New owner of a Skywatcher 130. Advice please :)

[Welrod50]

Hi folks. This is my second thread, after initially posting in the welcome section. Time to move on...

On Friday 16th of March I became the proud owner of a Skywatcher Explorer 130 (not para) with the EQ2 mount.

Now, I did a lot of research and plumped for this one based mainly on spec and price - I wanted a good starter scope to grow into and not change for a while (if at all) and this seemed ideal. I have the standard 10mm and 25mm EP's and the std x2 Barlow it came with. I've ordered a 4mm Celestron EP which appears a step up from the EP's that came with the scope.

I have already come to notice that the 10mm is not quite as clear or sharp as the 25mm (which in fact is really pretty good) and I've come to avoid the Barlow as it does get me closer, but at the obvious expense of IQ.

I wonder then, if anyone can share their experience of which EP's work best with this scope, which one's I need to avoid, if I can source a DSLR adapter at some point, if there is a Barlow which does not degrade the IQ and so on...

Apologies for asking this as I dare say others have done so before, but I tried a search and read a load of posts last night - while the sky was overcast and could not find what I was after.

Thanks all. Any advice greatly appreciated as I rekindle the feelings of awe I loosely recall from my childhood when I looked up at night.....

Scott.

Skywatcher Explorer 130

Tasco 12x50 bino's

Tasco 40mm refractor (circa 1980)

EP's and what not

[mallorcasaint]

When I had my 130 I bought the Revelation EP set and the EP's are very good. I continue to use them with my C6 and WOZ66. At least they will give you better views until you decide to splash out a lot of money on the much better quality EP's. As for the DSLR, I think you may have a problem getting a DSLR focussed on a 130. I know I did. Better to get a webcam and do some planetary imaging.

[Welrod50]

Thanks for that. Postman delivered the 4mm I ordered the other day just - its a Celestron Omni 4mm which cost £30. Have just tried it on the scope and admittedly there is a lot of atmospheric turbulence here today so I know it is not truly representative of what the optics will do tonight (if it is clear as forecast).

But, I have to say the 25mm std EP is pretty good. The std 10mm EP is notably more fuzzy, but still ok. The new 4mm EP is pretty poor in all honesty and not what I was expecting of a £30 EP. Am I expecting too much? Would I need to spend a three fugure sum to acquire a 4mm EP with the sharpness and clarity of the 25mm EP?

Any advice and ideas greatly appreciated

Scott.

[Capricorn]

A 4mm plossl is not normally a good idea, bought one years ago, tried it and have not gone near it over 10 years.

Even the 5mm I have is not used much however the 6mm is.

For eyepieces in the 5mm and 4mm options I have designs other then plossl. TMB planetaary eyepieces.

For a barlow the Tal 2x gets good reviews, would suggest one of those. Unless very good any additional glass in the path will degrade the final image. The compromise is how much you pay compared to the performance. TV 2x powermates are good, also £265.

[spaceboy]

I am assuming by (not para) you have the 130M f/9. The reason why the 4mm at x225 is poor because it is a tad to powerful for the average UK seeing (and possibly your scope). It is a misconception of most beginners that more power equates to a better view but this is not the case and UK seeing conditions rarely allow magnifications above x200 with out adverse effects. This is why the views are so much better through the 25mm not because the EP is of any better quality but because it has a much lower magnification. There is also the possibility your scope is not correctly collimated and you did not allow a long enough cool down time before observing. The chances are you will rarely use the 4mm EP and you would have been much better off buying a better quality barlow for £30 and using this with the 10mm on those nights of good seeing. This way you could also have used the barlow with the 25mm to get your monies worth. As scott said the revelation EP kit is a step up from the standard MA eyepieces that came with the scope and would offer you a much more suitable spread of magnifications for your scope. First Light Optics - Revelation Photo-Visual Eyepiece kit it also includes a DSLR adapter (requires T2) which you could probably use for taking snap shots of the moon with your setup.

HTH

[Lenny147]

I have the same scope and purchased the Tal x2 barlow which works great with the 25mm but the 10mm is a waste of time. I ended up buying a few Vixen Npls which seem to work great with my scope and wont break the bank

[Welrod50]

OK, thanks for the advice. May I ask, how do I tell if the collimation is incorrect? Would this mean the 25mm EP view would be compromised also, as it is very sharp indeed with this EP.

Also, I have pretty much ditched the barlow that came with the scope as it really does degrade the IQ. Assuming the collimation is ok (after being checked and altered?!?) what would be the best Barlow to go for. I'm only really interested in ED glass or something with more elements in more groups (similar to camera lenses I imagine).

Any advice folks would be brill.

Scott

[Demo johnny]

i just bought a collimation laser for my new scope and used Dion from astronomy sheds tutorial which is on you tube. My sw150 is just new also and was amazed how off it was. Saturn and Jupiter looked good through my scope as did the moon orion nebula was ok all before collimation and as i say it was off by miles. tonight hopefully will see an improvement. Being a newbie i would also guess you find the eq2 on larger magnifications a bit wobbly i find my eq3 wobbles bit. I have settled to looking wider now on the scope as really that is what it is good for though have just bought a 8-24 sw zoom next probably looking at a high quality 32mm as I say i think wider gets the best from these starter scopes. Saturn for the first time amazed me it was good with the 10mm but sharper with the 25 although small. I think the 8-24 with a high quality wide will be my setup going forward. if you have a local astro club see if you can go along there will be someone there who can help collimate your scope.

[Lenny147]

Yeah the barlow and the 10mm is not great so i changed them fairly fast.

Like i said i went with the Tal x2 barlow and for roughly £40 it works great and has some good reviews. Collimation is another issue altogether which i will leave for someone with more experience to explain that to you.

Im sure someone nice on here will explain in more detail than me

[Welrod50]

Yes please

I'l have a look at collimation on You Tube. Hopefully there may be an idiots guide on there (as I really do not know where to start).

Keep the advice coming guys, it is helping .....

Scott.

[Tiddles]

I found the high power plossl's gave very little eye relief and not a very wide FOV. After trying one I decided against the plossl's as I found them very difficult to use. The Baader Hyperion 8-24 zoom has really shown my 'scopes potential.

Astro Baby guide to collimation is superb and I've been more successful using a dust cap with a 1mm hole dead centre than any other gadget.

[Welrod50]

Oh and yes Demo - the scope does wobble quite a bit on the mount, but I try not to touch it as much as possible. It sounds daft, but to a degree it does work.

Strange really, as it's such a heavy scope and the tripod isn't what I would regard as flimsy at all.

[Welrod50]

Mmmm, Tiddles. Strange you should mention zoom EP. I have thought about that route, but have been advised to exercise caution as the IQ is less than a good fixed EP. I have to say though, a high quality zoom and a high quality barlow would be a good answer. Any ideas??

[Thirdway]

http://www.astro-baby.com/collimation/astro%20babys%20collimation%20guide.htm

Just follow it very slowly and it works well. A Cheshire with extension tube is useful.

[Thirdway]

The baader zoom 8-24 is great. Bit limited on FOV but it is nice and sharp throughout. Much nicer than the supplied10mm and a step up from the 25mm.

Get a 32mm wide angle such as the panaview and a decent 13mm such as the xcel and you can use the Barlow for good sky planetary viewing.

[Welrod50]

Cool. Best Barlow then for a reasonable price??

Thanks for the advice. It is a big help!!!

[Welrod50]

While I think on, it is the 130 f9 non parabolic. Great scope by the way!

[Tiddles]

Zoom EP's on a budget will be a compromise, spend big - spend once, the Hyperion is fantastic.

[Thirdway]

Probably a TAL 2x or you could splash on the baader Hyperion as it goes with the zoom, finally the celestron Ultima as it would be excellent with the 13mm and everything else but is more pricey.

[mallorcasaint]

Just anote that the Revelation set has a very nice 32mm zoom EP.

"The 32mm eyepiece is an excellent choice for low-power observing and incorporates a sliding barrel and male T-thread for imaging. Simply unscrew the cap to reveal the T-thread which accepts a standard T-ring for eyepiece projection astro-photography with a digital SLR camera.!

The set also comes with filters!

[Welrod50]

Having spent all of this (overcast) evening doing yet more research, i think I am leaning towards a x2 TAL Barlow and a Baader Hyperion 8-24 zoom EP. Is there any reason why I could not use both together?

Finally, I just need a nudge in the right direction guys. Any more users experience of these optics to share??

I ask as, if I do plump for these optics and they are not usable, it will be a lot of money wasted. I just need some reassurance and real owner input please.

Will they be a real step up from the std 10mm and 25mm EP's that came with the scope??!

Thanks

Scott

Skywatcher Explorer 130 F9

Tasco 12x50 bino's

Tasco 40mm refractor (circa 1980)

10mm, 25mm EP's

x2 Skywatcher Barlow

Celestron Omni 4mm EP

and still counting....

[Tiddles]

The zoom alone will be a huge step up from stock, you will not be disappointed. I tried mine with a stock x2 Barlow this evening and it performed well.

[Thirdway]

Barlow would be better on something like a 13mm celestron xcel. That gives a nice planetary EP at 6.5mm which should be more than enough. The 8-24mm is the convenient compromise if you can understand that. In other words you lose a little something to a good quality single mag EP, but you gain a boatload of convenience and a marked step up from the supplied lenses. Its all down to the sky quality. A good 13mm lens will perform slightly better than the baader because it gives a wider FOV and possibly slightly more light transmission, so gives an alternative to the Baader when a mid mag EP might give a marginal improvement ( we are talking very slight, subtle differences and not night and day ) then the Barlow gives pretty much max practical magnification for your scope at 6.5mm. You can stick the Barlow on the zoom, that's going to give you a 4mm EP, not really ideal, but that gives the theoretical maximum magnification possible for your scope under perfect seeing conditions.

Remember the 8mm max mag on the Zoom will be at the edge of the performance on average seeing nights. I often have to back off to something slightly less powerful. The 24mm setting allows you to acquire the object and then zoom in. If you just went from a 24mm to an 8mm in single lenses it gets tricky. The zoom means this is very easy, if you lose the object then zoom out a bit and re acquire.

The reason I suggest a 13mm is that it is quite often that that is where I use the Baader. So say you had ideal conditions and could use the 8mm setting easily, then you have a nice, slightly better FOV single lens that can be Barlowed to even greater magnification. Also, say that conditions were not ideal and you were finding that you were mid way on the zoom, the single 13mm gives an optional lens that might give a slightly improved view and a wider FOV.

This is why lens choice is difficult. You could, in theory have two identical mag EPs, one might give more brightness and a better FOV, while the other might give better edge sharpness but lose some brightness. On any given night, one might be better than the other. Tricky eh?

You probably can't have enough EPs if truth be told, but you probably don't have enough money for that. The 8-24mm is a great compromise. Next EP would be a wide angle low mag as its more useful. Leave the Barlow and 13mm until you have gained a bit more experience, you might, by then have figured out your exact requirements.

Finally, if you are buying well known, popular lenses in the 8mm to 34mm area, then you can sell them with a small loss, you can then buy secondhand without any pain at all. Even if you buy new, then the loss isn't catastrophic, you pretty much get 60-75% of the value back when you sell. I was watching a Baader zoom which sold s/h for just a pound or two short of brand new. Buy wisely and the money is safe as.....well, er not houses.

[Welrod50]

That, is sound advice. Thanks very much.

I've been looking at kit last night as the seeing was terrible again here in Staffs. I must say, I was leaning towards a good quality Barlow and mid range EP instead of a zoom, albeit one apparently as good as the Baader- so it's funny that I now read what you've advised here

My thought process being that, if I get the best EP and barlow I can afford, that would be of more benefit to me. I would prefer absolute clarity at wider mags than the convenience of a zoom. It's not the first time I've read about the idea of a 13mm EP either.

Truth be told, I want something that will allow me to see Jupiter more clearly on good nights and bring out more DSO's and I reckon a top quality EP will do that more often than a zoom will.

Also, a Barlow will enable the use of all EP's (as others have rightly pointed ot already) and give greater versatility.

Thanks for that, I think I've made my mind up.

Now, what can I sell to fund this endeavour??

Cheers!!!

Scott:D

[Thirdway]

For DSO you really need a good wide angle low magnification EP. Nebulas, galaxies and clusters benefit from low magnification, they are often difficult to find and many have very little luminescence ( galaxies are actually quite big objects but are very difficult to see because they give out very little light). I use the 32mm for that purpose.

For planetary I use the Zoom. It's very good, but has a narrow FOV. If you have decided that planetary is your thing, then a wider FOV with the 13mm means you move the scope slightly less. The Barlowed 13mm will, I expect be as much magnification as you can use. I think get the Celestion Xcel and the Celestion Ultima Barlow, if that's the way you want to go.The supplied 25mm is a pretty good EP for low end mag for now.

Remember that planets are quite restrictive in number on any one night ( Jupiter, Saturn, the phases of Venus, mars is very variable, Neptune, Uranus almost invisible) and for perfect viewing they need to be as high in the sky as possible. Low horizon viewing is tricky and plagued with atmospheric distortion and light pollution. Moons a good object. Orion Nebula is fine with the 25mm in town, brilliant with a good 32mm in dark skies.