Scope/Mount for deep sky + maybe pics

[crazyjedi]

I've been observing for a few years with my trusty SW 150p + EQ mount plus a hodge podge of lenses (mostly 2nd hand purchases).

I have recently started thinking about imaging and perhaps focusing more on DSO's.

I was wondering about what would be a good set up for a reasonable outlay. I was leaning towards the SW 10inch f4 quatro but have been warned that they're probably aimed more at experienced astrophotographers.

Therefore I thought I'd ask the question to you all.

I like the look of the SW Evostar 120ED-DS but am unsure of the best mount for this scope or even if I'm barking up the wrong tree all together with an f7 APO.

The only reason I've been SW biased is that I've been very happy with my current scope for some time but I'm happy to switch on a strong recommendation from someone in the know.

I'm not aiming fro pro- pics right now i just want to get started and have a scope for good DSO observing.

[Gina]

SW Evostar 120ED-DS sounds fine to me - I have the 80 ED DS Pro. I also have an NEQ6 Pro mount which I recommend for imaging.

[crazyjedi]

Yeah if I get a SW 120ED I'll be going with the SW mount. Wasn't sure how heavy duty it needed to be NEQ-5 or NEQ6?? I'm used to a Newt which is big-ish but lacking the glass lenses- relatively light. I know fracs can be heavy so I'm not sure about the mount requirements.

[John]

I have a Skywatcher ED120 Pro F/7.5 refractor which I use for visual observing as I'm not an imager. It's not that heavy at around 6kg including a 2" diagonal and 9x50 finder. For visual use an EQ5 / CG5 is fine but I guess for imaging you will need something more substantial.

[DOBBY]

Imaging isn't my thing but.... whats wrong with slapping your existing 'scope to an HEQ5 Pro ?

[rocketandroll]

you'll get comparable views of DSO's through the 120 as through your existing Newt I'd think... maybe a bit clearer, but not much brighter.

With a reducer/flattener in there it'd make a very nice imaging scope.

The trouble you'll have is that a good scope for observing DSO's wont really be the same as a good scope for imaging DSO's.

I'd probably say a biggish Newt may be the best bet, though the quatro's are allegedly a bit of a handfull to get working bang on.

You would be fine imaging with a 120ED or up to an 7" Newt on a HEQ5. A NEQ6 would of course be more stable but a good bit heavier... depends if you are going to need to move it around much?

Ben

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[Deneb]

If your going to image with that 120ED, only 2 mounts come to mind for that scope:

a) Skywatcher NEQ6 Pro / Syntrek

or

Celestron CGEM

cheers

Nadeem.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

you'll get comparable views of DSO's through the 120 as through your existing Newt I'd think... maybe a bit clearer, but not much brighter.

With a reducer/flattener in there it'd make a very nice imaging scope.

The trouble you'll have is that a good scope for observing DSO's wont really be the same as a good scope for imaging DSO's.

I'd probably say a biggish Newt may be the best bet, though the quatro's are allegedly a bit of a handfull to get working bang on.

You would be fine imaging with a 120ED or up to an 7" Newt on a HEQ5. A NEQ6 would of course be more stable but a good bit heavier... depends if you are going to need to move it around much?

Ben

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

Don't agree with the first point. Visually the 150P will beat the 120ED on DSOs. Aperture is king here. Visual DSO work has VERY different from DSO photography. In the first, aperture is king, in the second focal ratio is king. I intend to use my APM 80mm F/6 for photography (use it for wide field observing already), whereas the 8" SCT at F/10 is outstanding on DSOs (bagged a mag 13 galaxy with it).

The 10" would be a very good DSO scope visually, and it can be used for DSO photography, but might not be the best choice as noted by others for a starter scope in imaging. In fact, with a good focuser and coma correcter, the 150 might be easier to use than the 10".

The 120ED with reducer is better, but may still be a handful. An 80ED with reducer is has the same speed, but smaller focal length and will be easier to guide. It would also free up cash for a bigger mount. All imagers tell me to invest in the mount, rather than the aperture.

[Deneb]

There is also another option here, buy yourself a MN190.

The focal length is 1000mm, a little longer then the 120ED @ 900mm, you won't need a corrector for it either. With the 120ED the native focal ratio is f/7.5, with only a reducer you will get a ratio of f6.25, but the MN190 will give you a ratio of f5.3 out of the box with flat field correction. Also I think it's a tad cheaper...

Nadeem.

[swag72]

I have a 120ED and use it with a HEQ5 for imaging. Initially I used it with a DSLR and the SW reducer, it worked well. Now I have an Atik 314L with it, and I like the fov. I am still using the reducer / flattener with it. I am looking forward to Galaxy season with it and the Atik.

My only gripe was having to change the focuser as I found it sagging considerably with the DSLR weight.

The ED80 is a more popular imaging scope and I have often thought that the 120ED is a little large for DSO stuff. But now that I have an Equinox 66 as well, that's for the wider field. I am pleased with the setup and the HEQ5 is fine with the weight. This is the first scope I'd ever tried, it was a learning curve for sure. The weak link is undoubtedly me, not the scope and mount!

[crazyjedi]

It sounds to me (I did suspect this before) that the best scope for viewing DSO's is not so great for imaging them.

The plan may well be for me to save and get a ten inch newt (maybe SW 250P DS) and a DSLR to get started and then save for a short tube 80/90mm Apo frac. I'd only need the one mount.

Been good advice from this thread. Cheers everyone