SW 1145P vs Astromaster 130 EQ

[derekbadger]

Hello everyone. First post on these here forums so be gentle!

I’m going to be buying a first ‘scope for Christmas. It’s actually for my girlfriend but I will get at least as much enjoyment out of it as she will (the best kind of present I think you’ll agree).

Having done a bit of research and with an approximate budget in mind I’ve narrowed the options down to the Skywatcher 1145P and the Celestron astromaster 130 EQ.

My impression of the SW is that it is a perfectly serviceable well made piece of kit and will be a good choice for a first scope provided I have reasonable expectations. These expectations are that it will be able to provide reasonable views of the planets and the moon and at least provide the excitement of identifying faint smudges as some of the brighter DSOs without revealing their glorious detail.

My impression of the 130 EQ is that it’s perhaps not quite as well made and the quality of the optics is lacking in comparison to the SW but that it obviously has those 16 extra millimetres of light gathering capacity and possibly a more robust EQ mount?

Whenever making these kind of purchases the mantra “quality over quantity” has always served me well and I think I’ve pretty much decided on purchasing the SW (anyone recommend a particular supplier?).

Are there any other candidates out there that I should maybe look into?

[Moonshane]

I have never used either of these scopes but suspect that the 130 will provide more satisfying views. I think where the 130 gets criticised is that there's a lot of plastic parts used but I think the mount is more substantial and the mirror provides 30% more light gathering. the mirror quality is likely to be the same in both scopes.

given your choices I'd personally go for the 130.

if you can afford or find a used 150mm f5 scope (Skywatcher or Celestron) on a mount or a dobsonian then you'd probably get this for the same sort of budget and this would give longer term satisfaction. buying with someone who knows about scopes will help.

[jimmyjamjoejoe]

Expect to spend an extra tenner on a red dot finder, the one on the 130 is ****.

[derekbadger]

Hi moonshane, thanks for the reply.

My understanding was that the mirror in the 1145P was of the parabolic type. This doesn't get mentioned in the specs of the EQ 130 so I assumed just spherical.

Ideally, I'd like to go to a bricks and mortar specialist shop to purchase - it'd be nice to chat to people in the know - but the closest one seems a fair trip away from Leeds.

[John]

Welcome to the forum

I'd take Shane's advice and follow your own mantra - save a little more for a Skywatcher 150 newtonian on either a dobsonian or equatorial mount (the former is the simplest to use in my opinion).

The Celestron has a lot of plastic in it's construction - the ones I've seen don't say "quality" to me I'm afraid, although the optics are probably OK. You will also notice that First Light Optics (top of this page) don't stock the Astromaster range - it's worth thinking why.

The little Skywatcher is quite nicely made but it's mirror is an F/4.4 which places quite high demands on eyepieces and collimation.

Neither are really awful but I do feel there are better entry level choices available with just a little more investment and ones that will deliver more and perhaps longer lasting satisfaction.

[derekbadger]

Hi Jah, and thanks for your input too!

I'll take a look at the SW 150 as you suggest.

I'd noticed that amazon stock the astromasters, but that they don't sell so many SW models. I think this is the exact analogue of your statement Re:First light optics. Amazon reviewers are useful sometimes as a filter system though.

[dag123]

As an owner of the Astromaster 130EQ I have not noticed that much in the way of plastic. Certainly all the bits that are structural seem to be metal. Agreed the red-dot-finder is not great when used with the supplied EPs, but with a 32mm EP I find the field of view wide-enough such that the finder is certainly usable.

Hope this helps

dag123