Skywatcher Telescopes - Which is best?

[maamalade]

Hi

My partner and I are looking to buy our first telescope, but with all the research that we have done we keep getting confused as to what is best.

We have ruled out Dob as you can't add a motor which we will need for doing photography and have decided that a reflector will be best.

After all the research we thought we had settled on a Skywatcher Explorer 150P on an EQ3-2 mount. We have also looked at the Explorer 150PL on the EQ3-2 mount.

My questions are:

1. Which will be best for looking at the moon, planets and some deepsky viewing or are they pretty much the same?

2. Are these scopes stable on their mounts?

Many Thanks

[ronin]

If the slightly extra length is not a problem the I suggest the PL version.

It is a little easier on collimation, so doesn't need checking as often, and also a little easier on eyepiece choice as the faster the scope the more intolerant of poor eyepieces they tend to be.

The EQ3-2 isn't known for it's stability, depends on what you expect, I am looking at one now and with the scope I use it for it is fine. Be aware that bits of it are plastic and can break easily and are not easy to replace. The relevant aspect is that when you do anything (like move tyhe scope or refocus it) it takes a time for the small oscillations to die away, takes a bit less time on an EQ5 mount.

The 2 scopes will be the same for looking at anything, they are the same size mirror.

Take into account that you will want 2 more eyepieces within a week or two, just to have greater viewing flexibility and options, and at some time (a month or two) a collimating tool.

[brantuk]

I had the 150P on EQ3-2 as my first scope and it was great for visual though suffered a fair bit of vibration - took a few second to damp down before viewing. I wouldn't want to try imaging with it unless on an EQ5 minimum. The 150PL is a longer heavier tube and will suffer more so on the EQ3-2.

Dobs can't be used for serious imaging because they are on alt/az mounts wether motorised or not. They produce star trailing due to the "two plane" tracking and lack of polar alignment (which can only be done on an equatorial mount. They are nevertheless reflectors too.

As mentioned - the PL's extra focal length with give sharper, more contrasty images of solar system objects - but the 150P with it's shorter focal ratio will make for better dso imaging. It's hard to find a single instrument that does both with the same effectiness, which is why most folks have more than one ota.

That said - both are good starter scopes - just not with an EQ3-2 mount which is really made for lighter tubes. I'd use an EQ5 or CG5 both of which can be upgraded tracking motors. Hth

[Andymac79]

Regarding the EQ3 2, I have that mount. I do image with it but I use a camera and lens only. Also the legs are never extended, filled with sand and a heavy weight on the tray. I wouldnt try anything more than a small refactor on it for imaging.

But having said that I do get (in my opinion) great results with the cheap old mount.

[Catweazel]

I agree that you will really need a EQ5 to use that scope for photography, and the 150P (as opposed to the PL) will have the edge for photography as well. Purely for visual observing they are both great scopes.