What to decide?!

[MGeraads]

I'm with 'happy-kat' on this. The best telescope is the one you'll use the most. I have a 102mm Skymax (Maksutov) and I use it a lot more than my 130mm Explorer. Early next year I'm planning on getting a much bigger SCT, but I bet the Skymax still gets used a lot, especially with a simpler alt/az grab'n'go mount (I use an EQ 2 at the moment).

How do you solve the narrow field of view? It is hard for me without knowledge to imagine what can be seen with a 102mm mak. Is it doable without the use of (expensive) widefield oculars?

The guy from the advertisement of the mak said he wanted to sell for 250 euro but without the 24mm 68 degree widefield ocular.

The choice nearly freaks me out at this point :-)

[MGeraads]

I wonder if your refractor is operating at full aperture ?

It has been known for low cost refractor scopes to have an aperture stop just behind the objective lens reducing the working aperture. The benefits of this would be reduced chromatic and other aberrations but the downside would be reduced light gathering.

Alternatively the aperture could be stopped down further along the optical path by a misplaced light baffle or the end of the focuser drawtube cutting into the light path.

How do I find this out without the needed knowledge? Perhaps I should take my telescope to the nearest astronomy club.

[nameunknown]

..go along to a local "star party" and try out some scopes. It really is a very simple way of finding out what you like.

P

[Stu]

How do you solve the narrow field of view? It is hard for me without knowledge to imagine what can be seen with a 102mm mak. Is it doable without the use of (expensive) widefield oculars?

The guy from the advertisement of the mak said he wanted to sell for 250 euro but without the 24mm 68 degree widefield ocular.

The choice nearly freaks me out at this point :-)

A 32mm Plossl with a 50 degree apparent field of view will give virtually the same actual field as the 24mm 68 degree at around 1.25 degrees. The focal ratio of the scope is slow, so no problem with using cheaper eyepieces, although used TV Plossls aren't so expensive.

Here are some examples of what fits in. The outer circle is the 24, the inner one the 32mm.

M42

Double Cluster

M81/82

[Mak the Night]

How do you solve the narrow field of view? It is hard for me without knowledge to imagine what can be seen with a 102mm mak. Is it doable without the use of (expensive) widefield oculars?

The guy from the advertisement of the mak said he wanted to sell for 250 euro but without the 24mm 68 degree widefield ocular.

The choice nearly freaks me out at this point :-)

Well, Mak's have never had huge FOV's anyway. BigSumorian says it all better than I could in his reply to your question above. For comparatively low magnification non-lunar/planetary observing of objects like Open Clusters, Globular Clusters and certain Messier objects and the like I tend to use a TeleVue 50° 32mm Plossl and a 68° 24mm Panoptic. On their own, without a Barlow/Powermate, they will give me a magnification of around 41x and 54x respectively. Both eyepieces have the same 27mm field stop and I can easily get most of the Pleiades in the FOV with either. I have even had pretty good results with an inexpensive 15mm Celestron Kellner (shown below).

[Stu]

That's a good point.... M45 is a fine example of where you will push up against the limits of the field of view. They will just about fit, but they look much better framed in the kind of 3.5 or 4 degree field of view you can get with a widefield frac.

[MGeraads]

Thanks all! I think thanks to your help I know a bit better what I would like. I now feel a little more for the MAK 102mm, just to learn now, can easily take it from the attic to the garden or the car. I also can use it more or less with a stable phototripod.

I wasn't too much interested in another refractor but the startravel 120 combined witn an Az3 mount looks easy as well.

The 200p/150p are probably the best scopes for the price, but I am looking something more easy to carry.

So to put a little summary, would appreciate if you can add something I miss out:

1. Skywatcher MAK 102mm

Pro: easy, lightweight, sharp view, more forgiving on lower quality eyepieces

Con: long cooling time, smaller fov then other scopes like refractor

Price: 250 including mount (used one)

2. Skywatcher startravel 120mm

Pro: no collimation needed, usable as tele lens for dslr

Con: higher price new 406 euro with az3 mount

3. Orion skyscanner 100mm

Pro: very very portable, very easy to set up or so it looks

Con: looks cheapish

Price: 236 euro incl new photo tripod

Anything I miss so far and what option would you suggest considering my position and budget? I am done thinking and will start watching as this is the time of the year that atmosphere is quite stable during cold weather :-)

[MGeraads]

That's a good point.... M45 is a fine example of where you will push up against the limits of the field of view. They will just about fit, but they look much better framed in the kind of 3.5 or 4 degree field of view you can get with a widefield frac.

What application is this if I may ask? Is it for iphone or for android?

[faulksy]

I am driving a Seat Mii, very small car. Perhaps I should visit nearest store to see and feel the usability of the 200p and/ or the 150p. Loading two pieces inside my car with an easy build up system looks like a "grab and go" but my parents live across the country and that could be a problem with the regular stuff, our dog and two adults AND a dobsonion 200p :-) need a trailer or something..

good idea about the trailer, how do you think your partner would feel about going in the trailer though

[faulksy]

What application is this if I may ask? Is it for iphone or for android?

this app that stu put up is i phone, but you can get it on android as well. sky safari pro

[Mak the Night]

There is even a free version of that app on Android by Celestron called SkyPortal.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.celestron.skyportal 

A 4" Mak is pretty transportable, I think it's a good compromise between size and performance. It even does well connected to a 2" RACI! I definitely intend to keep mine as a grab and go after I get a bigger SCT. I don't find the cool down time a real problem, although by the time I have everything sorted it's normally fine. I think the Synta (Orion/Sky-Watcher) Mak's have dispelled many myths about 4" aperture Maksutov Cassegrain scopes. 

[John]

I don't want to spoil things but Synta mak-cassegrains don't operate at full aperture. The 102mm is probably around a 95mm in terms of actual usable aperture. To deliver the full aperture a mak-cassegrain of the design that Synta use needs to have an over-sized primary mirror but they don't. Not a huge issue but you ought to know about it in making a decision.

Other than that they are decent scopes.

You will need dew prevention of some sort - either a dew shield or a heated dew band.

[MGeraads]

And how about the refractor skywatcher startravel? What are the negative aspects for this one? Sorry for all the questions, can only spend my money once and I want to make the best possible decision in my situation that keeps me happy

Thanks again. You are all so kind and patient :-)

[John]

And how about the refractor skywatcher startravel? What are the negative aspects for this one? Sorry for all the questions, can only spend my money once and I want to make the best possible decision in my situation that keeps me happy

Thanks again. You are all so kind and patient :-)

The short achromats are good for low to medium power deep sky and star field scanning. They struggle when the magnification gets much over 80x-100x because the CA they produce coupled with spherical aberration that most seem to have conspire to reduce contrast and sharpness.

All scopes have their plusses and minusses which is why many folks end up with a few of the things !

[jetstream]

For the money the SW150P dob will be very hard to equal and is fast and easy to set up and will show M42 very well,the Veil, and so much more. The moon will be spectacular as will the planets. Easy on eyepieces, easy to collimate,fast cool down, very easy ( the best IMHO) to observe with.....

My refractors still love to send me through gymnastics classes for fun, especially as I like to observe near the zenith  

[happy-kat]

This thread will show how that MAK102 could be attached to a decent photo tripod though it depends on what mount base is on the telescope, it's an idea.

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/247988-grab-and-go-mount-ball-head-and-pan-plate-combo/

Both the MAK and the ST120 can be connected to a DSLR with the right connection bit to work.

Both views MAK and refractor are upside down. Night use does not matter, for daytime (NOT the sun) can use an erect image diagonal to correct the view.

[happy-kat]

This thread shows fans of the reflector, MAK and refractor.

You can't beat going to look see and try, only you can make a decision what is going to work best for you and get used.

[Mak the Night]

A Mak view without a diagonal is both inverted and reversed, with a conventional diagonal it is right-way up but mirror reversed. 

[MGeraads]

If it is still for sale I go have a look at the Mak. It is coming with extra eyepiece and carrying bag. Deep inside the easy use of this kind of scope had a slight advantage on my choise.

What should I check on a used scope? How do I know if the equipment is in good condition?

[brantuk]

Checking a new scope it's often best if you take an experienced person with you to look at it - maybe a friend from your local astro club. Generally though - all mirrors or lenses on the scope should be clear and clean with no scratches or dirt on them - you need to look very carefully for hairline cracks or smears. Ask lots of questions about how often the lens or mirrors have been cleaned and what was used.

Mirrors and lenses are coated so use a torch shined on the surface at an angle to check coatings aren't scratched. Make sure the focuser moves smoothly and firmly in and out with just the right amount of stiction (shouldn't be too tight or too loose). Check there's no dings or dents on the tube to confirm it hasn't been dropped or banged in it's lifetime.

Check the tripod for smooth movement of the legs - they should slide in/out easily and lock firmly when the clip or hand wheel is tightened. Again there should be no major paint chippings anywhere on the scope or tripod. Make sure all the usual gear is included - scopes usually come with a finder scope and one or more eyepieces. Do the same checks on these. Also make sure the lens shield slide in and out firmly and stays in place when set.

If possible get the owner to demo the scope and show you a few objects in the night sky to ensure the scope works and can focus on objects. This can be done in daylight too if necessary - the view should be sharp and well focussed (eg like using binoculars). If there's any electronics get them to hook it up to a power source and ensure it moves properly with no undue crunching or grinding sounds - if there's a handset ask for a brief demo of it moving in response to arrow key depressions and finding an object with the goto.

That's enough to be going on with - I'm sure others will add anything I've missed. Good luck

[MGeraads]

Thanks a lot. I can punch myself in the face as I told the guy first that I was not interested without the 24mm 68 degree eyepiece, when i changed my mind unfortunately the Mak was sold....which brings me again to zero. I will head towards a store this or next week and I will promise to let you know my final choice :-)

[MGeraads]

Here I am again, and guess what? I went to the showroom and I was not happy at all with the dobsonion mount. The final decision will go between:

1) eq3 with skywatcher explorer 150/750

2) extend my budget and go for eq5 with 200/1000

I expect it to be the last option as it is way more movable in my opinion!

This combo is EUR 678 at the local store against 474 for the 150p

[Mak the Night]

Here I am again, and guess what? I went to the showroom and I was not happy at all with the dobsonion mount. The final decision will go between:

1) eq3 with skywatcher explorer 150/750

2) extend my budget and go for eq5 with 200/1000

I expect it to be the last option as it is way more movable in my opinion!

This combo is EUR 678 at the local store against 474 for the 150p

Not everyone (including myself) gets on with Dobsonians, which really confuses Dob fans lol! At the end of the day, you should choose the telescope you think you will use the most and is most suitable to your preferences. 

The bigger the aperture, the better the viewing usually. If you think that an 8" scope is worth increasing your budget for, and you think it will get as much use as the smaller/lighter scope, go for the bigger one.

[Charic]

Here I am again, and guess what? I went to the showroom and I was not happy at all with the dobsonion mount. The final decision will go between:

1) eq3 with skywatcher explorer 150/750

2) extend my budget and go for eq5 with 200/1000

I expect it to be the last option as it is way more movable in my opinion!

This combo is EUR 678 at the local store against 474 for the 150p

Could  you explain why you were not so happy with the mount?

I`'m not here to argue, but the more opinions there are, the easier it is for others to choose when they  suffer the same dilemma in choosing their mount!

[MGeraads]

It is just a feeling. It looks to big. And it is not a problem if you just go gazing somewhere, but it becomes a problem if you ever want to go camping somewere and take your scope with you. The shop only had the dob 250 in the showroom so my gf and I were a little bit shocked about the size and it was/is very difficult to imagine the size of the rockerbox of the 150/200.

Beside that the guy you should always correct a dob by hand which I am not sure about if that is what I want. I know I have been interested in the nightsky since I was a little boy, so it wont be a bad choise to go for the 200/1000; and it can be extended with an RA engine maybe later on.

I have also the feeling that chosing the 150/750 will limit me for the future. I think it is worth the extra 200 euro between the 150 and the 200.

How about the difference between 200/1200 and 200/1000 which one is better?