Small frac or mak?

[roosta]

I'm looking to get a small telescope I can take out with me using public transport. I've got a budget of about £150 which has led me to look at the Skywatcher skymax 90 or startravel 80. I understand that the Mak will give me better views of the moon and planets (which I am most interested in) but how would it compare against the ST80 for looking at some of the easier DSO's such as the Orion nebula? (I realise that neither of these are the best choice for DSO's)

Thanks,

Kev.

[tjr]

If it were me I'd go with the frac I think. My instinct would say that a 90mm Mak won't tease enough detail on Jupiter & Saturn to be that rewarding, but a nice wide-field view given by the ST-80 will be decent still with less aperture. That would be my logic anyway, but I own a Mak and am currently suffering FOV envy and pining after a 'rich-field ' scope.

[onesmallstep]

Hi and welcome to SGL

I've used both scopes but for lunar and planetary views go for the Mak. The ST80 is a good grab-and-go scope as well but for bright objects such as the Moon the Mak will give better results and you won't have chromatic aberration (colour fringing) to worry about. The Mak will also be good for brighter DSOs.

One word of advice, ditch the EQ1 mount / tripod as soon as you can and go for a sturdy photo tripod such as the Horizon 8115 as this is the more stable / easier setup for GnG observing. A dew shield is also a wise purchase as the front lens attracts moisture like a sponge!

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/tripods/horizon-8115-2-way-heavy-duty-tripod.html

HTH!

[swamp thing]

Hi Kev

Welcome to the SGL

Whereabouts are you? The Mak is more suited to planetary/lunar observing as it has a longer focal length. The short tube fracs are more suited to DSO,s as they can display some CA when you ramp the power up for planets and the moon.

For planetary/lunar observing dark skies aren't essential and you can observe them pretty easily from within a city. Bear this in mind before ordering a really hyper portable scope when a slightly bigger one may well give you better results on your main targets.

[fredster]

I have the 102 Skymax and also own the larger Startravel, the 120 model. The Startravel is great for low to medium power DSO viewing but pretty hopeless for Planetary. The 102 Mak is excellent for lunar and planetary but also does quite well on deepsky from a dark sky site. So i always take the Mak on holiday with us because its a more rounded performer. I have thought once or twice about adding the Startravel 80 for holidays but i really don't do too much lower sweeping of the sky, so it would be a waste. I think a better plan is too save for a small Apo. A small 80mm Apo would do the job of a small Mak and small achro refractor all rolled into one. But the cost is more than both combined. So in the meantime the small Mak does a better all-round job than a small F5 achro.

[Damo636]

As lunar and planetary observing is your main interest, I would go with the Mak. It will have a longer focal length and won't suffer the false colour of the ST80. For DSO I would guess it would be much of a muchness but the ST80 will provide a wider tfov.

[earth titan]

Agreed. Mak as it will give less false colour and a nice long focal length.

Typed by me, using fumms...

[fredster]

Just noticed this scope has popped up on UK Astro Buy'n'sell:

http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=61620

Its the same as the Skywatcher ED80 and would give a well rounded performance on all objects. If you can afford the extra £50 this is the route i would go. In fact i thought about not saying anything and quickly replying myself but haven't that sort of money.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

And then there is this one: a 5" SCT going for £150:

http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=61554

That will do a very nice job indeed on many DSOs, and be very good on planets, and is very portable. For wide-field: bring a pair of bins. MUCH more light than the 80ED (which beats the C5 in wide-field).

[John]

And then there is this one: a 5" SCT going for £150:

http://www.astrobuys....php?view=61554

That will do a very nice job indeed on many DSOs, and be very good on planets, and is very portable. For wide-field: bring a pair of bins. MUCH more light than the 80ED (which beats the C5 in wide-field).

Thats a good option. I've owned a couple of the C5's and they are nice scopes. My last one sat very happily on a modest AZ-3 mount but provided excellent planetary and lunar views and decent views of the brighter deep sky objects too. Equal to my ED102 refractor I'd say. You can add one of the F/6.3 focal reducers too for a wider field of views. A pretty versatile scope in my opinion

Even without the reducer a 32mm plossl eyepiece will show 1.3 degrees of sky which is enough for all but the largest deep sky objects.

You would need to make / invest in a lightweight dew shield for the SCT and Mak options. Refractors come with those built in

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

The dew shield is important, but they can easily be wrapped around the scope for added protection during transport. SCTs are also lighter than Maks of the same, due to the thinner corrector plate.

[Ags]

I own both an ST80 and small 102mm mak. I would say they are equally bulky but the mak gives superb views, while the ST80 is only adequate for widefield views. Also, my relatively cheap eyepieces work better in the mak. The mak gives a better view of some DSOs (eg globular clusters) because it has more aperture and magnification. On the other hand, the ST80 is capable of lower magnification and it has shown some diffuse and faint objects I have never been able to see in the mak.

A small mak will show you plenty on planets if you have a little patience - while a larger scope has higher theoretical resolving power, it also is affected more by poor seeing...

My mak has three times the focal length of the ST80, so that means wobbles are magnified three times for the same eyepiece - so the mak has to be on a sturdier (heavier) mount.

Have you considered a pair of binoculars?