Stu1smartcookie

Absolutely agree ... i know its meant to be an easy target but when i found the ring nebula ( M57) by co-ordinates rather than a goto i felt great . I had actually seen this target already using goto , but the thrill of finding it later the same week manually was brilliant .

I agree about not missing a dob ... i have had a few of thewm and whilst they are great under dark skies they are not under skies of say bortle 5+ ( imo) ... i bought a widefield achromat and plan on getting a manual az mount . Easy to set up , easy to transport , easy to use ! No messing with polar alignment . Having had a Nexstar mount i found it underwhelming as it wasn't able to be used manually ( i know it wasn't designed for it ) cos sometimes you just want to swing a scope around , without worrying about powering the mount . The star discovery or the az gti would be my choices for powered alt az mounts .

Good advice , John

Ok , thanks guys for your recommendation of the SkyTee Please forgive me but I want to play devils advocate here. John you pointed out three reasons which are pretty important why NOT to go for the SkyTee… lol . What is wrong with the materials and.. not having accurate machining ?? .. ( picture in my head of a disgruntled employee on a Friday afternoon not bothering to set the machine up right ) lol

As i sell timber for a profession , What type of hardwood do you think that mount is made from , John

The "blurb" that comes with the AZ5 says the carrying capacity can be increased up to 9kgs if a sturdy tripod is used ( i am thinking eq5 standard ) ... i am wondering if its the same for an AZ4 ... Maybe i should get a sky-tee .. they seem to be one of the most robust alt az mounts available .

Hi John , I generally only use small scopes ... i have an ST120 FL600 so i suppose thats the heaviest ... when i had my AZ5 on a steel tripod i actually used a 200p !!! ( although not for long as it wobbled more than an excited Jelly )

Thanks @vlaiv ... is there any real difference in the payload ? .. i do like the degree markings on the AZ4 if im honest ..,. and it does get a really good write up in reviews . I found the SM movement good in the AZ5 and the fact that you could either use the cables or the small knobs . I have read that although the AZ4 doesnt " do" slow motion cables , the mount itself is really smooth and easy to fine control . I guess both these mounts do their job really well and its just a matter of choice of which one to go for . I suppose i am looking towards the AZ4 as i haven't used one before ... not the most scientific reasoning lol

So , I am looking for an alt az manual mount … no fuss , no worry .. just put the mount down and stick a scope on it ! I’ve used an AZ5 before and moved it onto someone but I’m keen to either get another one or an AZ4 … I will be using a steel tripod rather than an aluminium one . The question is , is there any advantages that one has over the other . I think the payloads when using a steel tripod are similar . Any thoughts welcome . Stu

So , thanks to all of you for commenting… I really do love my ST120 … but I also know it has limitations . It’s up for sale on here but I am hooked on its portability . And it’s large aperture ( for a frac) means it gathers a fair amount of light . And scanning the night sky is where it thrives of course . it’s strange that the orange comes through when viewing Antares .

I will try that , John … when the sky clears again in about a week 😕

Yes , my 70/700 bresser F10 picks up the colour very well ….. but it is weird that both my mate and I have the same anomaly with the ST120 , especially as I see colour in other stars

Hi all , I have a skywatcher st120 .. it’s a fine scope and has let me see many dso’s but I was looking at stars the other night and of course there was some CA visible on the brighter ones .. ie Vega . I also viewed Antares which was a lovely pale orange . Then I switched to doubles and looked at Albeiro and it’s companion .. but , there was no colour on either star . I have a very cheap refractor that I also used and it showed distinct yellow and blue colours of the stars ! My friend also has the same scope St120 and has exactly the same experience.. question to you guys is … why can we not see these stars in colour ?

Opening a can of worms here !!!. If as you write , people want to buy and use telescopes to view saturns rings and jupiter ie things that can be magnified enough to show detail , why haven't we all bought 16" dobsonians, after all if you want the best , surely a large telescope is the only way to go ????.. No , binos have their place .. they are great at scanning the sky .. getting used to where targets are located and , as Skyhog wrote , they were a fantastic tool for viewing neowise . So , perhaps, after all that 4" scope isn't worth the money ? After all it won't show views that you get from a light bucket . At that rate we will all just be looking at mags with glossy photos taken by hubble. As for Binos just showing "points of light" ... if anyone out there has any desire to see stars other than just points of light , then they will be sorely disappointed . I've basically played devils advocat to your points above ... to be honest i have no desire to own a pair of binos ... i like the idea of scopes . But , most people know what they will see when using Binos ... a 50mm or 70mm objective with , say a 10 x magnification . lol , you certainly did go "against the grain " but all points of view have their worth and if anything this stimulates the discussion , and lets face it anytime we can talk about astronomy is time well spent . Stu

So yesterday I WAS the postman as I collected my Star Discovery mount from @Cirrus… ( Thanks Paul ) … First use last night brought me M57 for the very first time , using my celestron 102 Mak . Also Saturn was a great sight . All in all a great first night

That 32mm will prove a great buy

Hi , good advice from above ... a dark sky cannot be used just for planetary ... you simply MUST view the wonders of wide field . I would use a 32mm EP for that . The zoom EP is an acquired taste but would serve you well for planets . Looking forward to your happy report of your viewing

Having owned both variants , i would say that the ST102 is a bit heavier than the starquest 102 , due to more metal . But , as i owned them at different stages i cannot be 100% certain . However the objective is the same , and to my mind the results are the same . Think you will be happy with either .

Great buy Rob ... i actually bought one of these scopes ( yes i seem to have had one of everything ) It gave very good sharp views . At low power the moon didnt suffer much in the way of CA either . Nice One !

I was lucky enough to also pick up a similar scope recently ( 70/700) which performs admirably on double stars and the moon . And these scopes are ridiculously lightweight which adds to the portability .

I currently have an ST120 but i have owned an ST102 in the past ... well built scopes that are easily portable and would work very well on the AZ5 . Wide field views are great , not too hot on planets but then again i suspect you may know that . Stu

Taken purely as the question , the 120ed is actually quite a bit better , IN THIS IMAGE .... But , this is one image . I wouldn't be swayed either way if i was thinking of buying either of these scopes , but it is an interesting comparison , especially as the Maks forte is planetary and lunar. If we are going on value ( which as has been written , we are Not ) then i still think the 120ed has it.. . Until you factor in the appalling viewing conditions that the UK has to contend with most of the time . One clear night in the last two weeks in Herts ( even that one had more moisture than the Sahara gets in one year ) . So , that is a leveler in my opinion .

As it was so cheap , it was a "no brainer" to buy it ... the EQ Mount is now very much set as an alt-az , and was used last night with the 70/700 .... lol ive used this scope more than my other two er , "better" scopes in the last week . I agree that the finder is utter rubbish ... i put my Raci on it ( the RACI is 10 times more expensive than the scope and mount ) . I like the mount in the alt az configuration , with my Mak .

Glad to see another good report of this EP ... i bought a Zoom EP from another member on here and i didn't like it at all , but i am tempted to take a look at the SVbony one .

This thread , whilst being really interesting ,actually demonstrates the weakness of humanity in so much that our intelligence is not advanced enough to comprehend beyond the boundaries that we have or that have been created for us by those who we look up to in the scientific world . And , who is to say , that they are right or wrong ? But , that is all we have . What a vulnerable specie we truly are . Things that were deemed right in Astonomical terms only 30 years ago( or less) have been proved to be wrong,, or so we think ... Maybe the makers of the film "Interstella" have everything right ! Is science fiction the "New truth" As John said , "The meaning doesn't trouble me at all, because I don't have any interest in understanding 'why?', only 'how?'. Why is not a useful scientific tool, except for when it is."