Starter Scope 114 or 90 ?

[Craig_]

Hello all. After spending the last couple of months observing with my 15x70 Apollos i would like to get myself a scope for xmas. 

Having looked at many options i have whittled it down to the following options.

Skywatcher Heritage-114p Virtuoso

Skywatcher Heritage-90 Virtuoso

Im not a serious observer yet and i do my viewing from the garden for 30 - 45 minutes at a time, so i like these options for there speedy set up and ease of use.

They both come within my £200 budget and i really like the tracking feature of them both. I just can't decide which to buy !

My main targets are the usual suspects, Andromeda, Orion, Pleiades and Jupiter, so which option would you recommend ?

Thanks for reading and for any replies.

Craig.

[happy-kat]

Great timing check out their clearance section

[happy-kat]

What I was going to link to wasn't as relevant as I thought it might have been.

What do you think you would prefer looking at?

I guess the 114p might be a bit more of an all rounder though won't push as high on magnification but perhaps enough to show a fair bit on the moon. The mak will narrower field of view and is slower. But as a telescope very portable and lends to terrestrial viewing.

[Craig_]

Great timing check out their clearance section

I saw that the other day.

Sorely tempted, but funny as this sounds, I really like to have everything from new, even the boxes  I did notice that the ad says "box a bit tatty" and this scares me because whenever i buy anything im careful with everything including packaging just incase it needs to be returned. 

[happy-kat]

I really can't see FLO not accepting under their returns process but could check that out, if it makes no odds gives you budget for one valuable new eyepiece.

[RichM63]

One thing I like about FLO is that they seem to try to be honest in their descriptions, although due to shipping and currency constraints I've not been able to order from them.

From reading umpteen posts on here, give FLO a call, and talk to the guys, I reckon that you'll receive honest advice.

[Moonshane]

I agree. the box will just go in the loft. which one to get I am not too sure though. both have nice features but I prefer more aperture.

[Hootsitabernacle]

never mind the box, FLO wont shaft you and as everyone is saying the box will go in the loft..mine sat in the garage for a year before it went in the tip.

[LukeSkywatcher]

You want the most aperture you can get. In this case, it would be the 114. Have you considered the Skywatcher Heritage 130P. Great little(ish) scope and sell new from FLO for £130.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html

[Craig_]

I must admit, i have used FLO before and they are fantastic to deal with.

Regarding the more aperture argument, would the 114 give better views of Jupiter than the Mak ?

And i did consider the flextube, but the open assembly is a bit more prone to damage, dust etc ??? This also does not come with the tracking. I really would like tracking so i can share the views with my son and not worry about manually tracking.

[Alfian]

Hi Craig, The two scopes, although both compact are quite different. The 114p is 500mm fast f4.4 reflector and the 90 is  1250mm f14 Maksutov.  If you put something like a 25mm EP in the 114mm you would get 20x magnification and typically about 2.5 degrees field of view. So great for wider fields of view - open clusters etc - but this comes at the cost of poorer optical performance of a typical plossl because of the fast focal ratio. The 90 Mak with that 25mm will give 50X  but a narrower 1 degree fov. Even using a 32mm which is likely to be the biggest EP you could use will give 40x and 1.25 degrees. So a relatively narrow field of view. However the pay-off is that the F14 focal ratio really gets the best out of cheaper EPs like plossls and because of the design of the Mak they give good realtively distortion free view of brighter objects such as planets, moon etc. Again, because of the focal ratio, with a 10mm EP you are getting 125x which will show remarkable lunar detail. To get 125 X with the 114mm either means using a 4mm EP or a Barlow.

I have an oldish second hand 114 which sits nicely on my CG3 EQ mount and I'm really quite surprises sometimes at its performance and because of its small size and open design it cools down quickly. My 102 Mak needs a bit more cool down but for Lunar views or Jupiter etc it beats the 114 hands down.

So as a useful and competent "all rounder" but not especially excelling at anything  specific the 114 would be the choice (not forgetting the extra aperture), but if you fancy nice sharp higher mag. narrow fov observation of brighter objects the 90Mak will do nicely (and is incredibly compact for what it does!)

Just to throw a bit of a spanner in the works though, IF you decided the Virtuoso type mount was not an essential you could spend £200 on a 6" Dob

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-150p-dobsonian.html

Its some way from the compact nature of the 90 and 114  but it is a whole lot more scope for your money.

[Craig_]

Alfian, thanks for your great reply. Im going to put you on the spot  If it were your money which would you choose ?

As for the 6" dob, too big and cumbersome for me right now. 

At this stage im a novice and really want that portability, quick set up that the heritage models provide.

[happy-kat]

Not sure how far in your journery of research you are but this is a good read here

[happy-kat]

Perhaps depends on your son's age I guess as to whether has the patience to wait for you to re find and positoon or ability to keep the object in view with a dobsonian mounted reflector themselves. I see you have answered this

You can upgrade the Virtuoso to be a go to. Quite pricey the handset and I have seen a member have their Heritage 130p mounted on it.

In order to make use of the tracking you would spend a moment making sure it was setup facing the right way etc., but if you go to the same garden table just make marks on the surface for positioning.

The Mak is essentially I think the skymax 90 for which you can find loads of reviews.

I found a lot less for the 114p in this focal length.

[Alfian]

Hi Craig. I understand what you are saying about portability but my £200 would probably go on something else anyway! But if it is a definite either or between those two - I would probably go for the 114mm. Despite its fast focal ratio, which undoubtedly does have its optical "cost" it is probably going to be a more practical scope for seeing a more varied number of objects. The 114 now has a parabolic mirror which I dont think mine has - so it should be better.

If you put in a search for Heritage Virtuoso 114p review, Optical Vision, who I think are the main distributors for SKywatcher in the UK, do a PDF link to  a review that appeared in Astronomy Now. I can't seem to be able to do a direct link. Seems like a good review.

[Moonshane]

if you are likely to use this regularly with your son I think actually that solar system and double stars might be best with the Mak. there are few objects which won't fit into a 1.25 degree field so I'd not worry to much about that. both would be OK but given your comments I'd go with the Mak,

[bomberbaz]

I think I agree with Moonshane. You will spend a lot of time looking at a great deal before you get aperture fever if you are only doing 30-40 minute sessions.

You don't say how dark your skies are so this has a bearing but tracking will make the whole experience more fun. Get the return scope, FLO will always look after you and its fully tested so you should honestly have no worries. The money you save can be used to buy 9mm UWA, it will be far better than the supplied 10mm  http://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-eyepieces/skywatcher-uwa-planetary-eyepieces.html

[bomberbaz]

Just realised. Scope (clearance) £135. UWA 9mm £37, total £172.  Still space in the budget for one of these http://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-eyepieces/skywatcher-sp-plossl-eyepieces.html  New total, £192, change for a few bevvies. Now you have a great little set up and your eyepieces should cover all objects you are likely to view for that scope. 

[Craig_]

I think I agree with Moonshane. You will spend a lot of time looking at a great deal before you get aperture fever if you are only doing 30-40 minute sessions.

You don't say how dark your skies are so this has a bearing but tracking will make the whole experience more fun. Get the return scope, FLO will always look after you and its fully tested so you should honestly have no worries. The money you save can be used to buy 9mm UWA, it will be far better than the supplied 10mm  http://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-eyepieces/skywatcher-uwa-planetary-eyepieces.html

Can i ask what difference there is between the 9mm and supplied eyepiece ? 

Just realised. Scope (clearance) £135. UWA 9mm £37, total £172.  Still space in the budget for one of these http://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-eyepieces/skywatcher-sp-plossl-eyepieces.html  New total, £192, change for a few bevvies. Now you have a great little set up and your eyepieces should cover all objects you are likely to view for that scope. 

Which size from the list ?

Thanks.

[happy-kat]

Supplied 10mm eye pieces just are not great definition they get you started but so can be improved on. The 25mm is fine.

I would guess it would be the 32mm from the list in that second link. But that is £2 over budget (plus shipping) so can't be that.

[nightfisher]

I think i would go for the 114 (tempted with it myself) 

[ronin]

With the 114 being f/4.4 I would suggest the 90.

In general getting eyepieces for the 114 and collimating it will be troublesome.

The problem with the 90 is that you will have a narrow field of view, so things like M31 and other extended targets will not fit in the view. Equally M31 will only really fit in binoculars.

Shame they do not fit a reasonable 70mm f/7 achro as an option.

[Moonshane]

off the top of my head there are about a handful of common non binocular objects that won't fit into the 1.25 degree field (although most of their visible extent will) : 

M31

M44

M45

Veil Nebula

North America Nebula

M24

Almost without exception all other objects will fit nicely or be far too big for a scope anyway and always better in bins anyway, especially from a dark site. if this does become a joint hobby, you may find that your son will be happy gawping for ages at the moon as it tracks and for now unimpressed by faint fuzzies. in the meantime  you find the faint stuff with your (future) new 8" dob. he can progress to that in due course.

[happy-kat]

I have been thinking about what would I choose and it would be the 90.

In time I might have got a second hand ST80 to put on the mount or even the tube only heritage 130p as astroboot had a tube only, you are not tied to that mak90 on the mount the mount is versatile. Great time lapse with a camera potential too and have read about making a diy wedge to sit the mount on for possible longer exposure.

[bomberbaz]

Supplied 10mm eye pieces just are not great definition they get you started but so can be improved on. The 25mm is fine.

I would guess it would be the 32mm from the list in that second link. But that is £2 over budget (plus shipping) so can't be that.

actually I was thinking about the 17mm tbh, get a 32mm later, the 25mm will suffice for now. 17mm would be a great addition for medium power viewing, the 9mm will be for cranking it up and as happy kat said, the supplied 10mm eyepiece are generally pretty poor and to be honest, not much fun t use. The UWA planetary has a greater field of view and more eye relief making them more confortable to use