HELLLLLOOO

[Vince1963]

:hello2:Hi. first can i say a big HI to everyone, I'm a virgin lol.

can any one out there tell me which of these scopes is the best but?, they are all about £300 mark.

1.Skywatcher Skyliner 200P Dobsonian

2.Skywatcher Skymax 127 SupaTrak

3.Skywatcher Explorer 200P EQ5

4.Skywatcher Skymax 127 SynScan AZ GOTO

5.Skywatcher Skymax 102 SynScan AZ GOTO

6.Skywatcher Explorer 150P EQ3-2 / EQ3 PRO GOTO.

7.Skywatcher Startravel 102 SynScan AZ GOTO

I'm new to this but i want something i can see the planets and nebula with pretty good detail, or am i expecting too much? Also i need it to be portable for traveling. I'm leaning more towards the Skywatcher Skymax 127 SupaTrak or the refractor Skywatcher Startravel 102 SynScan AZ GOTO. Please let me know what you think Cheers Vince

[AstroMadBloke]

Hi Vince, my suggestion to you would be start with the biggest aperture that you can afford. The best thing you can do if you have one local to you is join an astronomy club where members are always more than willing to give you advise and to let you look through there scopes. That way you can try out some different telescope to see what suits you the best for your needs, you can try before you buy if you know what I mean. Pete

[rowan46]

welcome to sgl.

The best scope for nebulas etc is the 200p but it's not the most portable. what do you mean by portable? if you mean put on a backpack for walking then the 102 synscan comes closest although it's not something you want to hike with. however if you mean split into pieces and put into an average car to a dark site the 200p is possible.

The 102 skymax is the most portable but least able scope

the 127 skymax is next most portable and next best scope

the 150 is the next best in terms of portabilty but not something you would want to carry far. but a more able scope than the skymax

200p dob best scope but heavy

200p on eq5 best scope but heavier than the dob

[Vince1963]

Cheers Pete.. But which is best 6 inch mirror or 4 inch lense. Vince

[rowan46]

6" mirror is better a good quality 4" refractor can compete quite well but that is well outside the £300 mark at the £300 mark refractors are not so good

[Vince1963]

Hi Rowan46, i'm struggling with this site at the moment too lol... Thanks for input, Yeah, i want it to take on holidays maybe the 200p EQ5 maybe the best scope in my price range but its going to be hard dragging it around. Isn't the Skywatcher Skymax 127 SupaTrak maksutov any good? Cheers

[rowan46]

It's a fine scope for planets but like any scope of that apparture struggles with dso's To get a little technical it has a long focal length which means it magnifys a little more and consequently everything is a little dimmer. On bright objects however it is lovely. so it's great on the moon good at planets and a few of the brighter deep space objects but it does struggle on nebulae except m45 it's pretty good at double stars too

[Vince1963]

Thanks ASTROMADBLOKE and ROWAN46 for your valued input. not sure i'm using this messaging thing right yet lol.

[John]

None of the scopes on your list are "bad" scopes. They all have strengths and weaknesses though which is quite normal for scopes. There is no escaping that the larger aperture scopes will outperform the smaller ones, by a considerable margin if you compare a 102mm one with a 200mm one - the latter collects 4x as much light so it's going to show fainter objects and more detail on the planets.

You are starting to find out why many folks end up with more than one scope !

I guess you need to decide how important portability is to you. If it's very important then that will steer you towards the smaller aperture scopes. If you can compromise portability then you can go for the larger ones, which certainly will perform better.

The 127mm maksutov-cassegrains are a reasonable compromise being both compact and having reasonable light grasp. They have quite a narrow field of view which suits planetary / lunar viewing more than wide field but will show enough sky with a 32mm eyepiece to enable many deep sky objects to fit in the field of view.

[rowan46]

i should add because somebody will. that the magnification can be mitigated by less powerful eyepieces but it will still give a narrower field of view. every scope has a trade off A mak has great portability no need to collimate if the factory have made it properly. In ease of use its nearly as good as a refractor just cool and use but it's not quite as good as a reflector of the same price because it doesn't have as large an apparture. It is however a good scope

[Vince1963]

Thanks Rowan46.. for now I'll keep looking but i can see its not going to be an easy choice.

[Vince1963]

Hi John thank you for your comment, this astronomy business is getting a bit confusing, I started off with two scopes and my list is getting bigger lol. wish i had more cash to spend.. this would have made my choice far easier. It is starting to look like i will need more than one scope. Cheers

[Vince1963]

Thanks guys for your help, It is very much appreciated Vince