Skywatcher 200p

[Daff]

Okay I've ordered a 200mm reflector, got a 127 Mak but more intrested in DSO. How much more detail will I get with a 200mm reflector ?

AND when will this cloud go ?

What type of paper and pen you use to make notes, I found normal white pad rubbish under a red dim torch, is there any better ?

Mike

[John]

A 200mm collects lots more light than a 127mm so potentially should show DSO's noticably better. Globular clusters will appear more like their photos (ie: more stars resolved) although galaxies will still be fuzzy patches of light in the main - but brighter patches. Nebulae will look brighter too and you should see more contrast variation and the fainter parts of the bright ones like M42.

I used the word potentially because how much you actually see of DSO's depends a lot on the quality of the skies you view under, and particularly the amount of light pollution.

But you will notice a difference

[Daff]

thanks for the info, would I be correct, I would have a bigger view of the object ?

I spent 2 hours over 2 nights on the ring nebular in my 127 goto mak. Used a 32mm and a 25mm ep did try others but 25mm the limit. 200mm is the biggist I can go, my back is shot, so it really is the limit. I've gone for a EQ mount because I may, just may want to take a few photos.

The goto 127 mak has impressed my as my last telescope was a 76mm traveller from aldi, which I have seen, oh mars, Jupiter with the moons, that was great, really good. Saturn, that was ok. Half a dozen DSO.

Oh I did notice double cluster in the Mak was better in a set of 10x50 bins, in the fact both clusters fitted in the eye. Still had details but the bins fitted both in.

Do you guys still use film or is it all digital ?

Mike

[John]

The size of the view you get depends on the magnification you use. As the 127 mak has a longer focal length than the 200P newtonian, the mak will give more magnification than the 200P with any particular eyepiece. As it collects more light the 200P's image has more detail in it and you should be able to use a little more magnification with it because of this. The practical maximum is 200x - 250x though because usually the seeing conditions don't allow more to be useful - the images get larger but are less sharp and detailed. Some deep sky objects look best with low magnification (eg: a 32mm eyepiece) but some are quite small and benefit from a bit more (eg: 100x can be great on globular clusters and small planetary nebulae).

The 200P can also make use of 2" eyepieces which can show a wider field of view than the smaller 1.25" ones. Often folks end up with a 2" eyepiece or two for low power / wide angle viewing and 1.25" ones for the medium to high power viewing.

M57, the Ring Nebula is a small object by the way - easy to overlook as a small fuzzy star with low power eyepieces. It's one of the DSO's that benefits from higher magnification - once you have found it !

When you get the scope, don't make the mistake of using both the 1.25" and the 2" adapters in the scope at the same time - it's a common error (the manual does not help !) but it means that you can't get anything to focus properly. Use these adapters separately as needed.

[boabsta]

I have just recently changed from 127 mak to 200pds and there is a difference. maybe not as much as you are hoping but the 200brings much more of the sky into view. The mak has a narrow fov so is great on planets and doubles but the 200 has a wide fov so can fully resolve nebulas and galaxies in a decent ep. I wouldnt say anything you see is going to be bigger as john has already said thats more down to ep magnification but you will get more detail and contrast.

Both the scopes are excellent and if you are keeping the mak then you have all you need for viewing with those 2 scopes. I had to sell mine and miss it.

[Carbon Brush]

Seconding the comments in earlier posts. You should be very pleased with the extra light gather of the SW200.

Do not though think of it as just a DSO scope. I used mine to view surface detail at (x200 to 300) on Mars earlier this year. Basically on the night I didn't want to go to the bother of swapping scopes on the mount. But you do need the right sky to get the best.

If your back is a problem. Can you put a fixed pier in the garden? Better still a shed with roll off? The shed was definitely my best astro spend. Sorry you haven't even got the '200 out of the box and i'm suggesting more spend! Time to shut up.

[skywatcher250]

daff, i have had a 200p and now moved up to a 250px dob - the extra light gathered will improve what you see depending on seeing conditions of course, there is no doubt about that.

i wouldnt necessarily expect to see something like saturn completely filling up your eyepiece as an example, what you will see is a better detailed and apparantly brighter object (in my experience anyway) and with better eyepieces the magnification should be a little better... obviously if you go to high itll become dull and no good but certainly you will see an improvement.

[Daff]

Thanks for all the info guys, I can't wait to try it out.