SkyWatcher Skymax-127-supatrak worth getting ?

[scottphillips]

hi guys been searching for a scope and mount that will allow me good use for planetary imaging ? 

is this my best option ??

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-127-supatrak.html

[Naplesnut]

Would do nicely but you wont get a brand new set up for £300. Check auction sites for a separate items or a package

atb

stu

[scottphillips]

That link is for £285

[John]

It seems to say £295 but thats close enough !

What are you going to do the imaging with ?

I've owned one of those for a short time. I think a lightweight webcam would be OK but the mount would not be stable enough for a DSLR.

They are good little scopes to view though and the mount does track well enough to hold an object in the view for a while, depending on how well the mount has been set up. You would probably be able to do some basic planetary web cam imaging with one.

[nicoscy]

John is right. For lunar and planetary webcam imaging it should perform really well, but the weakness is the mount.

Make sure you set it up with the tripod legs tucked in fully. If you extend them, then there is a lot of wobble.

Also, add some weight on the tray of the tripod, a kilo or two to increase stability.

But don't use a DSLR. Too heavy for this rig.

[scottphillips]

Any scopes for this price that come with a mount able to support the weight of a DSLR

[happy-kat]

Are you happy with considering an equatorial mount?

[scottphillips]

have discussed this with someone already, I wouldn't mind getting one when I start upgrading for deep sky imaging but I heard you don't need one for planetary imaging, only a tracking motor which this scope has ?

[nicoscy]

For solar, lunar and planetary you do not need a German Equatorial Mount. A standard Alt Az mount with tracking is perfect and much lighter.

If you pair the scope with a webcam and your laptop, you can start imaging at once.

Then it is up to you to learn the ropes of Registax and a bit of Photoshop or equivalent software...

[happy-kat]

First light optics have an EQ3-2 in clearance, choose a telescope to go with it bearing in mind carrying weight and at a later date could look to add motors to it. Reading posts is not the best mount for DSO imaging but might get you started?

You could get more for less if you looked at second hand.

Tracking is not essential I don't think to image planets. You take a movie file so the length of movie file is governed by how long the planet stays in view.

Hopefully someone can answer, does registax deal with field rotation in a single movie file?

[nicoscy]

At the magnifications required for lunar and planetary imaging to have an appropriate image scale, if you don't have tracking it is very challenging to say the least.

Your object will stay in the same FOV for only a few seconds at a time and you do want to capture a high number of frames, hence tracking is essential unless you are good at manual tracking with an EQ mount - again a huge challenge!!!

Registax deals with field rotation as part of the stacking process.

[happy-kat]

You have the choice of two different types of telescope that do not require collimation in this price range from my little learning.

Really crudely.

A refractor like what you already have or a maksutov.

A refractor gives lovely wide field of views and pin point stars but can have CA purple fringing on the edge of bright objects like planets. Faster optics.

The mak has narrower field of view and are slower optically so may find that faint fussy DSO harder but can take higher magnification useful for planets.

This in price but does not have go to but it does track. Something like this.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-127-supatrak.html

This is lighter and does have go to though the apperature is 102

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/az-goto/skywatcher-skymax-102-synscan-az-goto.html

If you can past process then you might be able to remove any CA from a refractor captured image.

Just ideas, you can decide what type of telescope and mount you want for your budget and needs.

[nicoscy]

Both the Mak and refractor can achieve high magnifications within the limits of seeing of course. The Mak can get there "easier" due to its longer focal length so a less powerful barlow combination is required to extend its focal length.

Point re chromatic aberration is correct as besides the colour, it is also a contrast robber, unless you splurge big time on a refractor which is apochromatic, but all depends on the budget.

The Skymax for a bit more adds goto capabilities as well: http://www.firstlightoptics.com/az-goto/skywatcher-skymax-127-synscan-az-goto.html

So, what's the budget for scope, tripod and mount?

[happy-kat]

Scott had previously communicated £300 for the entire setup.

[nicoscy]

Scott had previously communicated £300 for the entire setup.

Actually he indicated a specific telescope near that price, but not if his budget was restricted to that amount.

If the budget is indeed at the price point of the specific telescope, then this telescope is the best solution available.

[scottphillips]

Ok so thanks for the comments the skywatcher skymax 127 with tracking seems the best option ?? As the GoTo does not track the object ??

[nicoscy]

Goto both finds and tracks objects.

Tracking motors only track an object once you find them in the scope.

[scottphillips]

Really ? I was told GoTo only finds you an object ?

[nicoscy]

A Go-To instrument has a long list of items in its database, so once you align it, you tell it to go to any target in that database. Once it locks on, it tracks the object.

A tracking mount only tracks when you manually slew the telescope to the object you want the telescope to track.

[scottphillips]

Ah ok awesome thanks !! What would you say is better the skywatcher skymax 127 with GoTo or the skywatcher explorer 130p with GoTo ??

[nicoscy]

Just to qualify any statements: I am into the visual aspect of the sport.

Having said that, the 130 has larger effective aperture, lower% central obstruction and cools much faster. Between the two I would go for the 130P but that's just me. You would however have to learn to collimate the telescope (aligning the mirrors so that light that bounces off the primary goes up precisely vertically, hits the secondary and reflected at precisely 90 degrees to the eyepiece). Not difficult, but this is a design aspect to keep in mind.

[John]

I'd stick to the mak 127 for planetary imaging. You need a long focal length to get the image scale.

[scottphillips]

Thanks guys

[nicoscy]

I'd stick to the mak 127 for planetary imaging. You need a long focal length to get the image scale.

Nothing that a good barlow won't correct. In all fairness though, the Mak can get to high magnifications easier.

But again, a larger aperture and lower central obstruction (subject to proper collimation) should produce better results.

Of course it depends also on the quality of optics which in both cases are generally good, but there is a lot of variance in production...

[nicoscy]

I just checked the calculations for planetary imaging for my upcoming OO 140mm Mak. 

I currently have a Nexstar Image 5 webcam and for that webcam, the optimal focal length is 2050. Considering that the scope has a focal length of 2000, I don't need a barlow with this configuration.

If I were to use the 130P which has a focal length of 650, then I would need a 3x barlow to optimise the image scale (again, relative to the webcam I have and its pixel size).

Just highlighting the pros and cons of each setup as John was right about the need of a long focal length.