Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

Big Maks no good for DSO?

DaveS

By DaveS
in Observing - Deep Sky

Recommended Posts

DaveS

DaveS

Posted
Posted

Humph!

I've just had my best view of M42, full moon and LP an' all with my new 180 mak than I ever had through my Megrez 90. Reminds me of how I saw it through my old 8" f/8 newt. This was with my 26mm Meade plossl.

Bring on the galaxies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Doley68

Doley68

Posted
Posted

DaveS,

I use 2"eyepieces to get a bit of a wider field at lower powers. My 26mm panaview is very nice and I have a 38mm 70° eyepiece shows me the whole disc of the moon (or Sun!) Nicely.

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark at Beaufort

Mark at Beaufort

Posted
Posted

As you can see from my signature I enjoy viewing DSOs. Whereas I mainly use a 10" Dob I also have a 180mm Mak/Cass. An EP that I have enjoyed using on the Mak is a 38mm Panaview which gives very good views of the brighter DSOs - mag 71x and almost a one degree FOV.

I bought the Mak/Cass for Lunar/Planetary/Double Stars but I have added viewing brighter Planetary Nebula as well. The view using the 21mm Ethos is rather good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike73

Mike73

Posted
Posted

I've never even tried DSO's with my 180 to be honest as I bought it just for lunar and the planets. The 180 is on a HEQ5 and I'm used to dob bases for DSO's which for me at least is far simpler to move around the sky with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveS

DaveS

Posted
  • Author
Posted

TBH I bought the mak for lunar / planetary, trying it on DSO was just a "what if",  but I may put a WF eye piece on my shopping list.

As I "grew up" with equatorial mounts, I've never had any problem moving one around the sky, and never even considered a Dob, as I had enough hassle pushing an un-driven EQ in one axis, pushing a Dob in two holds no appeal for me at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
swamp thing

swamp thing

Posted
Posted

I had enough hassle pushing an un-driven EQ in one axis, pushing a Dob in two holds no appeal for me at all.

Aaah but that's the whole difference a Dob doesn't move on axis, it moves whatever direction you push/pull it.

I used to think as you coming from EQ mounts myself. You need to realise a Dob mount is nothing like an EQ, it moves in any direction with equal ease, and is not not restrained to axis along which it must be pushed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveS

DaveS

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Ah, but with a clock-driven EQ, once you've centred the object of interest you can concentrate on observing, rather than continually pushing the 'scope around :grin:

"De gustibus non disputandum est" sorry for any sp in there, Latin was never my strong subject :evil:

What works for you works for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stu

Stu

Posted
Posted

Nothing wrong with a mak for DSO, it just depends on which DSO!

I used my mak which had a 4m focal length and max 0.6 degree fov to great effect on globulars, planetary nebulae and to a lesser extent (due to my skies) for smaller galaxies.

The narrow fov is limiting for open clusters and nebulae such as the Veil or NA,, or M31, but even M42 was lovely through it (mind you it does look fabulous at any mag/fov really)

So, give it a go if you have a mak, just keep the field of view in mind do you know if the object fits within it or is over spilling.

Stu

Link to comment
Share on other sites
acey

acey

Posted
Posted

The dob vs mak discussion sounds like it's really EQ vs Alt-Az. There's no reason why you couldn't put a mak on an alt-az mount or a big newt on an EQ.

The notion that maks may not be good for DSOs seems to be on the basis that DSO viewing means fitting the whole of M31 into a single field of view (which is not my definition).

You can use anything to look at DSOs. The only essential if you want good views is a dark sky.

If you want DSO viewing with the widest possible field and zero tracking then look at the Milky Way naked eye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nightfisher

nightfisher

Posted
Posted

The dob vs mak discussion sounds like it's really EQ vs Alt-Az. There's no reason why you couldn't put a mak on an alt-az mount or a big newt on an EQ.

The notion that maks may not be good for DSOs seems to be on the basis that DSO viewing means fitting the whole of M31 into a single field of view (which is not my definition).

You can use anything to look at DSOs. The only essential if you want good views is a dark sky.

If you want DSO viewing with the widest possible field and zero tracking then look at the Milky Way naked eye.

I use my 150 pro on the AZ4 mount for visual, and for Luna/dslr imaging, but not really tried it for DSO stuff as im not all that fussed about looking at these, might give it a try though as with 42mm superview EP i can get about 43 x mag

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Qualia

Qualia

Posted
Posted

Just out of interest and mainly a question for the Dob owners who also have or have had a Mak; what in your in opinion surrenders up the best visual image on lunar and planetary work? Would something like a 150 Mak be able to compete with an 8" or 10" dob, would a 180 Mak compete well with an 8" or 10" etc? I'm just asking for I have seen a couple of members in this thread who own decent sized dobs and yet are using Maks for their planetary observations. Thanks in advance for any insight :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike73

Mike73

Posted
Posted

Just out of interest and mainly a question for the Dob owners who also have or have had a Mak; what in your in opinion surrenders up the best visual image on lunar and planetary work? Would something like a 150 Mak be able to compete with an 8" or 10" dob, would a 180 Mak compete well with an 8" or 10" etc? I'm just asking for I have seen a couple of members in this thread who own decent sized dobs and yet are using Maks for their planetary observations. Thanks in advance for any insight :grin:

Funny you should mention that because I'm going to sell my 180 soon in favour of a 10" dob!

I've had some amazing planetary and lunar views through my 180 and it really has lived up to its reputation as a 'planet killer' but I miss the flexibility of a simple dobsonian telescope.

I'm 100% sure that a 10" newt will beat my 180 Skymax for DSO's, for planetary and lunar I'd also bet that it will be better given that the 180 has a 32% CO vs 10" 20% CO and also the increase in aperture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nightfisher

nightfisher

Posted
Posted

Just out of interest and mainly a question for the Dob owners who also have or have had a Mak; what in your in opinion surrenders up the best visual image on lunar and planetary work? Would something like a 150 Mak be able to compete with an 8" or 10" dob, would a 180 Mak compete well with an 8" or 10" etc? I'm just asking for I have seen a couple of members in this thread who own decent sized dobs and yet are using Maks for their planetary observations. Thanks in advance for any insight :grin:

I can only answer from the mak side of this as i dont own a dob, but for Luna and planet work the Maks are very good, and nice and compact, plus give darn near APO views

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • 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.