10) sounds like a good candidate. I have the VX12 f4 and I am really pleased with its performance. 

If money is not a limiting factor, get the 8". It is quite compact and the tube is really lightweight. Get the Dobsonian Mount from OO and it takes all of 5 minutes to set up. I kid you not, as it takes me 5 minutes to offload and set it up, plug in the power supply to the cooling fan, put finderscope in place and relax for the next 30 odd minutes to let the scope cool down. Then commence collimation and 5 minutes later, I am in DSO heaven.

[milkyjoe]

I realise aperture is king, but I was interested in these Hilux coatings, which are supposed to be very good indeed. How do the optics of the SW dob's compare to the OO?  I also have to think about storing the scope because I live in a mid-terraced house.

[Paul73]

If you are considering a 10" and If storage is an issue. Have a look at the SW Flextube option. It knocks 12 to 18" off the hight of the stored scope.

Paul

[nicoscy]

I have Hilux in mine and the difference in brightness is very small but visible. It is just an extra though and I wouldn't call it a key factor.

Well figured and polished optics are more important and I believe that OO churns out better optics than SW.

A 8" Dob (yes, I am trying to steer you to 8' because I have used extensively 6" and 8" and the 8" is oh-so-much-better) stores pretty easy in a corner with the OO mount and a sheet / plastic bag on top to keep dust at bay.

[LeeB]

also a good point for OO is the weight, the 250mm f4.8 ota with a two speed focuser weighs less than 7kg without rings, the steel skywatcher is way heavier. I mount a 300mm F5.3 OO on an eq6 and even with rings finder and long dovetail bar, the ota assembly is only 16kg ish a sw is 26kg, what I am trying to say is they are very easy to move and I frequently move a 250mm on an eq6 with weights in one its heavy but not impossible as it would be with a 250mm sw.

[milkyjoe]

My only "problem" with a dob is that because there is no tripod and not being able to get out to a "dark site" I might struggle to see much over the fence so to speak!  That is why I was thinking about the OO on an EQ5 mount; is a fan available for the SW dobs to help with cooldown; the Revelation equivalent has one?!

[nicoscy]

With the EQ5, you will be able to see objects lower on the night sky, but both seeing and transparency will suffer, so keep this in mind too...

[milkyjoe]

Not sure what you mean by "transparency" nicoscy?

[nicoscy]

Transparency indicates how clear the sky is from pollutants and dust.

For example when it rains, you have excellent transparency later on as rain traps pollutants and dust and brings them to the ground.

So, when you are looking at an object at say 30 degrees, you are looking through "more" atmosphere as opposed to looking at the same object when it is at zenith.

The atmosphere is a thick air cushion, so looking at zenith where the cushion is thinner provides better views.

[Charic]

My only "problem" with a dob is that because there is no tripod and not being able to get out to a "dark site" I might struggle to see much over the fence so to speak!  That is why I was thinking about the OO on an EQ5 mount; is a fan available for the SW dobs to help with cooldown; the Revelation equivalent has one?!

Your aperture is important for visual use.  Bigger aperture allows you to see fainter objects, under the right conditions!    If you're restricted with the mobility of your telescope to a darker site,  a bigger aperture can be to your benefit, even  if  light pollution is prevalent?  If I were to upgrade now, I would have to get me the 12" version, as the focal ratio of f/5 is easier to work with for my use, rather than the 10" f/4.8.  Maybe, I wouldn't need too many new EPs at f/5!  If your needing any height with a Dobsonian, some folk use a large garden water butt stand as a support/lifting base!  Its not advisable to view items that are lower then 45° in the sky as your looking through more atmosphere, rather than trying to view items higher in the skies, with less atmospheric depth? If transporting, a car is generally the best option, the Dobsonian is two part -  Mount & OTA.

As for cooling, is rapid cooling really effective or worth the expense or modifications?  I leave my telescope out for about an hour, and its good to go when I sit ready for viewing.  The greater the temperature variation, the longer the cooling. There is no  real set time, only the time it takes for you to think....." the image is steady". As for brand of telescope, does that really matter?  It does to most folk, and me too.  But as long as the telescope is perfectly set-up, and the conditions are perfect, could you tell what brand of scope you're using if led out into the garden to test two telescopes, whilst blindfolded?. Cost is often your main concern, getting the best for the smallest amount.  Rolex usually has a set price. I still shopped until I got the lowest price. Do I need a Rolex? Branding yes, accuracy, No! Nice to have the 'better' watch, and is a good talking point, for avid horologist's, but the timekeeping for this mechanical swiss timepiece needs constant adjusting, on a Monthly basis for me! Yet I have watches that don't drift with their time, that cost  thousands less?  Its up to you if you think Sky-watcher is lesser than Orion Optics or Meade  etc . As long as the telescope gives a clear result you should be satisfied. I often look in to flo to check the prices for comparison  when offering advice to newcomers, and flo keeps reminding me that the Skyliner 200P is still the UK's most popular Dobsonian telescope. There must be a reason for that!

[nicoscy]

Not sure what you mean by "transparency" nicoscy?

I think is will serve much better than my explanation above:

http://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/feature/general-guide/guide-seeing-and-atmospheric-transparency

[milkyjoe]

Thank you for your replies Charic and nicoscy.

I am even more confused now than ever!  Everyone has a different opinion and given good advice, maybe the only solution is to buy a goto and a dob scope! lol

[nicoscy]

Ok, 6" is 6". You should go for the largest aperture you can, taking into consideration weight, transportability, time to setup/pack and cost.

But if 6" is your final preference, the OO has better mechanics, craftsmanship they respond fast.

EQ Vs Dob, go to Vs manual depends on:

Are you comfortable with star hopping? If not, go to or push to become important.

Are you going to be viewing from a light polluted spot? If so, go to or push to become important.

Do you want to set up as fast as possible? Then a Dob base is better than EQ.

So, many parameters and only you can ultimately decide :-)

[Moonshane]

My 16" oouk dob takes up less floor space than my 80mm frac on an eq5 tripod

unless you specialize in solar system and double stars, more aperture equals more available objects regardless of optical quality assuming a basic acceptable level like skywatcher

If you do specialize then a slow e.g. F8 6" dob will be better in my experience

comments all relate to visual observing

[milkyjoe]

OK...

I was initially leaning towards a 127 mak GOTO, but then lots of nice folks on here recommended the 8" dob.  I thought it looks like a good option, but started thinking about it being low down and that might cause a problem..., but then looked at a newt on a EQ5 mount!  Then I began looking at one of those Heritage GOTO's as well.... so you see, I am now quite confused as what to get!! :-\

In answer to your questions nicoscy:

I am sort of comfortable star hopping, but I don't really know my way around the sky enough to know what i'm looking at (apart from m51, m42 etc !)

I am viewing from light polluted skies.

I don't mind setting up, I do already with my 4" frac

I just can't make my mind up!!

[nicoscy]

The Mak is actually stopped down and you have 117-119mm (can't remember which of the two) effective primary mirror aperture.

It's a lovely scope but aperture is your friend both under dark skies as well as from light polluted locations.

Since you have a 4" frac, buying a 6" newt won't offer "much" more in terms of views. From a 4" frac the next jump if a reflector is involved is indeed the venerable 8" reflector, big enough to provide juicy details, small enough to be highly portable and easy to set up.

Also, what's to stop you from getting a wooden box and setting the 6" Dob (8" if you can stretch the budget - you will not regret it) on it so that it is higher from the ground?

[Charic]

.......its extremely comfortable being seated at the Dobsonian. A drum stool is easily height adjustable, and my King size kitchen chair is very cosy too.  If you need any further height for the telescope,  a water butt stand or a box/frame to lift it higher.

My  8" 200P f/6 telescope is right in the sweet-spot for affordability, ease of use,  ease of setup, comfortable with most - if not all eyepieces, especially for a Newtonian? You won't go wrong with an 8", should that become your choice?

[milkyjoe]

The dob's are fast scopes are they not so are they no good for viewing the moon and planets or is that just if using a frac!?  I have seen a couple of bands on jupiter and the rings of saturn with my trusty 4" frac using a lovely baader ortho i once owned; my meade's are just as good though ;-)

Yes, I suppose using a wooden box is a good idea, didn't think of that! lol

I suppose with a dob, I couldn't add motors to it in the future if I wanted to use it as a GOTO, whereas I could if I got an EQ5 mount.

How about one of these: http://www.firstlightoptics.com/advanced-vx-goto/celestron-c6-n-newtonian-vx-goto.html, but at that kind of money I could get the 8" OO!?

[Moonshane]

a 6" skywatcher dob is f8 (pretty slow) and an 8" is f6 (medium- slow) and both will provide far better views of planets in my experience than a fast 102mm frac.

I'd keep the frac though for wide field star clusters and to reduce packed up space when camping/looking over the fence  etc but either of the above will be better on planets definitely and better on most objects full stop (even the moon). 

I have found the two things that a small frac will work better on are the sun with a lunt wedge and 'easy' double stars. I have an 80mm f11 frac, 6" f11 dob, 12" f4 dob, 16" f4 dob and access to a 8" f6 dob and just bought a 102mm f10 frac (latter 2 for school astronomy club use). I use the 80mm frac almost solely for the sun.

[Charic]

The dob's are fast scopes are they not so are they no good for viewing the moon and planets or is that just if using a frac!?  I have seen a couple of bands on jupiter and the rings of saturn with my trusty 4" frac using a lovely baader ortho i once owned; my meade's are just as good though ;-)

Yes, I suppose using a wooden box is a good idea, didn't think of that! lol

I suppose with a dob, I couldn't add motors to it in the future if I wanted to use it as a GOTO, whereas I could if I got an EQ5 mount.

How about one of these: http://www.firstlightoptics.com/advanced-vx-goto/celestron-c6-n-newtonian-vx-goto.html, but at that kind of money I could get the 8" OO!?

.....taken with a Dob!........hand held using an Android HTC?

[nicoscy]

Regarding the Celestron, you are back to 6" but you have a very good EQ mount.

However the views will leave you craving more aperture as they will be similar to your 4".