Been away for a while but I'm back

[pulsar]

Hi all just letting you know that I am back on here at SGL after quite a while away. Hoping you all got some really tasty astro goodies for crimbo and lets hope that 2013 will be a great year for us stargazers. As we have 2 yes 2 comets heading our way this coming year.

And that brings me to a question that I have been mulling over in my brain for a while now.

Which achromatic refractor to get hold of? I have 2 choices either the Bresser Messier 152S or the Skywatcher Startravel 150.

I have provisionally set my mind on the Startravel as I should'nt need to change my mount an EQ3-2 to accomodate it. But the Bresser has received some interestingly good reviews on this forum as well as the sky at night magazine website in the equipment review section. But I would have to think about an EQ5 mount for this one as my EQ3 would just not be up to handling this OTA.

Any advice or information would be most welcome on this topic as I would like to aquire a nice widefield refractor to observe these 2 wonderful comets. And also have a telescope that will be fun to use for many years also.

Thanks and sorry for being away so long.

[Mr Spock]

Welcome back

I found a 120 f8 way too big for an EQ3-2, so a 150 f8 would shake like it was in an earthquake! I would look at an EQ5 as a minimum. If it's just comets you want then a ST150 would do fine and be ok at low powers on an EQ3. These scopes are bigger than you think

[JamesF]

I agree. I can't see the 150 being stable on an EQ3-2 at all.

James

[pulsar]

Hi guys thanks for a speedy reply. I have been in talks with Simon from the Widescreen centre here in London and he says that the Skywatcher 150 would be just about able to live with an EQ3. Also are these telescopes not an f5? they are quoted as being so. So they should be fast enough for astrophotography on deep sky and star clusters but I am primarily a visual observer and my EQ3 is motorised as well with the dual axis drive kit.

[MorningMajor]

Welcome back! - Bit of an avatar clash!

[pulsar]

Welcome back! - Bit of an avatar clash!

Yes just a bit but I was here first And a very good choice of avatar it is too my friend.

[saturn4me]

Hi and welcome back to SGL!

[JamesF]

Hi guys thanks for a speedy reply. I have been in talks with Simon from the Widescreen centre here in London and he says that the Skywatcher 150 would be just about able to live with an EQ3. Also are these telescopes not an f5? they are quoted as being so. So they should be fast enough for astrophotography on deep sky and star clusters but I am primarily a visual observer and my EQ3 is motorised as well with the dual axis drive kit.

I'd be very surprised if you could get reasonable exposures using an ST150 on an EQ3-2. My 127 Mak is marginal and I just about got away with using the ST120 on it for DSO imaging using a webcam, but I'm struggling to believe you'd get the required stability with an ST150. Even with Skywatcher's reputation for selling scopes on inadequate mounts they still package it with an EQ5.

It's still not the way I'd choose to do it, but for less money you could probably get a 150PDS newt and EQ5 with aftermarket motors, or for about the same money the 150PDS on an EQ5 Pro GOTO. Same aperture (less the central obstruction), same focal ratio, heftier mount, no CA.

James

[MorningMajor]

Yes just a bit but I was here first

Ah yes, but whilst the cat's away.......

[JamesF]

Hah. Just realised of course that the pricing isn't comparable as you already have the EQ3-2

James

[pulsar]

Thanks for that James but like I have said I am really a visual observer so imaging is not really my main area of interest. I have the 127 Mak that came with my EQ3 and it seems to handle it fine enough. Also I don't really want a newtonian reflector I am looking for a large aperture short tube refractor to replace my Meade DS2090 90mm refractor as this does not even see the light of day anymore (was thinking of giving it away for nothing at my next star party) it also has a crack in the useless little red dot finder mounting.

I also own an LX90 8 inch SCT for lunar and planetary observations. So I just want to fill a niche that I have in my telescope range. I was thinking that the light grasp of a good 6 inch refractor would be quite useful as well as the shorter focal length would allow me to fit objects like the pleiades and the beehive clusters into the field of view with my 2 inch eyepieces and also that galactic observing would be enhanced also.

[pulsar]

Hah. Just realised of course that the pricing isn't comparable as you already have the EQ3-2

James

Funny enough James the prices for these 2 telescope can be compared when you visit www.astroshop.eu they are practically giving the Bresser's away. They are less than £400 for the 6 inch versions when compared to telescopehouse who want £600 for the same scope. First light Optics are only after £475 for the Skywatcher. So I have been checking about to make sure these German guys are worth doing business with and they seem Bona fide even will pay for return shipping if the scope arrives damaged.

[pulsar]

Ah yes, but whilst the cat's away.......

I know the mice will play

[JamesF]

Well, even if you're prepared to ignore any imaging requirements I still don't think the EQ3-2 will carry the ST150 happily. It's half as heavy again as either the 127 Mak or ST120 and I think that in the slightest of breezes or whenever you touch the focuser it will be wobbling all over the place.

James

[Ags]

I think for a big bright comet, widefield views are more important than sheer power. Would a pair of big binoculars not be a better idea? Or a smaller startravel?

Also, if you want to put more aperture on your EQ3, why not a 150PDS? It is the same aperture and FL as the startravel, somewhat lighter (I think), and people do mount it on the EQ3. It will take better pictures too :-)

EDIT: Forget the 150PDS suggestion, I see you are not interested in a newt...

[pulsar]

Well, even if you're prepared to ignore any imaging requirements I still don't think the EQ3-2 will carry the ST150 happily. It's half as heavy again as either the 127 Mak or ST120 and I think that in the slightest of breezes or whenever you touch the focuser it will be wobbling all over the place.

James

I am prepared to purchase the EQ5 if necessary I have seen them being flogged on ebay for £100 so not much worry there. But still my question remains which is the better scope Bresser Messier 152 or Startravel 150? I am not too bothered about the chromatic aberration as I am going to get hold of a Baader Semi-Apo filter to compensate for this anyway.

[pulsar]

I think for a big bright comet, widefield views are more important than sheer power. Would a pair of big binoculars not be a better idea? Or a smaller startravel?

Thanks for your input. I do already own 2 pairs of binoculars Bresser 10x50 and Revelation 20x80 and they are both fine to use. But Simon at the Widescreen centre has stated that the 120 Startravel has limitations to it and that the 150 is far better scope. Also we all know that aperture is really important as our chosen pursuit is all about gathering light and I am interested in learning astro imaging eventually so a large aperture seems more sensible to me for future uses too.

[Naemeth]

Wouldn't a Newtonian be a safer bet?

[glowjet]

Hi Pulsar welcome back to SGL

John.

[pulsar]

Wouldn't a Newtonian be a safer bet?

Not really no I don't like newtonian reflectors! too much fussing about. collimating the thing all the time and the tube length is too long for me as I have limited space at home. I already have an LX90 8" SCT and the Skymax 127 Mounted next to me here, both offer very long focal lengths for high power work. No it's a refractor on this one. I actually thought about getting an 8 inch newt but went for the LX instead double the power and only a small impact on my room. These refractors are not that big really the Skywatcher tube or even the Bresser would be quite easily stashed in my corner when not in use. A big newtonian could not.

[Naemeth]

Perhaps go for the Skywatcher, you'll probably need an EQ-5 though, otherwise I dread to think how the EQ3-2 would cope with wind.

[pulsar]

Thanks Naemeth with regards to wind I am kind of lucky in my back garden I am down in a big rectangle created by three storey high terrace houses all round me and I cannot even see ahint of a streetlight. And the wind is deflected over the rooftops to a very large degree.

Of course some does get in but it ceratainly wouldn't be like setting up my scope at Regents park for the Baker street irregular astronomers meeting each month. I normally take my 5" Mak along to that But the refractor could also easily be slung over my shoulder for carrying from home to the park. Instead of taking another bag with my OTA and all my accessories ie eyepieces barlows binoviewers in which can be quite heavy in addition to my trolley bag that I transport my mount and tripod iand counterweights in.

[Matt Scunthorpe]

Welcome to SGL.

Matt

[Charon]

Welcome back.

[pulsar]

Right I have made up my mind and made my purchase from our good friends at First Light optics.

I have opted for the Skywatcher 150 f5 achromat refractor.

I will see how it behaves on my EQ3-2 mount and if it is to unwieldly I will go for the EQ5 a bit later as good deals for these mounts can be had.

I trawled around for hours trying to get this scope into my budgetary window and those lovely sponsors at FLO did just that! I got it for £475 and everywhere else it was £480 or even £495.

I cant wait to see the entire pleiades in my 26mm 2 inch eyepiece. Also M44 M35 M13 M31 and many more beautiful objects through this nice big aperture refractor. Will get a Baader semi-apo filter to complement and compensate for the inherent chromatic aberrations common to achromat refractors. That is unless my Baader neodymium filter does nothing to alleviate the CA.

Thanks for all the input it's a shame that no-one offered any advice on the Bresser Messier 152 they do look like impressive telescopes but I was warned against them by Simon from the Widescreen centre. New year New scope now that sounds nice. I do hope 2013 will bring better skies than 2012. :)