Which portable? Is ETX the only option?

[klaatu]

I have been ravaged by the astronomy bug. A few nights with a spotting scope and then a load of reading and I bought myself a Sky Watcher 150P on and EQ3-2 mount. I think I was showing early signs of aperture fever.

I have an iPad with a couple of planitarium apps and I read up on setting circles so I figured could find anything.

The scope is great. I can get my head around it and rehearse in the sitting room but once I get out in the wild it turns into mud wrestling. Things I want to look at seem to be on the zenith and if I do get the tube pointing in the right direction the eyepiece is pointing where I can't see into it - and I do do yoga.

That sounds too bad. It is actually great to use but I do tie myself in knots with it a bit and can't work the setting circles in the dark. The other major draw back is that it is a *proper* telescope and I need to take it out in the van and set it up within a few yards - we live in a city centre flat. I can't wander off up a hill or into the park with it in a ruck sack. (BTW I have tried lugging it a few hundred yards on a cold night and ended up getting a really stiff shoulder. I should have made two trips.)

So I have been looking for a portable scope. By 'portable' I mean something I can lug for a couple of miles in a rucksac not portable in the sense the Sky Watcher 300P FlexTube is portable - though secretly I would love one of those but it would have to replace one of the children in the car.

My search has resulted in either a Meade EXT 80 (possibly a second hand 70) or an EXT 90 (possibly 125 but that might be too big). I lean towards the EXT 90 plus a 40mm eyepiece to try and get a wider view.

Is this it? Is this the entire list of possibles? I could go cheap refractor on a tripod or one of the little Heritage Dobsonians but can't guarantee I can put it on a table.

Have Meade really cornered the market in this kind of scope?

Can anyone suggest an alternative? What if money were no problem? (Unfortunately it is)

Many thanks for your thoughts - I am sure many have gone through the same process.

p.s. The spotting scope I have is a Swarovski Optik 23 x 70 that I was given as a hand-me-down from my bird watching brother a few years ago. I only just realised how good these optics are and need to show a bit more appreciation next time I see him. Trouble is it is no good at looking up! I need to bend it in the middle.

[CGolder]

for me a nexstar SE would be a bette choice than the meade, the mount and tube are way more balanced and can be disconnected from eachother, the skywatcher az range is very good value

[MjrTom]

Hello

I would be inclined to suggest a small refractor in the 70mm to 80mm aperture range mounted on a photo tripod. This would be very similar to the spotting scope you have currently and when paired with a star diagonal will help with the neck strain.

The scopes you have suggested which are maksutov design have a few drawbacks the main one being cooldown times which can be an hour or more. A small refractor by comparison is ready to go in 10 minutes flat.

Secondly the focal length can be quite long which means limited widefield capability. If the scopes will take 2 inch eyepieces then the field of view will be bigger but then 2 inch eyepieces are typically more expensive and heavier than 1.25" eyepieces.

That is one nice gift you have there. Most birders would give their right arm for one of those spotting scopes, me included

[johninderby]

The small Celestron and SkyWatcher Maks have pretty well taken over from the Meades now. Optical quality is about the same but the Celestron/SkyWatcher mounts seem to be more reliable, the software is better, and they have removable OTAs so you can fit another OTA if you want.

John

[Andymac79]

I have used an 80mm short refractor on a manfrotto tripod with a decent head and it was very pleasing to use, also very portable, great views too. Also can be used for terestrial stuff

Andy

[umadog]

What I don't like about those Meades is that they need a power source and a tripod and the aperture is pretty small. I hear many bad things about the gears and electronics.

IMHO, if you want portable then how about this: Latest Model - Sumerian Optics

I have the 10" and it fits under an airplane seat and weighs 10kg. I'd recommend an 8" if you want to lug it a couple of miles. That way you can also carry a couple of books and a camping chair.

I wouldn't worry about the setting circles. I've always found it easier to star hop than to mess around with setting circles.

[ollypenrice]

Small scopes will never give good views of very faint objects. However, if they have a short focal length (unlike the small Maks) they can offer wide views which big scopes can't offer. So I'd second a small fast reractor on a simple tripod.

Olly

[Syntarsus]

I was considering a small refractor and some suggested these Opticstar ones which look nice, not to expensive and very portable. There's also an 80mm version for £135.

[swamp thing]

Personally I would keep looking for a more suitable place to park the van.

I use both my Dobs like this and never have too much trouble finding suitable places.

Regards Steve

[klaatu]

Thanks to everyone for some great advice.

I had thought about the Sky Watcher small GOTOs but they are really too big. The Celestron 4SE looks cute but again they are getting heavy. I guess the Meade ETX portability comes at the price of being flaky (I've seen some of the dismantling articles on the web). Then all these things need powering and that means lumping batteries etc etc.

I love those Sumarian Optics dobs - if I find myself having to travel again then I'd be really tempted.

I guess I'll stick with the spotting scope and a tall tripod while I think about other solutions.

[Rich MedRev]

Hi Klaatu,

I myself have a Dobo, a smallish refractor (4") and also a flourite APO spotting scope (Leica), for true portability the Leica wins hands down and an 72/80mm astro refractor with decent glass will be just the ticket for you.

if i had nice dark skys close by then i would definately be another Sumerian convert

[TheThing]

I've got an ETX-80 and have nothing but praise for it! Weighs next to nothing, can run off batteries (if needs be) or a power tank with a little (reversible) adaptation. Scope gives good views and the GOTO is spot on and very user friendly.

Nice short, fast frac. I wouldn't be without it!

TheThing

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Capricorn]

Not sure why the small Meades are singled out as needing a power source, so do the Celestrons and Skywatcher goto options.

Meade are about the only ones to make a small goto, the 80 being the smallest at present I think, the 70 used to be.

Nothing wrong with the Meades, have a look at the list of electronics problem with Celestron and Skywatcher posted here recently. Like everything used sensibly they will work, mine is coming up to 11 or 12 years now and is doing great.

The ETX80 has a build in barlow which I dislike the idea of, unless it is excellent then including one is of little use. Also if it comes loose then a pain to remove. The older 70 is simply lens, diagonal hole for eyepiece.

If you have a car get an adaptor to power it from the car, makes life easy, costs about £25.

As you want portable and presumably quick set up you are looking at an 80mm scope. After that they get a bit big and heavy. Sumarians are nice but being flat you will have to assemble and collimation is almost certainly going to need resetting vey often. So not immediate.

If the ETX80 fits the bill get one, be sensible and take care. If you can get a used decent ETX 70 get one, smaller but very portable. The other option is not doing astronomy.

[rwilkey]

The ETX's are not wide-view telescopes, so no point in a 40mm eyepiece, a 32mm Plossl, will give you the best performance. However, if you want a better wider views then some of the refractors suggested would be much better and just as portable.

[kharga]

I have a Celestron Nexstar 127 as a "Grab and Go"- it fits into 2 small camera bags!!

I also have a Skywatcher 200PDS and, like your 150P, if the eyepiece is in the wrong place, just rotate the tube in the rings!

[rwilkey]

That's the pain with EQ mounts, I find I prefer AZ mounts for visual these days.

[LukeSkywatcher]

How about a Celestron Travelscope 70. Its uuber portable (comes in its own backpack). Gives lovely wide field views. The tripod is not worth mentioning except to say its easily replaced with a sturdier one.

Great little scope for about 100 quid.

http://www.celestron.com/c3/product.php?CatID=78&ProdID=546

[TheThing]

The ETX's are not wide-view telescopes, so no point in a 40mm eyepiece, a 32mm Plossl, will give you the best performance.

That's not to say you can't use a 40mm with one. My Tal 40mm Super Plossl works very well with my ETX. Seen my first Caldwell object with that set up.

[rwilkey]

I agree, you can use a 40mm, but I cannot see any extra benefit, that's all. On the Travel Scope 70, looks pretty good, note diagonal is 45* not 90*, the 90* is better for astronomical use. Focal ratio 5.71, some good plossls will work well in this scope, especially the 32mm for wide field DSO's.