Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

Skywatcher Explorer 130p or Celestron Astromaster 130eq?


Recommended Posts

Hi, I am currently looking to purchase my first telescope, i have been researching into different scopes and have decided to get either the Skywatcher Explorer 130p or the Celestron Astromaster 130eq. I can pick up the Skywatcher for £175 and the Celestron for £129. I will mainly be using the scopes to look at planets such as Jupiter and Saturn. Which telescope would you recommend for me to buy and why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi James,

You can also get the 150 DOB for £175. If you can try that as it has that little bit of extra aperture. However if you have not used these scopes try to find your local astro group and go along to a meet so that you can see what others have and what might suit you best.

Hwyl!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the Celestron 130EQ and am pretty happy with it, but there are a couple points that should be mentioned...

1) The red dot finder is not very good. It's hard to align objects up in it as the alignment circles can be very hard to see under darkish skies. I've replaced mine with a Right-Angled finderscope.

2) The EQ mount might take a little getting used to. There is no simple up-down movement as with Alt-Az and dobsonian mounts.

3) It will get the shakes when you make any adjustments, particularly with the focuser. But give it a couple seconds and it will be stable again.

Optically it seems very good, but then I don't have anything to compare it against. But I have had some awesome views of our Moon, Jupiter and its moons, Saturn, Venus and various DSOs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would suspect they are the same scope, Celestron and Skywatcher are both owned by Synta. So the decision could be down to the bolt on items and how good they are.

Neither mount seems to be exactly stable/solid as webtubbs says, and I cannot see the scope on an EQ3-2 (bit more solid and greater expansion options).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would suspect they are the same scope, Celestron and Skywatcher are both owned by Synta. So the decision could be down to the bolt on items and how good they are.

Neither mount seems to be exactly stable/solid as webtubbs says, and I cannot see the scope on an EQ3-2 (bit more solid and greater expansion options).

Optically yes, Synta probably manufacture the mirrors for both. They are not the same telescope though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hiya,

I used to have a 130P. It was a 900mm focal length one, and was very capable. I think Sky-watcher also does a 650mm and I think the Celestron is 600-650mm focal length.

Anyway, check the focal lengths of the two scopes. If you're observing planets you'll benefit form the extra length as that will give you a bit more magnification – magnification equals scope focal length divided by eyepiece focal length.

Kev.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never recommend an equitorial mounted scope for a beginner, especially one as flimsy as an Eq-2.  Equitorial mounts are terrific for tracking objects either manually or with a motor.  However, they have two drawbacks for someone just starting out.

1.  To gain even a reasonable amount of "tracking", they need to be polar aligned with each use.  While that is not difficult and needs not to be overly accurate for visual use, it adds a small degree of complexity that someone new really doesn't need.  Those particular mounts will prove difficult to polar-align beyond a crude alignment.  It's just something that will "get in the way" as you're trying to learn the sky.  (Besides, they'll both shake way too much.)

2.  Just moving an equitorial-mounted telescope to a new target is akin to grabbing an alligator by its tail.  As you start to move the scope, it will want/need to be twisted in both declination and right assention... making star hopping more difficult that it needs to be for a beginner.  Once the target has been identified, the eyepiece will seldom be in a comfortable viewing postion... meaning that the tube itself will need to be rotated in the mounting rings.  Again, just something that a beginner doesn't really need when learning the ropes.

I always recommend an Azimuth/Altitude mount for beginners.  Az/Alt mounts are intuative to move... left/right, up/down.  No real alignment is necessary unless one wants to use a setting circle and an inclinometer... something that beginners simply won't do.  (That'll come later.)

... I will mainly be using the scopes to look at planets such as Jupiter and Saturn. Which telescope would you recommend for me to buy and why?

I respectfully suggest that you are limiting yourself way too much.  There are exactly three and one half planets and one Moon that meet the criterial you've used for your quest.  (Jupiter, Saturn, and Venus each count as one, and Mars only counts as one-half)  That's a total of four and a half targets (lol), and you're gonna get bored pretty quickly.  Even then, the two scopes you mention are really not the best planet-viewing scopes around... they're too fast (f5), require attention to collimation (another skill to have to learn), and will suffer from comma on brighter targets.

The best scopes for planetary and/or Moon viewing are either long, slow (>f/8) refractors or Maks.

Now that I've been totally negative toward your question, I'll comment about recommendation(s).

If you're going to limit yourself to the 4 1/2 targets mentioned above, get a decent refractor on an Az/Alt mount.  Remember, "junk usually stops above 70mm".  An aperture of 90mm or 102mm and a speed (focal ratio) of f/8, or above, will be a nice place to start and will serve you well for many years.

A tabletop Mak around 90mm will do the same thing.

If you want to view planets and go beyond to Deep Space Objects, I strongly suggest a Dobsonian-mounted Newtonian with a moderate focal ratio (~f/6.7)... say 6" or 8" of aperture.  Yes, it will still need to be collimated, but the process is much easier that the two scopes you originally posted... simply because the tube is bigger.  Dob mounts are rock-solid Az/Alts that are intuative to use... Skywatcher markets some good ones.

Good Luck and Clear Skies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if had to chose out the two id go for the skywatcher ,but i do think a dob would suit you better like a 150p then you dont have to worry about the wobbley mount.i wish you luck with your new scope and clear skys..charl..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As said, both those scopes are made by the same parent company and they share some components but they are not the same.

The comments that AstroBaby makes in this thread are worth heeding,

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/231425-beginner-scope/?hl=130eq#entry2502723

and as a once 130EQ user I can second them, so out of the two the Skywatcher is the one to go for. That said, if you can scrape the extra cash together the 150P Dob would undoubtedly be better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi James, in you original post it sounds like you've already done your research and made your mind up. As the sound advice above explains there is a world of scopes and set ups out there and that just makes the fist plunge a difficult one. All I can say (as I have no other experience) is having recently started off on my journey like you I narrowed my search down to the astromaster 130. And the best advice I have is when your starting off the most valuable thing is time @ the eyepiece, clear (dark sky's) and patience. It's a learning journey and the astromaster will serve a purpose but your time invested is what really counts. If you get hooked you'll no doubt want to upgrade this and that, change this bolt on that and make many many mistakes along the way but that's all part and parcel of the fun. I've had my scope for about 6 months now and I have a better understanding of the night sky and what I want to get out of my time at the eyepiece and my next purchase will be a larger goto dob but I only know this because of the path I've been on. Hope my ramblings have provided some additional clarity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why was #7 not included in the user guide for my Celestron 127EQ ?

Back then, I knew how to align and set up, its not untill you actually witness it in practice, do you realise/understand how un-neccessary an EQ mount is for visual observations only. And the performance / limitations of that scope are soon realised ( on first use for me, I knew I needed something different!).

If purchasing a reflector telescope mounted on a Dobsonian base, no less than 6" aperture should be considered the basic minimum, 8" (200P) is very popular, there are larger units. Every telescope, system, will have benefits and weaknesses! Finding what suits you takes time.

I think my Sky-Watcher f/6 Skyliner will last a longtime, if not a lifetime!

Going larger brings benefits and weakness. If the images from a 10 -12" telescope are twice the size and detail of that already achieved from my 8" then I may source that telescope, otherwise the 8" remains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why was #7 not included in the user guide for my Celestron 127EQ ?...

I assume you are talking about my post. :rolleyes:

Frankly, it kinda hurts to write something like that when a new astronomer is convinced that all the advertising hype aimed at a first-time buyer is true.  I don't like writing it, and he/she doesn't like reading it, but we've got to be honest.  If not, the purchase will be disappointing, and we'll lose an otherwise good addition in our hobby.

Name's John, but you can call me "Frank". :smiley:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Alfian on posting #9 - the SkyWatcher 130p would be the better of the two.  I got an Astromaster 130eq, only to find out that the primary mirror was a dud - couldn't focus sharply with it even after collimation (and center spotting the primary!).   And for the reasons that Astrobaby mentioned in her thread. 

As John in posting #7 mentioned, a longer focal length scope will be better for planetary viewing or zooming in on small and faint deep-sky objects.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Alfian on posting #9 - the SkyWatcher 130p would be the better of the two.  I got an Astromaster 130eq, only to find out that the primary mirror was a dud - couldn't focus sharply with it even after collimation (and center spotting the primary!).   And for the reasons that Astrobaby mentioned in her thread. 

As John in posting #7 mentioned, a longer focal length scope will be better for planetary viewing or zooming in on small and faint deep-sky objects.  

Its unusual, I think, for a primary to be a "dud". I had several fruitless attempts to collimate mine before realising that the focuser had an issue that effectively meant is was not running true when I racked it in and out. I cured this, centre spotted the primary and then collimated it all from scratch and it was fine. I realised though after that, although the the 130EQ looks good, there is a certain element of style over function which does not serve it so well. The Skywatcher is a bit more of a sensible option in this respect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.