Celestron 127SLT Tripod and Focus Knob..bad?

[dazzst]

Hi all,

Almost about to take the plunge and buy our 1st scope, a Celestron 127 SLT however a number of forum posts suggest that the tripod and focus knob are poor. The tripod wobbles with the slightest of movement which is exacerbated by the stiffness of the focusing knob.

I've found users who have cleverly modified both of these but feel that they shouldn't have had to.

Can anyone comment on their findings?

Thanks

Daz

[starnut]

Hi I feel the same as I have not bought a scope as yet, but been doing a lot of reading, but one member has put pipe clips on the tripod and stuffed plastic up the legs, I do think that after spending £365 + you should get something that works straight out of the box, yes I know it is a beginners scope and £365 is low the the astronomy world, but I would have thought you would get something better.

I have been looking at the Skywatcher Skymax 127 (EQ3-2) with Goto

First Light Optics - Skywatcher Skymax 127 (EQ3-2)

but now it has gone from £365 to £643, but it has a better tripod (I think) and that is without the “add on's” I'm now beginning to wonder if I should just stick to my kayaking and cycling.

What I'm really looking for is a decent scope that can be put in the car and travel with as I live in a flat.

[dazzst]

I have no interest in packing up a scope and travelling to some extra dark site in the middle of nowhere. I want to view from my garden, sorry. I guess Celestron would say that it's built for a price but that's a little different from built for purpose..

The mods I've read about that increase stability, etc. would cost next to nothing in the factory which leads me to believe that they want people to step up. If the next step up wasn't £300 or so then ok!

Me.

[philhas]

Try moving the position of the accessories tray upwards, it worked for me on an SLT130 and hang a bag of sand or weight from it. Failing that if your just going to use it in the garden you could make a pier for it.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[philhas]

If your wondering where to spend the money I would try and get a deal with an EQ5 mount included. If you start with a good mount the scopes can easily be upgraded.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Cunhaval]

Whoa - let's get this into some perspective.

The Alt-Az goto mount for the 127 (I think the Celestron is the same as my Skywatcher) is fine for visual - and you shouldn't be using any Alt-Az mount for imaging, other than webcam.

Make sure you get the steel-pipe legs, rather than the older aluminium, don't extend the legs more than you actually need to, and be careful when tightening up the leg bolts. Just be gentle with it.

On a windy night, if you notice instability (I never have), a small sandbag on the eyepiece tray should make a noticeable difference.

The focus knob is small, but works fine.

When you subtract the cost of the ota (Skywatcher 127 is about £250), you are paying not much more than an extra £100-150 for a steel legged mount with full goto.

And even the EQ mounts have their problems (bendy bolts, etc).

Everything is indeed built to a price, but I would suggest that the price in this case is not unreasonable.

[dazzst]

Thanks for the replies.

So how do I ensure before I order that I'd get the steel legged tripod and not aluminium? The size of the focus knob hasn't been moaned about too much but it's stiffness and the often difficulty in getting an accurate focus without wobbling the rig. I indeed intend to use our scope for imaging with a webcam.

[Cunhaval]

Can only speak about the Skywatcher version - which I think is now always supplied on the steel legs - why not ask the supplier?

FLO are pretty good about this kind of advice.

The only reason I went for Skywatcher rather than Celestron was that the Celestron had a red-dot finder, and I hate red-dot finders, other than Telrads.

The focusser on mine is not stiff at all, but achieving focus, again, needs a gentle hand - turn it slowly. Never had any trouble in achieving focus with mine. Bear in mind that you will only be adjusting focus before you turn your webcam on. When viewing, and certainly when imaging, it's always best to avoid touching the OTA at all.

If you can, best to visit a supplier (or a local astro society) to see and play with an example before you part with your hard-earned.

[Dunkster]

I have the Celestron version. I feel everything is built to a price, but optically the 127 is a great little scope. Very portable. Very happy with mine.

As with everything, there is room for improvement, but nothing that can't be worked around. With focussing, you just need to be careful and patient. If you look in the equipment section, lukeskywalker makes the same observation about his new 8SE.

I also have a 6SE and it suffers less being on a sturdier tripod and being only slightly heavier than the 127... but it's also twice the price for previous little optical gain.

[hemihaggis]

put a bit of pipe insualation foam on the focuser , it doubles the size of the focuser and make fine tuning focus so mush easier

[Dunkster]

Ingenious!

[JamesF]

I'm inclined to agree that most of these issues are really only problems if you're imaging and these products weren't really designed specifically with imaging in mind. If they had been, they'd probably be a good deal more expensive.

The 127 focuser is awkward to move without wobbling the scope on these mounts. For visual use that's really no bother. For imaging it means fine-tuning the focus is nigh on impossible which is why people tend to modify the focuser in that case. I've motorised mine and will hopefully get to test it later this evening unless my cold gets the better of me first. Before that I put a clothes peg on the focuser knob, which I rather like as a modification because it means you're only trying to move your hand in one direction at once.

I think the 127 Mak is a good scope and for visual use I'd bet most people would be more than happy with it. It's only when you want a bit more out of it that you have to put in a bit more work yourself.

James

[hemihaggis]

yes i agree with james , the 127 is a great scope for any observer , not just beginners , the optics are just so good , and the mak design seem to have great contast ,inky black skies which make the objects jump out .

i stupidly sold mine and have regretted it ever since , i now have a 10" schmit/newt , which for the first few months of use i could not get a better image out of than my 127 mak .

i have done a lot of work and spent cash on the 10" and it is now starting to sing lol

the above home-made mods work great ,ie clothes peg , pipe foam , bag of sand ect ,dont forget your dew sheild , but a good upgrade is good 32mm ep think mine was 60 degrees , gives you a larger fov , easier to locate objects .

[JamesF]

Good point. My 32mm eyepiece is almost always the first one I reach for whatever I'm planning to view.

James