Upgrade advice please! Evostar 150 or Skymax 150?

[paul1610]

Hi all,

I am looking to upgrade from my Nexstar 127 which I use purely for lunar / planetary viewing to something around a 150.

I'm really attracted to the EQ6 mount but can't decide around sticking with another Mak (ie the 150 or even 180), or go more traditional towards a refractor like the Evostar 150.

I had no idea that amateur astronomy was full of such sleepless dilemmas! lol

Help and advice really appreciated

Paul, Notttingham.

[mik]

Hi Paul,

Well i am a refractor kinda guy so i will suggest the 180mak yes i said that,

My reason the 150 Evostar is a beast and ive found that with big fracs you are never 100% happy until you have that apo in the yard.

The 180 mak will have better optics,be quicker to set up and use and with our weather.......

Just my view hth Mick

[iwatkins]

A big 6" frac is *always* on my list of things to own.

But I never do it as I have the 180Mak

As Mick says, the Mak it quick and and easy to setup and less of a handful. And if planets are your thing, I think you would be happy with what the 180Mak can do with 2700mm focal length.

I'll never part with mine.

Cheers

Ian

[paul1610]

Thanks for the advice. Yea I think I could see myself veering towards the 180 Mak, although am also considering a Celestron CPC 925 which would probably be my preferred choice, although I like the EQ6 mounts hence why the 180 Mak. Is it wrong to base decision on which type of scope to go for around the mount?

[iwatkins]

Wrong? No.

Many people *have* to decide on what scope to to go for based on what mount they have as often replacing both at the same time is cost prohibitive.

But if you can buy the right scope and mount together, even better.

Of course, you do know you can have the Celestron 925 OTA to fit on a EQ6 mount right? Could be an option. But you would need to check what your current mount can handle weight wise as the 925 is up around 10kg I think, not sure what the EQ6 can handle.

Either way, the 180Mak and the 9.25 are both great optically.

Cheers

Ian

[Earl]

Both those scopes are good contenders, the 9.25 does offer a bit more versatility with reducers for imaging if mounted on an EQ mount.

The Mak does suffer from needing a hard to get adapter to use standard SCT fittings.

My best views of jupiter have been through the Mak. I did let mine go when I came across my C11 though. aperture fever.... going up to a C14 is not something I see happening soon though as its a rather large price jump and realistically would need a mount upgrade too..... never say never though LOL

[nightfisher]

Here is my take on this, as a Mak and frac user

the refractors tend to be the quickest to set up and get viewing, but an achro WILL show false colour on bright ojects, this false colour will be ok on lunar, but might be a problem with Jupiter, also the 6" evostar is best on the EQ6

The 180, or 150 Mak will show NO false colour, Jupiter is superb with the big Mak, lots of intricate detail with the right eyepiece, its at the limit of an EQ5 but great on the EQ6, the mak will also give a fair account on some DSO`s, but they do have a cooldown time, maybe an hour or so before they give their best

[paul1610]

Thanks all for the advice - again really appreciated.

So what would your thoughts be on the CPC925 Vs 180 Mak + EQ6? Not far off eachother price-wise, but I assume the CPC would offer less options to upgrade the OTA given the mount, whereas the EQ option would give me that option in future?

Oh the torture of amateur astrogazing! lol

[Merlin66]

I'm lucky enough to have a 6" refractor ("Big Yin") - IT IS BIG!!! (Used for white light solar observing) and a C9.25 OTA which mounted on the NEQ6 - absolute magic!!

Recently upgraded the spectroscope kit to a C11 again on the NEQ6 - this is about the workable limit!

[paul1610]

Hi Merlin - thanks for your thoughts.

The C11 is just outside of my budget but I am also sniffing around the CPC C925 which is around the same price as the 9.25 OTA + NEQ6. What are your thoughts?

How long is set-up and polar allignement with the NEQ6? Am concerned that while this mount is great quality, I will spend half of my time on PA with it - or am I just panicing? lol

[Merlin66]

I used fork mounted Lx200's for many years. No major issues, but I couldn't fit my spectroscope to the rear cell and get enough clearance...lost sky coverage.

That was the motivator to change to the GEM.

Setting up the NEQ6 is no different to any other EQ mount...get it pretty right once and then mark the ground for the next time...

[jfox61]

Thanks for the advice. Yea I think I could see myself veering towards the 180 Mak, although am also considering a Celestron CPC 925 which would probably be my preferred choice, although I like the EQ6 mounts hence why the 180 Mak. Is it wrong to base decision on which type of scope to go for around the mount?

No. Mount first. The biggest and best you can afford. This will dictate the size of Scope you can max up to. I made that mistake and bought the 120 Evostar on a 3-2 mount, oh dear!! I have had to bite the bullet and buy an EQ6 for my Newt relegating my CG5 to the Evostar and using that for visual. The 3-2 will now support my little 80mm ED which leaves me with a spare mount which i'll probably use now for DSLR DSO photography. But his has now cost me over £800 for maing the wrong choice in the first place.

[paul1610]

Thanks jfox really good to hear that I've not totally lost the plot considering the mount to such an extent. Any thoughts on how the CGEM compares against the NEQ6?