Skywatcher Heritage 130P or 114P

[doninwales]

I am buying a first telescope for my son ('and' me....)  He has been asking for one for ages, but I didn't want to buy a cheap 'toy' one.....

But I certainly want to foster his interest in astronomy!

Have been reading up, and looked at a variety of options - and whilst I liked the Sky Watcher 130P, I thought portability was a more important consideration.  I want the ability for him to pop outside at short notice for a viewing, or for us to quickly take it into the car andd rive up a mountain etc...

I was lucky to come across the highly-portable Heritage range :-)

Have settled on two possible telescopes.  The Heritage 130P Flexitube (at around £130) or the Heritage 114P Virtuoso (at around £185).

But I can't decide between then.

Both are highly praised in various reviews.

The 130P seems to offer an excellent view, but some people complain about the constant need to track, especially at higher mag (I appreciate that this would be common to all non-tracking telescopes).  There is also some concern about the helical focus, and having to wait for oscillation to dampen after movement.

The 114P, I 'assume' will offer a slightly lesser view, having only a 4.5" mirror compared to the 130Ps 5.1" mirror.

But it DOES offer computerised tracking.

(It also offers potential to upgrade to GOTO, but since the cost is the same as the initial outlay, I wonder if I would ever consider that upgrade anyway).

The other features of camera cruising etc are of minimal interest to me.

So......how do I choose?

Have I recorded the most important features?  I am new to Astronomy myself, so have little knowledge of the important of comparing things like focal lengths, eyepieces etc. although am sure they all have an impact.

Am sure there also many other telescopes out there, but unless there is one that an over-riding and extremely important better feature, then I'll probably stick to choosing between these two.

Both these telescopes are within my price bracket so am not overly concerned about their costs.  I also appreciate that there may be some other costs soon after eg. I will probably buy a moon filter straightaway, and I read that people are always talking about getting a 2x Barlow, etc...

So.....

Do I go with the 130P and accept the 'annoyance' (?) of having to continually manually track?  I'm also considering that this may be a benefit for my son, as I suspect he doesn't even realise that the objects are continually moving!  Though after the initial comprehension, I wonder whether he will get fed up of the tracking...?

Or...

Do I go with the 114P where we don't have to worry so much about the tracking?  Though he/we may not get the best experience in terms of viewing the moon and other objects?  (Though going from nothing to seeing 'something' is going to be amazing anyway!)

Son's birthday is in 2 weeks time, so I have a little time to make the right decision.

Any suggestions/advice you have would be greatly received :-)

[TractionMan]

The Heritage 130P is a very good starter scope. Being bigger (aperture) than the 114 does mean it'll show you a bit more of those faint fuzzies. Many people here on SGL are happy with the Heritage just because it is so nice and easy to use. It was my first scope as well. Don't worry about tracking manually, it becomes second nature after a while. Oh and welcome to SGL by the way. I'm sure you'll like it here!

Edit: Forgot to mention that if or when you get the Heritage or any other scope, there's no need to hurry up with upgrading eyepieces. Try the ones that comes with the scope to get a feel for what you want or need. Take your time, do your research (SGL is great for that) and you'll less likely to end up with accessories you don't like or want.

[AndyWB]

I have a 130p, and I'd recommend it. Yes, you do keep needing to nudge it at high magnification - but honestly, a lot of what you'll want to look at is best at low magnification. Planets are the only thing where I find myself nudging a lot - and even then, that's maybe once a minute. I don't even notice it anymore, as a rule. 

When deciding, I found this post useful: http://www.deepastronomy.com/what-you-need-to-know-before-buying-a-telescope.html 

Personally, I'd sooner my money went into optics - and you don't need to worry about the batteries

[doninwales]

Thanks for the replies - I wasn't expecting to get anything back quite so soon :-)

Yes, I've read that a LOT of people like the Heritage 130P, and I 'almost' ordered one, until I came across the reviews where 'some' people became annoyed about the manual tracking, and I also came across the computer-tracking 114P.

Regarding accessories, the only ones I was considering (for now) are the moon filter (will probably buy that straightaway, as I suspect we will be looking a lot at the moon to start with) and then 'maybe' the 2 x Barlow - though I'll probably hold off on that one for now.

Am looking forward to frequenting this board now that I have joined :-)

[Skipper Billy]

I bought the Heritage 130 flextube as a starter scope and I am delighted with it.

The comment about the focuser being sloppy is easily rectified by putting a couple of turns of PTFE tape round the threads - then its smooth as silk and no slop whatsoever.

I would disagree about the ep's though - the 25mm is fine but the 10mm is dire (or at least the one I got was - maybe I was unlucky)

Tracking / nudging is no bother at all - it becomes second nature after a while and if you put a wee spray of 'pledge' on the pads it moves very smoothly.

I cant make a comparison as I haven't got the goto one but to be honest if you take the value of the electronics out of the price there isnt much left for optics whereas with the 130 all you are paying for is the optics and a bit of MDF.

Delighted with mine and as a grab and go its perfect - I have seen Jupiter and her moons as clear as day and the moon in staggering detail and M42 and and and....................

The only other mod I have made is to make a shroud for the open part of the tube to help keep the dew down and block any light just out of some foam backed vinyl.

With the weather we have had its the only thing I have used - gap in the clouds and I am out viewing before you can even say polar alignment !!!

[AlexB67]

You will know your son's character best, do you think he will enjoy finding objects in the sky as part of the exercise or prefer to press a button to got there ?. Nudging a scope is not as hard as it sounds with a little practice, and finding objects in the sky does not have to be an annoyance, he may turn out to be fine with it, but there are different camps, some who swear by automated scopes and some don't like it. 

Onto the scope: Not only does the Heritage have that little bit more aperture, it is also has slightly longer focal lengths, with the stock eyepieces supplied this means you'll get a bit more magnification out of the box, but also that they'll perform that bit  better in providing sharper views across the FOV.   The short focal length of the 114p means you are beginning to push demands on eyepieces more somewhat. The supplied eyepieces with these scopes are cheap models and will the same for both scopes, but they will suffer more in the 114p for sharper vies away from centre in the eyepiece. 

For the moon filter personally I would not buy one straight away, it is a very subjective thing as to whether you need one or not. I've never felt the need for one myself, but some do. See how he gets on without a filter and one can always be ordered afterwards.

Good luck

[doninwales]

Thanks guys.  Still more people saying how good the 130P heritage is.  I'm edging towards it....

I know I'm expecting the impossible.

Would be ideal if someone could just say 'you HAVE to get this model because of.....' a specific X, Y or Z feature I had over-looked or not placed enough emphasis on.

But I also know that can't happen....lol....

I think Nebula's comment is slightly incorrect.  The 114P does NOT have GOTO.  It just has the option to upgrade with a GOTO unit (although the price is the same as the initial telescope!)

So even with the 114P I believe it's not a matter of pressing a button and finding an object - my son would still have to find the object - and I think that is probably important as a beginner to get used to the geography of the stars.

But....when he has found an object, he won't have to keep nudging the scope whilst he watches it.

I have a funny (and expensive!) feeling that I am going to buy one, and want to buy the second as well some time later.

Either go with 130p and then want to move to a computer-tracking model afterwards, or buy the 114P and then want to move to the larger-mirrored one afterwards for better views.  Neither a terrible option - just expensive.  Look I'm getting addicted and I haven't bought anything yet!  lol....

I hear what has been said about the accessories.  However, with the moon filter only £10, it's probably as cheap to get it now, rather than later when I would have to pay additional postage.  I just looked at 2 x Barlow lenses.  Damn.  I had assumed there was only one :-(  But there is a Sky-Watched 2x Economy, 2x Deluxe and even a 2x super-deluxe.  Doh......  Shows I have a lot to learn...

However, someone mentioned it's only every minute or so, which doesn't sound excessive.  I even wonder how long he would look at a particular object 30-50 seconds at a time perhaps?  Or....will he become obsessed and want to look for extended times...?  'I' don't know...lol..

[TractionMan]

You might want to read this excellent thread: http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/196278-what-can-i-expect-to-see/

Another tip is to download a free program called Stellarium: http://stellarium.org/ There you can find out which objects that are visible from your location.

[Charic]

Doninwales...............Hi, You and your Son will get extremely p**** off with the critical aligning, an EQ or GoTo telescope requires everytime you want to use it. Even without a GoTo powered / computer system. its a pain in the donkey! just Polar aligning and then having to make so many adjustments to look at everything during your viewing session. Trust me, I have a Celestron 127EQ tucked away in the shed.(You can have it if you live nearby, just to prove my case. I wont post it due to the fragile nature and the counter balance weights) but free to collect for you if you live in NE Scotland. But looking at your avatar name, it looks like you are from my homeland?

For simple observation use, the Aperture is your most important feature, but not the only feature. Size, weight &  costs ect.

If you want to photograph, that's another ball park, and more expensive.More members will advise on that issue.

For simple observation of the Moon, Saturn and some Galaxies a standard Newtonian reflector mounted to a Dobsonian base is the best value you can spend your money on.

The Aperture (the bigger the better) provides better contrast, allowing you to see fainter objects in the night sky.

M31 Andromeda, can be seen by some, with the naked eye. (I used to be able to see it, but my eyes are older now). I use an 8" reflector and can just make out the core of the Galaxy as a very small patch of grey light (very faint) from my light polluted garden (due to Winter / trees foliage missing and the glaring street lights shining through). When I transport my telescope to a darker site, my telescope blows me away, The Galaxy nebula is so bright and wide, I had to buy a larger lens to fit the image in. You often need very low power eyepieces and wide views to appreciate what's up there. Higher magnifications for the Moon and planets is fine. The Moon cannot blind you, so filtering is not essential, especially as some filters cost more than my own eyepieces? Sunglasses will reduce the brightness of the Moon! ps. Looking at the Moon through a telescope is always good, through an 8" telescope is awesome with a 5 or 8mm lens? Its also said, a 6" aperture can make an 8" blush if used under dark skies and in perfect seeing conditions. Lastly, you don't mention your Sons age. Maybe he can grow into something that is more suited to your self, rather than spending good money now, only having to spend again later for an upgrade. If your Son is young enough, then I'm sure he`d enjoy having his own scope. Finally there is only two options to move a telescope. Powered or Manually.  Manual is not an issue at low powers. As the power (eyepiece magnification ) goes up then so does the pushing, but its not excessive. After all, Planet Earth is spinning at 1000 mph so at higher magnification, you will have to track one way or another?

[YKSE]

I don't have had any of these two scopes, only a Skywatcher Explorer 130P which is about the same as  Heritage. I would vote for the Heritage, partly because the extra aperture, and also a little slower focal ratio (f5 against 114P's f4.3), the 114P will be quite demanding on eyepieces, showing much more astigmatism on the edge with the stock eyepieces.

I'd choose a simple cheshire over a moon filter. You need a cheshire to get the best of out of a reflector, but you don't need a moon filter to observe the Moon.

[TractionMan]

I don't have had any of these two scopes, only a Skywatcher Explorer 130P which is about the same as  Heritage. I would vote for the Heritage, partly because the extra aperture, and also a little slower focal ratio (f5 against 114P's f4.3), the 114P will be quite demanding on eyepieces, showing much more astigmatism on the edge with the stock eyepieces.

I'd choose a simple cheshire over a moon filter. You need a cheshire to get the best of out of a reflector, but you don't need a moon filter to observe the Moon.

Oh right, don't forget the cheshire. It's a vital tool for collimating a newtonian reflector. Might sound intimidating, but it's not that difficult when you've done it a couple of times. Besides, the 130P will hold collimation very well.

[doninwales]

Interesting comments Charic, thank you.

I did read something about the GOTO aligning requirements - having to align to specific stars, which we (as beginners) wouldn't have a clue about.

So certainly GOTO is not an option for the near term at least.

But the 114P does not have GOTO (its an optional extra), but it 'does' have computer tracking - which I 'assume' (am not sure!) means that if we want to look at an object, say the moon, then the telescope would automatically move with the moon without us having to keep nudging the telescope along.  I'm assuming (again, I don't know for sure) that this would happen even at higher resolutions.

Then again now that you mentioned it, and I start to think about it, presumably we'd still have to perform an initial alignment (even 'without' GOTO) so that the computer tracker would be able to initially orient itself.  Hadn't thought about that before.......

If all my understanding is correct, then this would be enough to rule out my consideration of the 114P! :-)

The eureka moment I was hoping for :-)

Down to you charic.  Thank you :-)

FYI, about us -  yes, we are in Wales.  Fortunately on top of a little hill away from lights, so am hoping light pollution is minimal.  Son will be 10 in 2 weeks.  I am 'slightly' older....

I'm afraid, I started to get lost with all the talk about apertures and eyeglass power, focal ratio, antistigmatism etc....  (though my wife is a dispensing optician so am sure she could fill me in with relevant explanations :-) )

Again, I have plenty to learn.......

All I know for now is that the 130P has a 5.5" parabolic mirror, and it comes with two eyepieces - 10mm and 25mm

Interesting comment about the Cheshire.  I had read about it, but forgot to look into it.

I had also read about collimation, but recall reading that it shouldn't be too difficult to do and doesn't need to be done often.

I wasn't aware I would need anything special to do it.

I'll have to read up about the Cheshire :-)

[TractionMan]

Two different cheshire EP's, slightly different in price but either will do:

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/other-collimation-tools/cheshire-collimating-eyepiece.html

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/other-collimation-tools/premium-cheshire-collimating-eyepiece.html

[completenovice]

Aperture every time.

130p is an excellent starter and not as cumbersome as ones with mounts so is easily storable and portable. Once you're into this astronomy lark you'll be upgrading anyway (trust me - it will happen  ) and the 130p will remain as your quick grab'n'go for when you have a spare hour and can't be bothered to set up your upgraded gear.

[happy-kat]

The computer tracking only works well if you align the scope to start with, if you do not align it the object will drift out of the field of view from my reading as I looked at the virtuoso mount. So you do not escape aligning it.

[AlexB67]

Personally for collimation I'd just buy this  to start with

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/other-collimation-tools/rigel-aline-collimation-cap.html

The long sight tube is a bit unwildly and sloppy in this scope and needs some improvisation in the 130p, it is also very long and comes very close to the secondary mirror not allowing you to see what you need to see without the aid of extension tubes etc, inducing even more slop in the system while collimating.  For the 114p you may find it ends up touching the mirror as it will be too long altogether.

The simple cap can do a very good job, easy to look though, although making the secondary collimation a bit hard to judge it is good enough for a decent collimation for visual observing. 

Alternatively I can recommend a short version with cross hairs like the one Tractionman linked to, but it is a bit harder to look through I find for my older eyes which will probably not be a problem for younger eyes, it is a much sturdier fit in this scope and allows you to see everything without extension tubes and would work for both of these scopes.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1-25-Cheshire-Collimating-Eyepiece-for-Telescope-Short-Version-Brand-NEW-Boxed-/181107523622?pt=UK_Photography_Telescopes&hash=item2a2ad98026

In the end of the day in my experience of the 130p is that your collimation will be good enough with the first item, since the eyepieces will also slop around a little bit inducing enough error that would override any of that real finetuning in collimation anyway, but don't let that concern you, the views that scope provides are great in the end of the day.  

The above short version can be bought from sky's the limit, a reliable seller, though I do not seem to find them on ebay right now sold by him.

The 114p cannot even be collimated on the primary mirror, it looks to me from the pictures it is fixed anyway, so it would only be used for the secondary mirror, which should most probably be well in place on that scope when delivered.   If you buy the 130p I'd certainly recommend to order something for collimation, since there is a good chance it will need it after delivery.

Good luck 

[doninwales]

OK, so I am currently looking at the Sky Watcher Heritage 130P Flextube for £128.90 from Morris Photographic Centre (free delivery too :-) )

Looks like I also need a Cheshire Collimating device, but not yet sure which.

Am hoping the basic Rigel Aline Collimation Cap is sufficient at just £4.95.

I'm not sure of the benefits of the alternatives - I see a Cheshire Collimating Eyepiece for £26, or a premium one for £36.  Are these more expensive ones really worth the extra cost?

[AlexB67]

IMHO, jut get the cap, worry about the more costly tools later and when you've read up on collimation and understand the processes involved. The cap is sufficient to get the job done to a good standard.  I probably jumped a bit in at the deep end in my previous post, but the premium one as well the 26 pound come with some problems when used on this scope out of the box, enough to negate the bits that they are so good at, that is very accurate collimation. 

[Charic]

doninwales. The dust cap on the focuser will be sufficient for  collimation? Read here.  http://www.astro-baby.com/collimation/astro%20babys%20collimation%20guide.htm  In-fact print it out, and read it many times. Its great. But don't buy too much until you`ve received the telescope and seen what its capable of?

Alex just beat me!

[Charic]

doninwales........Alignment should only ever need to be done at the start of every  viewing session,if your using any motor driven system  or any system on an equatorial mount. This alignment procedure aligns the telescope to the Earth's axis, this helps to track  properly, as everything moves concentric to the Pole Star. The telescope is simply aligned with the Pole Star. But there is also much to do and adjust afterwards, but the Polar alignment is essential.  Any telescope on a Dobsonian mount just requires any flat surface to sit on, job done. You just point it at where you want to look. Start with low power wide angle eyepiece, then move up to the higher focal length eyepieces to get a little closer to the Planets and the Moon. The eyepieces have numbers on them. This is their focal length. The telescope also has numbers on it. Take mine for example. F-1200  & D-200 That means I have a telescope with a 1200mm focal length. That is the distance from the lens/mirror to where the image is formed. If I divide that figure 1200 / 8 ( 8 mm lens )  the answer is 150 or 150 power normally written as 150x The end result is that I'm looking at something with 150x Power / Magnification.  If I now choose the 32mm eyepiece ( on eyepieces, the bigger the number the lower the magnification) on the same telescope, I'll now have ......you guessed it  37.5x power. Low power, wide angle  is much needed for the DSO's (Deep Space Objects). The D-200 refers to the aperture 200mm or 8"  (mine is actually 203.2, but 200 makes it easier to sell and remember?)  Always, Always (twice) have regards to the size of the aperture for visual astronomy. the bigger the better. take a look at the Skyliner 150P (may be past the budget at £200 delivered) Its Only 6" but under the right conditions and dark skies that you mention, you may get a better result than I get under polluted skies?  I would obviously suggest getting the Skyliner 200P like mine. Your Son may sell that when he's past his 20's. Its such a good scope, and may never sell it?  If you purchased the 150P  and after a Year, its not  getting used, then the scope will sell on, if needed. Also remember once the bad weather and Winter has passed, the Days get longer, the Nights being shorter, and maybe a little less time at the scope under the skies. all food for thought. Another great option is the Binocular, A 7 x 50 for the younger eyes going up to 10 x 50. Easy to set-up, grab and go,  no need to mind someone around expensive kit?

[AndyWB]

What Alex said about the collimation cap makes a lot of sense; it's what I used for the first several months. And my 130p seems to hold collimation remarkably well.

FWIW, I'd try and buy from a specialist astronomy shop (not necessarily, but possibly, the forum sponsor) if I could. For a few quid difference I'd prefer to know who I'm dealing with knows about astronomy. But that's just me!

[happy-kat]

Had mine a year and not collimated it yet.

[doninwales]

Thanks Charic for some more good advice/information :-)

That collimation document was interesting - there seems to be a lot more to the process that I had expected.  Fortunately it sounds like it shouldn't be needed often.

The Skyliner 150P you suggest 'does' look good.  However the 50% premium in cost is probably not warranted for his first scope.  If he gets in to it, then no doubt I would consider upgrading in future years :-)

Thanks also for the explanation of various terms.  My Physics A level is coming back to me.... :-)  The only bit that I wasn't sure about is why you would need lower power for DSO.  'Logically' I would have assumed that viewing more distant objects would require you to use as high a power as you could get (?)  In any case, I suspect much of the early stages will be studying the moon mainly, and probably some other planets :-)

[Langy]

The only bit that I wasn't sure about is why you would need lower power for DSO.  'Logically' I would have assumed that viewing more distant objects would require you to use as high a power as you could get (?)  In any case, I suspect much of the early stages will be studying the moon mainly, and probably some other planets :-)

I think the reason for this is that Lunar an Planetary objects are already bright and if good conditions with higher magnification you can see them closer with the detail. For DSO they often are very faint and you need to gather as much light as possible so therefore a lower magnification allows the extra light in. Often in a scope you see DSO objects in grey scale where if you take long exposures with a DSLR etc. then they capture the colour.

That's my thoughts but guess I may get corrected.

[doninwales]

OK, Heritage 130P and Rigel Aline Collimation Cap Ordered!

Went with FLO in the end as I could buy both from one place with single postage payment.

So......my next question, since I've been so impressed with replies/support/advice  I've had :-)

What book should I get?

I'm guessing it would be a lot more useful and exciting to looks at some colourful pictures/charts of specific celestial objects, and then go off and see them for real.

Hopefully also read up about them and so, learn about them.

Have only just started looking at possibilities.....

This one looked interesting:  Dorling Kindersley Handbooks: Stars and Planets by Ian Redpath.

The description states:

"From the planet Jupiter to a refracting telescope, discover all about the stars and planets in our solar system and the equipment you need to spot them.

Each of the planets is illustrated and described in incredible detail while the complex process of locating planets in the night sky is made simple through charts, maps and diagrams. You'll find star charts to help you to locate and identify constellations and individual stars. Interesting features in the sky are examined in a monthly guide, complemented by absorbing accounts of all 88 constellations and the objects they contain.

Perfect for beginners or intermediate astronomers and pocket-sized so you can take it outside."

Sounds like just the thing I'm after.  Lots of illustrations.  Lots of advice on how to locate the planets.  Star charts etc. etc..

The only think I'm weary about it that it claims to have a monthly guide - but am wondering if this changes from year to year and so might be a little out of date (?).  Perhaps I'm completely wrong.

Would appreciate any feedback about this book, or indeed any suggestions of other books.

Though I'm prepared to hear that everyone has their own favourite.....lol....

Just remember that this is primarily aimed at a1 10-year old.... (and me!)