Skywatcher Evostar 120

[ManInTheMoon]

With a Skywatcher Evostar 120 refractor... What realistically would I be able to visually observe and image on a DSLR (Canon 1100D)? Zero light polution, approximately at Latitude: 54:20:41.99495 ( give or take a few ). What planets would I get a good size on? Any nebulas or galaxies? And why can I not get carrage returns in my posts? lol

Edited August 28, 2011 by ManInTheMoon

[swag72]

I have an Evostar 120ED and a Canon 1000D - Planets with this setup are pretty dire, not much bigger than a pin head. Regarding nebula, how about uploading the free software Stellarium and you will be able to put in your coordinates, time etc and it will show you what you can see and where.

Anpther good place to look I always think is Flickr. If you put in the 120ED into the search window, I bet there's loads on there to look at.

Hope that helps.

Edited August 28, 2011 by swag72

[ManInTheMoon]

Ahh ok will do, thanks. I plan on using it for Lunar and Solar too so its no biggie if I cannot see much of planets. I also plan on getting a larger aperture SCT reflector later on when funds permit.

[Bizibilder]

With an Evostar 120 (achromatic NOT the ED Apo) you can get full disc pictures of the Sun and Moon quite easily. I have attached a Pic of the Sun to show the disc size within the frame.

If you use a webcam then you would need around 5/6 webcam frames to cover the disc from edge to edge.

Hopefully this will give you some idea of the field of view.

For Deep Sky Objects (DSO's) try downloading ccdcalc - its freeware - just put in the details of your camera and scope ant it shows you a picture of your chosen object within the fov of your scope/camera combination.

[Wurzil]

Is your scope gonna be the ED version (3xthe price) or the achromatic version?

I have the celestron version of the evostar 120 (not ED). I dont do photography so i cant comment on that except that if you get the cheaper, achromatic scope like mine you will get colour fringing on the moon and planets (like a purple haze around the object). I dont think many people do astrophotography with achromatic refractors scopes.

I can just about get 250x magnification (absoulte maximum!) for use with the moon and planets using a 5mm EP. Jupiter looks about the size of a 5p piece held at arms length in my eyepiece at the moment, the other planets are smaller but definitley not pinheads!

w

[ManInTheMoon]

Cool thanks. I am currently trying to get VirtualMoon program but dling 100mb on Vodafone mobile internet is like trying to fit a melon into a blender. Having zero light polution has its drawbacks lol

Edited August 28, 2011 by ManInTheMoon

[ManInTheMoon]

Is your scope gonna be the ED version (3xthe price) or the achromatic version?

I have the celestron version of the evostar 120 (not ED). I dont do photography so i cant comment on that except that if you get the cheaper, achromatic scope like mine you will get colour fringing on the moon and planets (like a purple haze around the object). I dont think many people do astrophotography with achromatic refractors scopes.

I can just about get 250x magnification (absoulte maximum!) for use with the moon and planets using a 5mm EP. Jupiter looks about the size of a 5p piece held at arms length in my eyepiece at the moment, the other planets are smaller but definitley not pinheads!

w

I have the achromat, the ED was out of my price range atm. I was going to add a Baader fringe killer or that other filter on the scope to reduce the CA on the moon.

Edited August 28, 2011 by ManInTheMoon

[ManInTheMoon]

That brings up another question. Will upgrading the eyepieces from the kit and the diagional add much quality to the base scope? I can always move them to a better tube later on. Would it be worth upgrading the diagional or just the eyepieces as a long term investment?

[Bizibilder]

Upgrading the eyepieces is a good idea - but pay more for a couple of good ones that you can keep rather than a "set" where you may well be paying for eyepieces and filters (and a case) that you will seldom use.

[ManInTheMoon]

Upgrading the eyepieces is a good idea - but pay more for a couple of good ones that you can keep rather than a "set" where you may well be paying for eyepieces and filters (and a case) that you will seldom use.

I plan to get the best eyepieces I can afford individually. Does upgrading the diagional add much benefit?

[Bizibilder]

Probably not the SW diagonal is of pretty reasonable quality - you would have to spend a lot of money to get a significant improvement.

[astroeddie]

Where abouts are you?

If you're in the UK then 54* puts you around where I live.

In time get a Dielectric diagonal, transmits around 95% of light entering the scope. Go for 3 eye pieces, low, medium and high magnifications. a 2x barlow will, in effect, give you another 3 eye pieces.

[ManInTheMoon]

Where abouts are you?

If you're in the UK then 54* puts you around where I live.

In time get a Dielectric diagonal, transmits around 95% of light entering the scope. Go for 3 eye pieces, low, medium and high magnifications. a 2x barlow will, in effect, give you another 3 eye pieces.

1.25 or 2" ? The diagional takes both, I understand the 2" gives a wider FOV and brighter images right and 1.25 is more for magnification? Would a powermate be better investment than a barlow?

Edited August 28, 2011 by ManInTheMoon

[spaceboy]

I enjoy using my EVO120 and despite it only being only 4.75" and an achromatic it dose offer some good views of a fair few night sky objects. Out of all my scopes this is by far the best on double stars and gives good contrast on the moon. Planets have been a let down to be honest due to the CA. For the same reason I doubt it would be the greatest instrument for imaging as I suspect a DSLR is only going to emphasize these imperfections.

[ManInTheMoon]

I enjoy using my EVO120 and despite it only being only 4.75" and an achromatic it dose offer some good views of a fair few night sky objects. Out of all my scopes this is by far the best on double stars and gives good contrast on the moon. Planets have been a let down to be honest due to the CA. For the same reason I doubt it would be the greatest instrument for imaging as I suspect a DSLR is only going to emphasize these imperfections.

Yeah I understand the limitations then again I am also taking into consideration the price lol. I don't mind imperfections in it even imaging, I just like to take pictures of things I havn't taken before. Once i get a larger aperture SCT reflector later, I will most likely use this scope for solar white light, it should get decent images of the sun I hope

[carastro]

This website is useful for telescope and camera sizes.

http://www.12dstring.me.uk/fov.htm

Carole

[spaceboy]

I don't mind imperfections in it even imaging, I just like to take pictures of things I havn't taken before.

I think I remember reading that there is software that can help reduce the effects of CA from images. Not sure if they were referring to photo shop or a specific program written for imagers using achromatics but it may pay to ask in the imaging or beginners section.

[ManInTheMoon]

I think I remember reading that there is software that can help reduce the effects of CA from images. Not sure if they were referring to photo shop or a specific program written for imagers using achromatics but it may pay to ask in the imaging or beginners section.

Photoshop can do it, it has specific CA filters in its raw editor. I think digiKam is planning to have it but it always opens up my CR2 canon raw files PINK lol, a big in their graphics library I think. Lightroom probably can but its too expensive. I try to use open source or free programs where I can. I imagine it is best using post editing CA for imaging rather than filters and stick to filters only for visual?

Edited August 29, 2011 by ManInTheMoon

[FarSide]

I enjoy using my EVO120 and despite it only being only 4.75" and an achromatic it dose offer some good views of a fair few night sky objects. Out of all my scopes this is by far the best on double stars and gives good contrast on the moon. Planets have been a let down to be honest due to the CA. For the same reason I doubt it would be the greatest instrument for imaging as I suspect a DSLR is only going to emphasize these imperfections.

I recently bought a Evostar 120 and actually it's not totally awful with planetary views. The 120 is primarily a 'starter scope' so to speak, and you'll want to eventually move on to something bigger for better planetary/DSO views, and imaging. That said, i will say that with some effort, and the right lenses you'll get some fine views -i'm testimony to that having seen a beautiful vision of Jupiter last night with only a 10mm lenses; with barlows involved you'll see much more.

The Moon if a different story, the 120 really brings out the Lunar surface with great detail, you won't be disappointed in that.

[Sharper]

I used to own a Konusuper 120mm f.1000 achromatic refractor which I believe is the same scope as the current Skywatcher Evostar 120. I was impressed by the Konusuper's performance on planets. Using a 12.5mm orthoscopic eyepiece I could clearly make out the Cassini Division and the polar ice cap on Mars. Views through my telescope were very sharp, with only a tiny amount of false colour evident on the limb of the moon when it was full. I used a standard quality 1.25" star diagonal, not a dielectric one.

I was very surprised to read in this thread that some people have been disappointed with their view of the planets through these telescopes. From my own personal experience I would expect a lot more from a 120mm f.1000 achromatic refractor. It seems strange that some people using the Evostar-120 report fine planetary views, whilst others report very poor ones, perhaps this could indicate potential quality control issues with these telescopes?

[John]

I'm another ex-Evostar 120 owner who found the scope a good planetary and lunar performer. The CA was (on my example at least) pretty well controlled for an F/8.3 achromat and did not prevent the scope from showing the sort of fine detail and contrast that an unobstructed 4.7 inch scope should show. I did not use any sort of filter with my 120.

Edited August 29, 2011 by John

[ManInTheMoon]

I just checked it in the day time, I see very little CA on it, same for my Giant Binos (25x100), a lot of people cried about bad CA, I have yet to see it bad, sure if I really look I can see some CA but it is not I believe as bad as people say, sure probably against a scope costing 3x the price lol but for what it is, I don't think the CA is that bad really, I think it is managable.

[John]

CA is something that bothers some folks more than others. Try the scope on the lunar limb, bright stars such as Vega and Sirius and bright planets such as Jupiter, Saturn, Mars and Venus and you will see it.

Have a look through a 120mm F/5 achromat (eg: a Skywatcher Startravel) and it will put the CA of your scope into perspective.

[twotter]

It seems strange that some people using the Evostar-120 report fine planetary views, whilst others report very poor ones, perhaps this could indicate potential quality control issues with these telescopes?

Or perhaps different viewing conditions, or different eyesight?

[John]

Or perhaps different viewing conditions, or different eyesight?

Agreed - Synta / Skywatcher optics are of pretty consistent quality. There is much more variance in the factors you have listed.

It's taken me quite a few years to realize how much time you need to spend at the eyepiece, under varying conditions, to see anything like the maximum performance potential of a scope.

I'm sure I'm guilty of letting a number of perfectly good scopes go in the past that did not meet my expectations when it was almost certainly my weakness / lack of experience rather than the scopes