Thinking about a Skywatcher Equinox 100 Pro Apo for Moon and planets

[jonathan]

Just wondering what people's opinion of this telescope is, how do the views compare to my 8SE, and what I might expect to be able to see besides planets.

Could I see Venus any better than I can in the 8SE? I'd like to be able to see the larger planets, but don't think that I have the space for the 120.

I already have things like diagonal, may just need a finder scope for it. Any particular eyepieces that work well in this telescope? I have a standard Celestron 25mm Plossl, 10mm Celestron X-Cel, SW 38mm Panavision.

Thanks for all the advice!

[Rob_UK_SE]

I would expect it to provide better contrast and perhaps access to a little more detail. This is largely due to not having a central obstruction like that in your 8SE.

You will also benefit from significantly reduced cool down times.

APOs excel on double stars and the planets, however, as always, the limiting factor is light gathering. Your 8SE will still be very useful for DSO and probably a notch better. The light gathering capability of your 8" SCT will be around 800x more than the human eye, whereas the 100mm APO will be around 200x. For the moon, planets and stars, in addition to the huge number of brighter celestial objects, you would achieve a fine view with a 100mm refractor - APO design that is.

Although I have experience with 100mm refractors (and own one), I am unable to provide specific details about the SkyWatcher one you refer to as I regrettably haven't used it.

In terms of eyepieces you may find a good old barlow / powermate is your ticket. Your 8SE has a focal length of 2032mm; the Equinox 100 has a focal length of 900mm. Therefore, a 2x barlow device would double (pardoning the shocking barlow related pun) your current eyepiece range to achieve a similar magnification on the Equinox.

Rob

[John]

As long as it is in decent collimation and well cooled, an 8" SCT will substantially outperform a 100ED refractor. I had my best ever views of Saturn with a Celestron C8 SCT. I'd owned an ED100 shortly before the C8 and the difference was very apparent. The ED100's are lovely scopes though but 4x more light is hard to compete with.

[Mr Onions]

I would take a 4" refractor any day over an 8" SCT for moon planets why?

Seeing conditions.

My friend in Belgium has a wonderful Takahshi Mewlon but can only see the same amount of detail on Jupiter as his 4" refractor as seeing conditions won't allow the full benefit of the extra aperture of the mewlon.

Maybe? in Spring IF seeing improves he might tell a different tale.

[hunterknox]

As long as it is in decent collimation and well cooled, an 8" SCT will substantially outperform a 100ED refractor. I had my best ever views of Saturn with a Celestron C8 SCT. I'd owned an ED100 shortly before the C8 and the difference was very apparent. The ED100's are lovely scopes though but 4x more light is hard to compete with.

I'd second this. Also had both scopes.

[Peter Drew]

+1 for the C8.

[A McEwan]

All this is true, but the 100mm ED will be quicker to set up, quicker to cool down, easier to maintain, and show excellent views of any object it points at. It will perform better in average seeing and yield a more contrasty view. Tack sharp stars - like diamonds sprinkled on black velvet.

It's not about aperture with these scopes - the C8 will trounce it every time on a like for like basis under excellent seeing, but will take longer to set up, longer to cool, require more frequent collimation, etc.

I'd say the two would complement each other nicely, not particularly compete with each other.

Clear skies to you,

Ant

[MjrTom]

I agree with Ant, these are the reasons why I prefer refractors over a Newtonian or Catadioptric.

It takes me less than ten minutes to setup one of my refractors on it's mount.

Take it from room temperature house to the garden and within 20 minutes or so it's cooled down enough for high power viewing.

[A McEwan]

Forgot to say, I wouldn't expect great views of Venus with it. Venus is very hard to observe, even with a cooled Apo. It's usually low over the horizon with the air temp either dynamically cooling or dynamically rising. If you can get it high in the sky you've a better chance of a pleasing view...

Eyepiece wise it'll cope with anything really. Personally I like using Ortho's with wide field reserved for medium power by means of a 17mm Nagler T4 and 23mm Axiom LX (both with 2x ED Barlow) and a 9mm 100-degree Explore Scientific gives 100x mag and a whole one-degree true field of view. Rather nice...

Ant

[Peter Drew]

I must have an untypical C8 (SE). It takes me a couple of minutes to set up, kept at a reasonably ambient temperature it performs well almost immediately, rarely needs collimating which is another couple of minutes with Bob's knobs and outperforms my Vixen 4" flourite refractor on all counts except star image quality for which the 4" is preferred.

[MjrTom]

Hi Peter think you hit the nail on the head, you keep your C8 at ambient temp.

I doubt it would be the same if the temperature differential was 15-20*c (at this time of the year) which is usually the case if you keep it inside a centrally heated home

Dont get me wrong I want a C8 myself as you just cant beat aperture on some things

[dweller25]

My C8 outperforms my 4" Apo on the planets.

[Luke]

We use the ED100Pro, which has the same optics as the Equinox, as our grab and go. Constrast is great and the views razor sharp. The shadows from moons passing over Jupiter are perfect pin points.

Our 8 inch SCT does get us in closer with more detail, giving a better view overall for me, just not quite as sharp and constrasty. On general deep sky, it's no contest, the ED100 is fairly limited in comparison in what you can see because of the aperture (about 25% the light gathering power of the 8 inch).

The ED100 is a joy to use, perfect for a low hassle session of the brighter DSOs, moon and planets.

[skywatcher1]

i think skywatcher equinox ed 100 and 120 are the better choice for astronomical use.i would suggest you see microglobe.co .uk site for its details

[jonathan]

Hmm. I'm considering another option now - the Omni XLT 120. It is wider than the 100, has the same Starbright coatings that the 8SE has (I think), but should be a lot better than my ST80 for grab-and-go stuff. I may be taking a step too far too quickly with the Equinox Pro line, what do you think? I have no plans to get serious about photography, it would be purely visual.

I would have to lose the ST80 to make room for it, but if it's a much better scope then I wouldn't have any quarms about that. I appreciate that the 120 is a longer scope.

Are the tube rings pretty much the same size for the ST80 and XLT 120? My Lunt LS60 is a perfect fit in the tube rings that came with the ST80, it would be very handy if it would also fit in the XLT 120 tube rings without modification.

Would I regret not holding out for an Equinox Pro? Colour fringing really that bad or very acceptable compared to the ST80? I do not expect to see Venus or most of the other planets well through such a scope, when Venus was up recently I think I got the best out of the 8SE by seeing the phases, and that was a hard task through the turbulent atmosphere over the houses. So long as I can see Saturn and it's rings, Jupiter, and some cracking moon views (with ND filter, most likely) then I'll be happy. Not forgetting those beautiful clusters...

Would I be able to fit my 2" diagonal to this?

[laser_jock99]

I'd expect the 8SE to give better views than a 100ED the extra aperture alone should give much better resolution.

[ollypenrice]

Storm in a teacup and not worth changing scopes one way or the other. I'm a refractor freak but there will be nights of poor seeing when the 4 inch might win and nights of good seeing when it would be the 8 inch. Either way it would not be a life changing difference!

Olly

[jonathan]

I'm not trying to replace the 8SE, the refractor is a grab and go scope for me.

[Donkeiller]

I have a 4" APO and a 6SE.

I reckon the 6SE is better on all objects, except double stars, than the 'frac.

A 8SE would be even better.

The only negative is that the 6/8SE is not "grab 'n go", but rather "grab 'n wait".

That's why I keep the 'frac.