Celestron Astromaster 130EQ vs Sky-Watcher Explorer-130

[riggers69]

Hi guys i'm a newbie and i have been searching and doing some research and with my budget i have narrowed down the 2 scopes mentioned above.

i believe they are quite similar but was hoping for a "2nd opinion" before buying.

i really want all rounder to view more or less everything there is posibly to see, from the moon to nebulas. i know the quality of picture isnt going to be great for this price but its all i can realistically afford.

i know there are also parabolic versions of these scopes but it seems the para scopes have a slightly less focal ratio than the "normal" 1s.

any feed back from some of you more experienced guys would be very much apprieciated.

thanks chris.

[swamp thing]

Hi Chris

TBH I see no advantage in buying a scope mounted on one of these small equatorial mounts. The mounts aren't sturdy enough for deep sky imaging and they won't be of any benefit for webcam work.

So that leaves visual. Well TBH they will be wobbly at best for that, and there is no advantage visualy to an EQ mount. A Dob is better, its easier to find stuff with, its easier to track with, it's easier to set up, and most importantly of all, its a lot more stable. You also get more aperture for your money as you aren't paying for a flashy looking mount that actually isnt very good.

This is what I would get. It'll beat both of the others scopes hands down in every department.

http://www.firstligh...-dobsonian.html

[LukeSkywatcher]

I have to agree with Steve.

[Banana head]

A lot of people on this board (and others) started out with scopes from the SW130 series.

They are excellent beginners scopes. Can be used all round - moon; solar system and; DSOs - no problems. It is a very capable scope and the provided mount is perfectly adequate. You won't get good DSO images with it, but you will get brilliant views.

Imaging wise; stick to webcam and solar system stuff.

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

[rory]

hi chris, i think i seen this question somewhere else ?

[riggers69]

hi chris, i think i seen this question somewhere else ?

damn it ive been rumbled lol, sorry if i have offended but more advise the better lol

[Naemeth]

I have to agree with Steve. For the price of the Astromaster, you'd be far better off with one of these:

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html

Brilliant little scope, and it's not wobbly (which cheap EQ mounts often are). If you can stretch your budget, a Skywatcher 150P would be good, as Steve says .

[Banana head]

The supplied EQ mounts are wobbly. That is an erroneous assumption.

For the money, you get a better set up with the SW130 than the semi truss dob.

And the original question was about 2 specific scopes; not this dob so that's way off topic.

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

[Banana head]

That should say aren't wobbly!

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

[riggers69]

And the original question was about 2 specific scopes; not this dob so that's way off topic.

at this time whilst selecting a first scope all advise is very welcome.

thanks for all the advise guys as i havent even considered dobs till today and i have seen a skywatche skyliner 150p which i could possibly stretch to price wise.

[rory]

damn it ive been rumbled lol, sorry if i have offended but more advise the better lol

no not offended at all. i ask tons of questions on here and other foums too. but from the answers your getting ,there seems to be a reoccurring theme ,namely the dob route. mainly due to the fact the mounts are flimsy the lower end ,so alot of peeps go for the dobsonian mount. a good solid e/q mount can cost a tidy sum.

[rory]

as i said earlier , if you dont mind traveling a little ,you can get a bargain in the second hand market.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Skywatcher-Skyliner-200p-Classic-Dobsonian-8-/251104922589?pt=UK_Photography_Telescopes&hash=item3a77050bdd

for example. also watch here - http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php

[Naemeth]

The supplied EQ mounts are wobbly. That is an erroneous assumption.

For the money, you get a better set up with the SW130 than the semi truss dob.

And the original question was about 2 specific scopes; not this dob so that's way off topic.

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

It was based on what previous forum members have said, not an assumption. I know this because I initially thought about buying the exact same scope.

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/145212-celestron-eye-piece-filter-kit-and-celestron-130eq-astromaster/page__st__20#entry1457187

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/145212-celestron-eye-piece-filter-kit-and-celestron-130eq-astromaster/page__st__20#entry1457577

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/145212-celestron-eye-piece-filter-kit-and-celestron-130eq-astromaster/page__st__40#entry1457711

I'm not going to saying that the 130EQ is completely rubbish and not worth any money, because it clearly isn't, many people have had positive experiences with this scope. I'd go for the Heritage myself, simply because it's lighter and therefore will probably get more use, and you won't have to spend time trying to get each leg stable, you just put it on a table. That and it's also cheaper....

_{If I sounded rude I apologise.}

[Banana head]

Not rude, no. It seems though, that you have no first hand experience of the 130, which is a shame. They are very good scopes on sturdy tripods/mounts. I had one to start either and I'd have another again in a flash.

Assembled, they can be moved easily by any fairly fit and healthy individual.

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

[swamp thing]

1342374464[/url'>' post='1576194']

Not rude, no. It seems though, that you have no first hand experience of the 130, which is a shame. They are very good scopes on sturdy tripods/mounts. I had one to start either and I'd have another again in a flash.

Assembled, they can be moved easily by any fairly fit and healthy individual.

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

Strange I've used. Several, and they all wobbled

[riggers69]

no not offended at all. i ask tons of questions on here and other foums too. but from the answers your getting ,there seems to be a reoccurring theme ,namely the dob route. mainly due to the fact the mounts are flimsy the lower end ,so alot of peeps go for the dobsonian mount. a good solid e/q mount can cost a tidy sum.

i am now looking at a few options along the dob route now, so thanks again guys..

some interesting replies which have been duely noted

[Naemeth]

Not rude, no. It seems though, that you have no first hand experience of the 130, which is a shame. They are very good scopes on sturdy tripods/mounts. I had one to start either and I'd have another again in a flash.

Assembled, they can be moved easily by any fairly fit and healthy individual.

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

I don't have any first hand experience of them, no. I'll probably stick to Dobsonians for a while because they are the most cost-effective telescope to use if all you are looking for is aperture.

AP is of course a completely different matter, where you need a sturdy mount and good tracking for long exposure images.

[Eigen]

I will mirror what Banana head has said. The scope (130EQ) is definitively a worthwhile scope. The mount and tripod do suffer from "budget syndrome", meaning that some tightening must be done on the tripod and the accessory tray moved(and weighted), with the mount itself lubed etc. But, I believe that every scope needs a bit of tinkering out of the box.

I have since shelved it but keep it as a spare, but the scope provided me with stellar Saturn and "stellar" DSO views (fuzzy clump of light, except perhaps Andromeda, which left me speechless). Cassini was not an issue on Saturn, the scope handled 216X without issue. I really can't fault the optical system, though I did spend quite a few hours dialing in the secondary and getting the scope nicely collimated. Tracking with the RA knob was brilliant, just required a patient and through setup.

That having been said, despite the nice optical system...it is not the best built scope. Spider vanes, well basically the entire secondary assembly is plastic (some contrast must be lost by these 3mm thick plastic vanes), the focuser is a bit iffy, it isn't perfect on my scope, using a Cheshire and zooming in and out proved this, with the collimation cross-hair moving about 1-2mm from min to max zoom.

Can't say about the SW130, but it does seem to have these elements built better. While I think the AM mount seems a bit sturdier, but what do I know I am just relying on pictures.

Either way you go, I believe it's hard to go wrong with a 5' Newt as a first scope, tons to see and do, as well as learn. I have limited Dob experience (star parties), but I really like the cool efficiency of a nice setup EQ mount. If you need tracking just add the simple RA motor and a properly setup of mount will track Saturn at 200X+ with no adjustment from 15 minutes without issue.

Well those are my long 2 cents. Hope that helps.

Regards,

Eigen