Skywatcher 150p dob

[leo82]

Hi all,

I thought it would be better to start a new thread although it is really an extension from the thread titled national geographic premium 76/700 telescope. The thread changed from one telescope to another one which i'm looking for help and advice on, hence the new thread.

I'm looking at the skywatcher 150p dob. After a quick look online I found 2 models, 150p and 150pl. What I can see is the pl is longer than the p and also the f number is higher. Which would be the better scope for a beginner who is after an all rounder? If theres any other scopes worth considering around the same price bracket feel free to mention them.

Many thanks.

[beamer3.6m]

I would go for the shorter focal length.

Lighter, easier to carry and fast (lower f number) so could also be good for imaging in the future.

The longer scope will give more magnification so technically better for planets but were splitting hairs on the difference to be gained in that regard.

Just my thoughts.

[laudropb]

I think you would be better with the 150p, though to be honest I have never come across the pl.

[nightfisher]

I was under the impression the 150 skywatcher dob was 1200mm focal length only i.e the pl tube and this would be the one to go for

[Stub Mandrel]

I've got a PL and when I went to pick it up the sheer size of it was a bit daunting - over a metre long.

It was the right scope for me as my first interest was imaging planets, which it is ideal for.

Now I've started on DSOs and find I'm using telephoto lenses most of the time as the 1200mm fl is too long for most objects and the lack of good nights has meant the quick and less fussy setup of  a 135 or 400mm lens lets me make more of limited time.

When I get a second scope it will be a 130P-DS (for most DSOs), and then the 150PL will be almost exclusively for planets and galaxies.

A single 150P might be a better choice for visual astronomy, while the 150PL/130P-DS combo is probably a good choice for entry level imaging of a wide range of objects.

[John]

I was under the impression the 150 skywatcher dob was 1200mm focal length only i.e the pl tube and this would be the one to go for

Thats correct Jules.

The dobsonian mounted 150 is an F/8 instrument. On the equatorial mounting you can get either the F/5 or F/8 optical tubes. I feel the F/8 tube is rather undermounted on the EQ3-2 equatorial mount so if the original poster is minded to go for an F/8 the dobsonian is the way to go.

In many ways both scopes are decent all round scopes. I would probably tend to for the dob F/8 because it's collimation "sweet spot" is a lot more forgiving than F/5 and most eyepieces will work very well with it.

[Peter Drew]

If Dobsonian mounted, go for the F8, no contest!  I have the Orion equivalent and it is excellent overall. 

[Philip Benson]

I agree with Peter.   A 6" F8 on a convenient dobsonian mount for under £200! What's not to like about that?   The F8 focal length will give you good all round views of planets, the Moon and DSOs and the scope is still portable enough to fit into the back of any car and set up in minutes.

[ronin]

As it is the dobsonian there is I believe little choice the dobsonian mounted 150P is generally the 150PL variant. The shorter 150P is generally the one they offer for use on the equitorial mounts. It used to be always indicated but I have noticed more recently that the "PL" suffix tends to get reduced to"P" only.

I would say the 150PL is the easier to get along with, it needs less attention generally in the area of collimation and as it is f/8 it tends to be a little more forgiving on eyepieces especially the plossls ranges.

[Piero]

Another thumb up for the 150PL (f8).

...but if you can spend ~100pounds more, I would go for the dobson 200 F6. This is as long as the 150PL, so storage and transport won't change. Plus, unless you develop a serious 'DSO addiction' , a 200 can be a keeper for a lifetime.

Just a comment of course.

Good luck with your purchase!

[Charic]

The OP was changed due to conficts between scopes but I +1 Piero's comments

For a little more funding, the 200P will offer so much more ( Skyliner - Not the Explorer ) and the f/6 ratio is easy on eyepiece selection, a 6mm providing 200x power.

[leo82]

Thanks for everyones replies.

It seems the skywatcher is the way to go.

I certainly like the comment from piero stating the 200 version would be a keeper for a lifetime. 

However, the daunting thing is the length but I guess it's needed.

Now i guess have 2 options, the 150 or the 200. is the 200 version worth the extra money or is the 150 good enough?

Many thanks.

[Charic]

Don't settle for good enough, you`ll want more straight away?.......go for the 200P Skyliner, but then I have one and would say that!

No matter which scope you choose, one if not all will satisfy your needs!

I have street light pollution messing with my eyes from my garden, yet I can see M31, but  its not awe inspiring, the Moon is just mind blowing, and I have seen Jupiter  in stunning detail, under the right conditions, extremely small, but stunning.

I go to a darker site ( weather/time permitting) and its a different telescope, simply amazing what it  can show me, so much more,  I needed a 70° Panaview to view M31. You will see so much more, Its huge, when viewed from a dark site, and the conditions allow.

I have already considered the 10" and 12", favouring the 12" (f/5) and some Delos eyepieces, but unless I can get a 300P classic, at a silly price, in mint condition, then the 200P will be here for much longer, in fact with the new smaller car,  Corsa  and a 300P things may get a little tight in the back, so the 200P looks like a lifer?

I  need to check my 200P aside the 300P under the same exact conditions, and if there is clear  noticeable difference, and I can heave it into a Corsa, only then will I part with the funds, the 300P has to beat the 200P hands down from my garden site, otherwise, this scope stays. 

[Piero]

Thanks for everyones replies.

It seems the skywatcher is the way to go.

I certainly like the comment from piero stating the 200 version would be a keeper for a lifetime.

However, the daunting thing is the length but I guess it's needed.

Now i guess have 2 options, the 150 or the 200. is the 200 version worth the extra money or is the 150 good enough?

Many thanks.

The main important factor for a telescope used for visual is aperture. Therefore, the bigger the better.

BUT.. The main important factorS for visual amateurs are 1. Having bright detailed views, which is aperture dependent, 2. Storage, 3. Transportability, 4. Weight, 5. Cost, 6. Additional money to invest in equipment, such us eyepieces, ...

A DOB 200 F6 and a DOB 150 F8 ticks the boxes from 2 to 6 in the same way. Regarding the first box, aperture, a 200 collects almost twice the light collected by a 150 (area of the mirror, not the diameter!)

As additional example, a 250mm would be even better,but this costs significantly more than the 150mm that you considered and its weight is at the limit many people would consider fine to move. In addition a 250mm is a F4.7 which makes box 6 something to be evaluated carefully. I am not against 250mm dobs at all, but just used this as example to show you that there are many differences involved between a 150mm and a 250mm, whereas between a 150mm and a 200mm, the major difference is aperture.

Also note that these telescopes are stored vertically so they can stay on a room corner when not used.

Good luck with your choice,

Piero

[jetstream]

Thanks for everyones replies.

It seems the skywatcher is the way to go.

I certainly like the comment from piero stating the 200 version would be a keeper for a lifetime. 

However, the daunting thing is the length but I guess it's needed.

Now i guess have 2 options, the 150 or the 200. is the 200 version worth the extra money or is the 150 good enough?

Many thanks.

At f6, the 200p will let you get into some excellent eyepieces with an exit pupil for use with an OIII filter a little easier. A 30mm EP will give a nice OIII filter matching mag for that scope. Vixen does make a nice 42mm LVW that would work great in the 150 f8, but its not cheap and the plossls etc available around this focal length have floating eyerelief...something I personally dislike.

I think the tube lengths are the same between the scopes...I would go with the 200mm f6, but this is your own personal choice-can't go wrong either way.

[leo82]

Thanks for the replies. I think if i'm going to spend money it's worth spending that little more now rather alot more in the future, especially as it seems popular with some of you guys as alot of signatures say that you have the 200 version.