200p HEQ5 or 150p NEQ6

[SpaceFan]

Hi all!

A few months back i bought my first "decent" telescope, a Sky-Watcher 150p with eq3-2 mount, and i've had some great nights with it.

I altso have a Canon 550d, and has really fallen for the photography bit more than the visual. I've managed to take some decent shots of m42 and m45.

But as i have experienced the eq3-2 has its limits, and i really want a goto system to.So i have decided to upgrade. But i cant decide if i shoud bye a Explorer 200p with the HEQ5 or stick with the 150p and buy a NEQ6. It's about the same price so it pretty difficult to decide.

Will the extra 2" be noticeble in photography? will i need a much longer exposure time with the 6" rather then the 8"?

Later i will probably buy a tracking system to, so the weight is altso a factor.

Thanks in advance!

[Catweazel]

Hi, the short answer is yes, the extra 2" will make a difference; the 200P option is definately better

[rowan46]

I would get the eq6 if you want to get into imaging. Apparture is not so important in astrophotography the mount is. After all, people get great images with an ed80.

[1981suede]

I would keep the 150p and invest in the EQ6 personally. If you have been bitten by the photography bug then the mount is definitely the top priority. It is a lot easier to upgrade a telescope than a mount.

[rowan46]

you would find it difficult imaging with a 200p on an heq5 anyway the 200 needs the eq6 for imaging

[RikM]

They are both f/5 so will give you the same image brightness for your exposure time. The 150P will give you a wider field and an easier time with guiding. The shorter focal length being inherently more forgiving and the lighter weight and reduced 'sail' area giving you more stability and wind resistance.

[Tinker1947]

Go for the NEQ6, a bigger scope is then a option a little later...

[Ian123]

Go for the NEQ6, a bigger scope is then a option a little later...

Same here.

[Steve 1962]

...and another vote for getting the NEQ6

[RikM]

Hi, the short answer is yes, the extra 2" will make a difference; the 200P option is definately better

For visual perhaps, but for imaging the extra 2" is irrelevant. The only significant difference is the focal length.

The 200P at 1000mm will be harder to mount and harder to guide but it will get you a little closer to small targets. It won't give you the field of view for larger targets.

The 150P will fit larger targets but still not a really wide field, you can easily crop for smaller targets.

[1981suede]

you would find it difficult imaging with a 200p on an heq5 anyway the 200 needs the eq6 for imaging

I'm not sure this is strictly true. Plenty of people image with a 200p and EQ5 and get great results. An HEQ5 should handle a 8" fine along with extras.

[Cunhaval]

+1 for the NEQ6, which will cope with (just about) any OTA that you are likely to want in the future. The 150 will be excellent on it for now.

A 200p on an HEQ5, whilst fine for visual, will be less so for imaging.

Although you could always keep the 150/EQ3-2 purely for visual, and then get an HEQ5 + (say) ED80 for imaging work. Aperture is not the most critical consideration for imaging.

Ahhh..........decisions, decisions, said the man who can't make his own mind up about the next acquisition!

[SpaceFan]

Thanks for the reply guys!

Lokks like the NEQ6 is winning here, as my priority is photography. If i get innto vissual later, is it smarter to bye a huge dob then because ot the less need for accuracy? And they cost allot less to.

[SpaceFan]

+1 for the NEQ6, which will cope with (just about) any OTA that you are likely to want in the future. The 150 will be excellent on it for now.

A 200p on an HEQ5, whilst fine for visual, will be less so for imaging.

Although you could always keep the 150/EQ3-2 purely for visual, and then get an HEQ5 + (say) ED80 for imaging work. Aperture is not the most critical consideration for imaging.

Ahhh..........decisions, decisions, said the man who can't make his own mind up about the next acquisition!

Yeah i want to keep the eq3-2. Its allot lighter and easier to use when im just going out to look at the moon and planets. Yeah its not easy too decide, but the neq6 i can enjoy for many years to come:)

[SpaceFan]

They are both f/5 so will give you the same image brightness for your exposure time. The 150P will give you a wider field and an easier time with guiding. The shorter focal length being inherently more forgiving and the lighter weight and reduced 'sail' area giving you more stability and wind resistance.

So even though the bigger aperture, its the same brightness. Does the 200p just give more magnification then?

[RikM]

So even though the bigger aperture, its the same brightness. Does the 200p just give more magnification then?

I suppose you could think of that way, yes. It gives you a smaller field of view.

[RikM]

Thanks for the reply guys!

Lokks like the NEQ6 is winning here, as my priority is photography. If i get innto vissual later, is it smarter to bye a huge dob then because ot the less need for accuracy? And they cost allot less to.

Yes. Exactly right.

But then I might be biased as I have a 150P on an EQ6 for imaging and a 10" Dob for looking through

[SpaceFan]

Yes. Exactly right.

But then I might be biased as I have a 150P on an EQ6 for imaging and a 10" Dob for looking through

Ahh....i see what you meen:D But then i better bye a 12" dob:D

You have any experiece using a barlow when imaging. Does that work? And how long exposures can i expect on the NEQ6 without guide camera?

[UnderTheRain]

EEEEEEQQQQQ66666!!!!!!

Scopes come and go but your eq6 is 4eva :-)

[RikM]

Ahh....i see what you meen:D But then i better bye a 12" dob:D

You have any experiece using a barlow when imaging. Does that work? And how long exposures can i expect on the NEQ6 without guide camera?

I use a barlow with a webcam or QHY5 for lunar/planetary imaging but not for deep sky. You want a fast f/ratio, especially if you don't have an autoguider. I will try again with the barlow for planetary nebs but will probably also use the 10" in scope rings for that.

I have never run the NEQ6 unguided so I can't answer I am afraid. I can get 2min unguided with the 150P on an EQ3-2 so I guess the EQ6 would be the same or maybe a little longer. The difference is that with the EQ3-2 I had to throw away 50% of the subs because of the shakes. The EQ6 is solid so you can keep them all. Much more efficient.

For Dobs, get the biggest you can a. afford, b. carry, & c. store.

[Auntystatic]

I had the same delema, but as with housing = location, location, location, so imaging = mount, mount, mount. Every post I looked through in the discussion/mount section said get the best mount you can then buy a telescope later.

So I bought the NEQ6 and just use my camera lenses until I can afford a telescope, I have narrowed it down to 3, but I bet I get more choices from the forum members, a link to my first light astrophoto.

So my vote NEQ6

:0)

[SpaceFan]

Now the the NEQ6 is ordered from first light optics:D Cant wait for it to arrive! Probably takes a week or two. I just hope for some clear nights. Hasnt been a clear night for weeks where i live.