Skywatcher 200p Dob. Vs 200p Explorer.

[Hermancrab]

Hi all, I know this thread appears alot but I'm deciding on which I should get....

The Skywatcher 200p Dobsonian Or the Skywatcher 200p Explorer?

There's a big gap in price difference and I hear that the explorer is better for images but both need a HEQ5 if you want good images from them.

What do you think?

[rory]

both same scope, one on a dobsonian mount one on an equatorial mount, you need equatorial for long exposures i believe. the optics are the same

[coxy322]

I have the EQ5 model 200P. Works fine for imaging DSOs - exposures up to 50 seconds are the limit but I am still learning to tweak polaris alignment.

I think HEQ mount is only needed if you are going to get 'serious' about imaging :- if that is you then you must understand the need to spend more money in the first place!

[zainraza]

I'm gonna be keeping an eye on this thread as I'm also looking to get one or the other when I upgrade.

From what I've heard the Explorer is easier to track, imaging etc but the dob has what every dob has, portability.

[rory]

in a nut shell if you want to practice imaging , i would go for the 200 on a gem .

if you want to do visual ,with maybe planetary imaging the dobsonian would suit.

that would be my understanding.

[coxy322]

Quote: "From what I've heard the Explorer is easier to track, imaging etc but the dob has what every dob has, portability. "

-- The Dob has a longer FL so how is it more portable (Dob=1200mm EQ=1000mm)!?

My 200p OTA fits comfortably in the boot of my hatchback and the mount in the back seat.

About the limit though. Any bigger and you'll need a larger car.

[RikM]

The 200P Dobsionian if f/6 so 1200mm focal length. the Explorer 200P is f/5 so shorter at 1000mm focal length.

For imaging you would need the Explorer 200P and a sturdy equatorial mount with tracking motors at minimum. Better a very sturdy EQ mount with the capability to run an autoguider if you want to get good images. The scope is sold as a package with the EQ5 and this is fine for visual use and short unguided exposures. For better results you would be looking at the HEQ5 or bigger.

For visual observing, the 200P Skyliner Dobsonian is a wonderful scope. At f/6 you get good views with midrange eyepieces (where f/5 is more of a challenge). The scope is big enough to see lots of interesting deep sky objects but with good focal length and resolution for very nice views of the planets as well. You could add scope rings and mount this on an NEQ6 (too big for an HEQ5 really) in the future if you wanted to.

[swamp thing]

The Dob has a longer FL so how is it more portable (Dob=1200mm EQ=1000mm)!?

Portability is not just about tube length (it's only 8" longer). It also about your willingness to set the scope up every time you observe. EQ mounts require polar aligning and Dobs don't, this makes up for being 8" longer and some.you can also pick up your 8" Dob and move it accross your observing site halfway through a session, to find that galaxy thats hiding behind a tree:rolleyes:. Can't do that very easily with an EQ unless you wanna polar align again.

The advantage of an EQ mount is only apparent if you wish to do AP for visual the Dob is a more portable usable package.

Regards Steve

[zainraza]

Portability is not just about tube length (it's only 8" longer). It also about your willingness to set the scope up every time you observe. EQ mounts require polar aligning and Dobs don't, this makes up for being 8" longer and some.you can also pick up your 8" Dob and move it accross your observing site halfway through a session, to find that galaxy thats hiding behind a tree:rolleyes:. Can't do that very easily with an EQ unless you wanna polar align again.

The advantage of an EQ mount is only apparent if you wish to do AP for visual the Dob is a more portable usable package.

Regards Steve

This was what I meant when I said portability

[Moonshane]

personally, I hate GEMs for visual observing. they are awkward, bulky, heavy and you end up being a contortionist half the time or having to regularly turn the tube in the rings, they are not for me.

if you are looking at imaging then a GEM is required but if not then a dob will be better in my experience on all fronts, stability, ease of set-up/pack-up and value for money. the image produced visually will be the same at the same magnification.

[Hermancrab]

Thanks for all the replies, It helps alot, as for portability i.e putting it in a car that wont usually be necessary as I am in a rural area in a village, so I can sit in the back garden when it's clear and the sky's are filled with stars.

I will probably get a dobsonian as I'm not going to get into imaging just yet and I could get another stand for it if I want to.

Thanks

[ismangil]

And you can put the Dob on eq platform for less than £500 (cheaper than NEQ6) , and then do imaging and tracking...

Perry

[Rattler]

I have the 200p Dob and I've outgrown it and now after an NEQ6. It all depends what you want it for though.

[kingboya]

I have the 200p Dob and I've outgrown it and now after an NEQ6. It all depends what you want it for though.

I have the dob and have it on my NEQ6. Works well, but would love a skywatcher 80ED someday for imaging!

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[Naemeth]

Dobsonian is better for observing, Explorer for imaging.

I'm fairly sure you can get a webcam for a Dobsonian, so it's not like they are useless for imaging (plus, it will save you quite a bit buying a Dobsonian )

[JamesM]

And you can put the Dob on eq platform for less than £500 (cheaper than NEQ6) , and then do imaging and tracking...

Perry

I understand where you are coming from on cost, but the NEQ6 is a quite a different beasty altogether, be it in terms of how long you can track, goto, autoguiding facility and connection to EQMOD which provides a lot of funtions be it connecting to planetarium software, creating imaging mosaics, periodic tracking correction etc. Those EQ platforms are fine for observing but they do need a little bit of adjustment in trimming the motor and making sure it's all level. The tracking time is fairly limited for imaging use if I'm being honest.

James

[ismangil]

I understand where you are coming from on cost, but the NEQ6 is a quite a different beasty altogether, be it in terms of how long you can track, goto, autoguiding facility and connection to EQMOD which provides a lot of funtions be it connecting to planetarium software, creating imaging mosaics, periodic tracking correction etc. Those EQ platforms are fine for observing but they do need a little bit of adjustment in trimming the motor and making sure it's all level. The tracking time is fairly limited for imaging use if I'm being honest.

James

All correct, I should say *basic* imaging.

Perry

[Pappy Nick]

I had the same dilemma recently with choosing between the Explorer 150 PL and the Skyliner 150P (the same OTA on different mounts I'm led to believe). I went for the 150PL so I could get a nice EQ mount (which, by the way, is quite a lump) and then build my own dob mount afterwards.

HTH

[ollypenrice]

And you can put the Dob on eq platform for less than £500 (cheaper than NEQ6) , and then do imaging and tracking...

Perry

Hang on, no; an equatorial platform would facilitate fast frame camera planetary imaging but would not be at all likely to work for DS imaging. A very high order of tracking precision is needed for that.

Olly

Olly's Favourites. - ollypenrice's Photos

[ismangil]

Hang on, no; an equatorial platform would facilitate fast frame camera planetary imaging but would not be at all likely to work for DS imaging. A very high order of tracking precision is needed for that.

Olly

Olly's Favourites. - ollypenrice's Photos

Yup, I stand corrected: "allows fast frame camera lunar and planetary imaging"

[coxy322]

Hang on, no; an equatorial platform would facilitate fast frame camera planetary imaging but would not be at all likely to work for DS imaging. A very high order of tracking precision is needed for that.

Olly

Olly's Favourites. - ollypenrice's Photos

I am getting good results (especially for a newbie) when using my EQ5 200P for DSO imaging. Am not expecting to win any competitions just yet but it certainly lends itself to some success at deep sky photography.

[Moonshane]

I think the Tom Osypowski ones can produce better results if aligned properly. That said, their prices make an NEQ6 pro skyscan seem cheap. Equatorial Platforms: Pricing

[Scott]

i don't think you need to be a contortionist to use a eq. point it where you want to look and rotate the tube. it takes all of 15-30 secs. once youve found your target you can walk away for an hour, come back and find it almost imediately using only your ra. EQ for me all the way.