Telescope advise please.

[KAYVEE62]

Hello folks, a newbie seeking advice on a first telescope purchase , after a great deal of research through going online , reading different forum topics , I have decided to go for the Orion astro view 120 St ,or the Skywatcher startravel 120 ,the Orion comes on a eq mount ,the skywatcher on a altaz mount ( I am aware of the differences ) .So first question is"are they as good as each other , for a couple of hundred pounds difference "? , I already have a decent dslr camera as I am a keen photographer ,so I would like to take some shots of the moon to begin with ,once again through my research I am aware that I would need to but the adapter to suit my camera ,I also like the idea of using the scope in the day for photography , I have chosen refractors because I have read that the optics tend to look after themselves and don't require regular collimating , any feedback would be great ! Thanks

[Cornelius Varley]

Hello and welcome to SGL. Optically there should be no difference between the Orion 120ST and The Skywatcher 120ST, they are both made by the same company. The difference in price is due to two factors. Firstly the equatorial mount supplied with the Orion 120ST costs more than the simpler alt-azimuth AZ3 mount supplied with the Skywatcher 120ST. Secondly, Orion products tend to cost more in the UK than their Skywatcher equivalents.

[Tinker1947]

Regular Collimating takes less than a minute, its not a "Black Art" very easy to learn how.......

[ronin]

Regular Collimating takes less than a minute, its not a "Black Art" very easy to learn how.......

Is this correct on a refractor ?

Since there is no centre spot or secondary to adjust I would have said that it was a longer activity then with a reflector.

The OP is referring to either of 2 refractors.

[Owmuchonomy]

Regular Collimating takes less than a minute, its not a "Black Art" very easy to learn how.......

...the point being, don't be put off other designs just down to collimating. Regarding the photography, if you want to take anything other than bright objects with very short exposures you are going to need an EQ mount at minimum.

[rwilkey]

An alt-az (AZ) mount is easier to use than an equaltorial for beginners, also less cumbersome usually.  I prefer refractors on an AZ mount, just point and shoot really.  So I would therefore go for the Sky Watcher on an AZ mount if its me, they come on either I understand.  But I have tried the 120ST on an EQ mount and it is quite a beast.

[Tinker1947]

Typo.....

[Moonshane]

The 120mm ST f5 is a great scope for wide field views at lower powers but not too great at higher powers compared with say a 150mm newtonian. There is a lot of chromatic aberration on bright objects like the moon so imaging would be challenging I'd have though. Mine is virtually a dedicated white light solar scope (used with a Lunt wedge) for which it is superb.  Last night I used it briefly with a wide field eyepiece and it provided quite lovely views of the double cluster/Stock 2, M45 and the whole area around Cassiopeia. On the moon it is 'OK' but falls short of a newt in my experience.

[damnut]

The ST120 is a great scope on the limit of an az3 but great on an az4. It is my grab&go scope, goes everywhere and its bullet proof, impervious to sand, snow and dog slobber!.

[happy-kat]

Could always look for a second hand eq mount sturdy enough to take the st120 and camera in the future.

[Sirius Starwatcher]

Plus 1 for damnut post reading a review of the SW 120 I read the owner upgraded to the Alt Z 4 mount being that much more stable for the scope. I am actually considering this set up myself for a grab and go system for holidays etc best of luck with you choice

[damnut]

Not to hijack the Op's post. But it is a great grab&go scope  Garry, plenty of apperture a little CA but brilliant, next to be taken back home to Holyhead & Llanfairfechan!

Hwyl!

[KAYVEE62]

Thanks for the feedback everyone , more questions though , rwilky says the 120 St on an eq mount is a bit of a beast ,does this mean it's awesome or cumbersome ? Damnut says the skywatcher would be better on the az4 mount rather than the az3 that's supplied ,why ? , Is a finders cope or red dot finder better ? , with either scope on either mount ,what realistically would I be able to photograph ? ,and finally can either of these scopes be mounted on eq or altaz mounts ? Sorry folks but the more info I can gather the better understanding I will have ! Thanks

[happy-kat]

Simply summarised from a relative newbie.

With an AltZ mount whether Az3 or Az4 you just take it outside plonk it down and start viewing. These mounts do not track the earth's rotation so imaging is restricted to planets and the Moon or wide field images.

An equatorial mount is heavier but does follow the Earth's rotation so a suitable mount with motors can allow for longer exposure lengths.

This mount has a less plonk and go some polar alignment maybe needed to really good alignment to image. Not all equatorial mounts are equal.

So a link to the one with the eq mount might be an idea as the load capacity of a eq mount for visual is not the same to image.

I have not used an eq mount myself.

I personally prefer RDF for simplicity but it would not be a buying decision factor for me.

ST120 using rings can be mounted on either I would expect, there are various sorts of adaptors anyway to facilitate many things.

Az3 might want to create a simple counter weight bar if using that telescope I made one for mine for about £15 to balance my ST80 with camera attached.

I expect you will get more replies :-)

I have not used an Az4 to experience the difference. The Az3 gave me what I wanted.

The vixen porta II mount looks to have the best of both mounts, stability and slow motion controls but is the most expensive.

[happy-kat]

Is it the Eq3-2 ?

I see FLO have this scope on either the Az3 or EQ3-2.

I can't comment on the suitability of the EQ3-2 and long exposures with the ST120 plus camera.

[Zadoq]

For visual observing or taking photos of the moon, either would do well.

If you're planning on mostly observing then an AZ mount is arguably simpler to use. It would do well enough for the moon and planets.

However, if you are planning on imaging DSOs, an equatorial mount is better as it won't be subjected to a rotation of the field of view through the night (assuming both mounts track). For imaging, I would recommend getting as good a mount as you can afford as it's probably the most important part of the setup

[rwilkey]

Hi, the 120 St and an EQ mount are quite hefty in my opinion, too much for me to manage being a bit older (64) and slightly disabled.  Weight and portability are important to me and is something you should consider if you need to travel to a dark sky spot.

[KAYVEE62]

Thank you again for the feedback , next question - I can understand that I would need t-ring to connect my dslr to a scope , but what does a t adapter do ?Am I right in thinking that it allows you to photo a magnified image through the eyepiece , where as there would be no magnification with just the t-ring ! Thanks

[Tinker1947]

The T-Ring has the DSLR connector on one side this clicks into the DSLR the same as a lens would, the other side away from the DSLR has a thread which allows a adaptor to screw in then the other end goes in the focuser, or with the right type of EP another type of adapter screws into the EP and then screws into the T-Ring allowing imagines to be taken through the EP when it is attached to the focuser......

Canon DSLR with T-Ring connected and a Baader Coma Corrector, this goes into the focuser.....

Canon DSLR with the T-Ring + Adaptor + Baader Click-lock + Focal Reducer......

When there all connected together....

Canon DSLR connected to a Pentax EP with the right adapter, this then goes into the focuser...

[happy-kat]

T ring screws on to camera body where lens would have been, the t ring allows the camera on some telescope to be screwed into the end of the empty focuser tube.

A t adaptor screws onto the t ring and essentially provides a nose cone to be placed into the empty focuser tube.

I prefer to use the later combination as it makes it easy to attach and deattach the camera from the telescope.

[KAYVEE62]

Thanks for the replys folks , not wanting to sound dumb ,I can understand the t ring bit and the t adapter , but what magnifies the image that your trying to photo ? Thanks

[happy-kat]

The camera.

The diagonal size of the sensor gives you the focal length so divide the telescope focal length by the sensor size is the magnification you get.

I only learnt this reading a post last week.

[KAYVEE62]

Just to carry on with this topic , i stumbled upon a video on YouTube with a guy using an eyepiece inside the t ring adapter ,is this how the image gets magnified , is a variable t adapter a better option over a fixed one ? Thanks

[happy-kat]

Do you mean something like this here

[damnut]

Hi There, I originally had the st120 on an az3. If you viewed nearer the zenith it would carry on going!. The az4 is far more capable and its easy to transport. The St 120 is also short and light enough to be transported easily. I have three other fracs 152mm, 127mm and a evostar f10 120mm , I just would not think of slinging one of those in a roofbox!!!

Cheers