Jump to content

Skywatcher or Celestron?


Recommended Posts

Considering my first scope (second actually, if you include the awful Meade 114 short-tube I was given!).

Current thinking is a Skywatcher 150PL on an EQ3-2 mount. I'm interested in planets and the moon, and probably some deep sky....

Fair bit of light pollution where I am, not sure if this is a factor in the decision between 150P and 150PL.

Interested also in the Celestron OMNI XLT-150 - does it have any advantages over Skywatcher?

The Skywatcher says it is Direct SLR Camera Connection - what exactly does this mean??

Probably add to this as I gain experience, motor drives, better eyepieces etc (warmer coat?)

I'd be grateful for any coments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 150PL is a 6" F/8 scope, whereas the OMNI 150 XLT is an F/5 scope (Skywatcher also builds an F/5: the 150P). The 150PL is better at planetary detail, easier on eyepiece quality, and more tolerant of collimation errors (misalignment of the mirrors). The 150P and the OMNI 150 are better at wider-field objects and more compact (greater ease of transportation, a bit less sensitive to the effects of wind).

I think the direct DSLR attachement of the Skywatcher means that with a suitable T-adapter, you can fit a  DSLR to the telescope to use it as a 750mm F/5 telephoto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Mick,

do you want to use it for imaging mainly or visual?

You could also get a dobsonian for visual use as 8" (200mm) just starts to show amazing details, while 6" is a bit limited visually.

As for imaging, you could also start with the DSLR and it's lenses, it's amazing what can be done with 30-300mm focal length (and perhaps a cheap diy barn door tracker).

http://www.j-baechli.ch/astrofotografie/Controller?action=GALLERY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One point to note: Direct SLR Camera Connection, means you can attach a DSLR, what it does not state is that the DSLR will achieve focus. This comes up as a problem quite often. People attach their DSLR and get nothing,

The 150PL on an EQ3 should be fairly good, the PL allowing a bit more easy magnification to be available. The P would be better for any future imaging but the focal length of the PL doesn't make that an impossibility, actually the 150P on an EQ3 isn't a great deal better. The same mount so the same associated limitations of that. So if you want one or the other then I come down in favour of the 150PL.

If not on the mount consider adding RA and Dec motors, they are useful and make viewing more pleasurable. Things simply stay in view for you, they gallop out of view amazingly fast otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I  can't speak personally for the 150PL but I can for the 150P on the EQ3-2 mount. 

I love my scope and have had some wonderful nights with it. When it starts to get windy I find the mount does start to wobble a bit. I would imagine that the 150PL being longer would catch the wind more. Against this as Michael has mentioned the longer focal length will be more tolerant of poorer eyepieces and collimation errors but I haven't found the 150P goes out of collimation easily.

I'm sure whichever you chose you won't be disappointed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the information, now starting to look at a Dob as well (8"). I understand uimaging - if I wanted to do that, not sure yet - is less easy on a Dob unless you use a webcam and stack images?

I've got a Canon EOS550D with stock 18-55 and a 55-250 (Canon). Any hints how to take pics of the moon with this would be welcome!

If I bought an 8" Dob (Say Sywatcher Skyliner 200P), could I then at some later date buy and EQ3 or 5 mount, and use the OTA from The Skyliner on it? (with suitable rings and mounting?)

I'm thinking this might be a more progressive way.

I also assume that I can use my Canon with prime focus on the Dob for moon pics without too much effort? Or even using eyepiece projection?

Ready for my assumptions to be corrected!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a dobsonian you can take pictures of the moon of course as it's big, bright and easy to find :-)

Planets can work but still difficult without tracking.

I'd do it with a EF-1.25" adapter or a barlow with T2 mount and the ef-t2 adapter.

The EQ3 will be WAY to weak for the 8" tube of the dobsonian. The NEQ5 won't break down but it won't be much fun either.

For the EQ5 a 150/750 would be the way to go I guess, even the short 200/800 (and that has a lot of downsides) will be a tad much...

Have you seen the images taken with low focal length DSLR lenses? That will be much less hassle and you don't need a beefy mount :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's just not one set up that'll do it all. For a starting out scope the 150Pl will give superb views of planets and the Moon. However the Eq3-2 is a bit of a wobbler. I filled the legs with mortar and it's settled down a lot.

A simple RA motor fitted will track for hours on DD batteries. It's ideal at keeping collimation and very easy on eyepieces.

If you do buy just a beefier mount later on then this and any other suitable scopes/ camera can be mounted .

The 200 Dob is a more general purpose deep sky bit of kit. You'll have to track it by hand, but the views are great. I've not heard of anyone remounting this ota on an eq mount. I assume the Dob ota is thinner than a 200 SW Newt ota , for tube flex and load the latter being preferable.

Best option is to get to a local group meeting or star party and have a shot and talk to users,

Nick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 for the 150PL but i might be a bit biased in that regard :)

Im finding this scope very easy to live with for all the reasons mentioned above. ( I've even gotten used to the wobbly mount, its taught me how to be still :)  )

As a first scope, all i was looking for was something to learn with, to give me an opinion on what i liked or didnt like, something that wouldn't break the bank or leave me wanting an upgrade soon. I did consider the dob, and i still want one,  but in the end i decided, if and when i get a dob its going to be a BIG one :) Right now living in central london, LP is bad so sticking to planets / moon / double stars... that sort of thing, and the PL seems to like that sort of thing too.

Couple of pics attached, all afocal with zoomed in point and click camera, jupiter pic is poorly focused and over processed / coloured, but just for fun and practice.  I aint no Damian Peach thats for sure :)

Anyways, Clear skies to you, and what ever scope you get, you are in for some fantastic sights!!

All the best

Mark

post-32804-0-68858800-1387327514_thumb.p

post-32804-0-20691300-1387327539.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Probably going to go for a Skywatcher Sklyliner 200P Dob.....

Reason: Quick to setup, easy to move around the garden.

Against the 150PL: Going to take time to setup (I can't leave it setup) - difficult to move around the garden

I'll probably change my mind again, but a Dob is winning at present!

Comments??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure I'd describe the 200P dob as 'easy' to move around (people may well disagree with this, perhaps a lack of strength on my part!) - it is a bit awkward and unwieldy - but certainly easier than trying to move an EQ mount and scope once set up.

The 200P dob is a great all rounder, if you want a telescope for visual observing you will struggle to beat it for the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the feedback.

Now for the curved ball!

Any advantage in a Refractor over a Reflector? What is the size equivalence (200Dob vs a ??? refractor), or is it impossible to answer?

Hello,

the advantage of the refractors is that they have no obstruction through a secondary mirror, no spikes around stars from the secondary holder, and reflectors may show long tars/coma under f/6 quïe noticably.

A refractor will show chromatic aberration on higher magnificatons, apochromatic refractors are yet more expensive. The refractors with low chromatic abdration/color fringe are long, expensive to mount sturdy.

Refractors over 100mm are usualy much much more expensive then reflectors of equal size.

Note that if the secondary mirror diameter is 20% the size of the primary, it's surface area is NOT 20% of the primary. It only blocks a little amount of light.

A 150mm refractor may gather as much light as a 130mm newtonian perhaps, but a 200mm newtonian is still cheaper...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.