Telescope advice please.

[Jimmer28]

Hi all. I know this has been asked 100's of times but advice from experienced people is priceless.

I'm not a complete beginner, I can find my way around the sky, can pick out planets, stars, constellations etc. I currently have a small spotting scope which just about shows Jupiters moons/Saturns rings. I'm looking to spend 300-500 pounds, I like the look of the celestron goto nexstar 4se but having read a few other threads have concluded that maybe I should opt for a larger aperture scope like the skywatcher 200.

I would love the goto option on a scope but think this maybe detrimental to learning more about navigating the sky manually.

I live in the far SW (nr Penzance), my garden is reasonably dark so hoping light pollution will be far less than a big town or city.

When googling skywatcher 200p the search finds one scope with the eq5 mount (explorer) and one with a dobsonian mount (skyliner). Are these the same scopes on different mounts or are they completely different?  Which mount would be the better choice?

Hope this makes sense and Thank you in advance for any advice.

Jim

[Cornelius Varley]

Yes the telescopes completely different, not just the mount. The Explorer version, with the equatorial mount, has a focal length of 1000mm and the Skyliner dobsonian has a focal length of 1200mm.

[Mr Spock]

If you are thinking of spending £xxx on a 200mm with EQ mount, why not consider the same amount on a 250mm Dobsonian? 250mm of aperture in dark skies is really useful.

My scope has goto but I never use it

[Astro Imp]

If you are only interested in observing and not imaging then go for the Dob. An equatorial mount IMO is only required to image and is unnecessary for visual work.

[Charic]

Both 200mm telescopes but their specifications differ, but the final images will be, in all honestly, about the same!

The Dobsonian will be far easier to use in operation and look at that price difference, for no difference in image quality? The  extra money goes into the mount, and you need an EQ mount if you want to track targets, especially for astrophotography, but if your interest lies only in visual astronomy, the Skyliner is the one to get.

The Explorer, the dearer one,  has faster optics, f/5 which means nothing for visual use only. If you want to photograph then go for the Explorer, but many folk would also recommend that you would need a better, more  secure EQ mount, than the one supplied?

For me, no option but to own the Skyliner f/6 Dobsonian. If you want to spend more, consider the 10" 250P or the 12" 300P, but for both those scopes, weight, cost, and somewhat slightly more bulk to consider for transporting in a car, or just lifting into the garden. My next jump in aperture would be  for the 300P in favour of the 250P because of the aperture, and my visual use only. Faster apertures, and tighter light cones can and often require more correction to abate the effects of Coma, due to the telescopes design?

 

[Jimmer28]

Charic.  Is it easy to follow an object with the dobsonian mount?

[Charic]

Its easy to follow any target, even satellites, with practice.

I owned a Celestron,  on an EQ mount, and for me, its just an  unnecessary piece of equipment if all you want is to view manually.

Planet Earth spins at 1000 MPH? so at high power, looking at a target, look away, look back, and it might be gone, your scope has just amplified the speed of rotation of Planet Earth.

A wider field of view reduces this effect, as does lower powered eyepieces, of which the 200P is more favoured too!

Tracking is as easy as you make it, you just gotta learn which way to push/slide/glide call it what you want. 

[ronl]

I have the 200p - EQ5 and I have used the Dobsonion version as well, there is no difference visually,

I chose the EQ5 over the Dob mainly to gain height, I have high fences around my garden so the extra

height gives me better views, plus I have added motors, which are very good, which means I can stay on

my target for a long time without having to move anything, I can take notes and sketch the target without

distraction, I also use the EQ5 with my refactor for viewing the Sun in white light, the same applies, taking

notes and sketching, as for go-to I personally would never consider this mainly because I am a visual observer

and I love finding all my targets by star hopping using star maps, it would take away the enjoyment using go-to,

this is only my personal opinion and why I use this set up, which ever set up you chose you will not be disappointed.

 

Good luck and Clear Skys. 

 

[Charic]

....as ronl points out, either scope has its benefits. I don't think any new user would be unhappy given either scope,  but for me,  not the EQ.

If you can get to a club/society and view the scopes side-by-side, you should find your answer, although the two scope users will stick to their grounds, the reason for owning either scope.

When I venture into Astrophotography for real, the EQ probably would  be essential  for my needs, but that's some way off for now.

[laudropb]

The 200p Dob is said to be the most popular scope in the UK. I found it an ideal beginners scope. Nudging to keep the target in view does not come naturally. Well it didn't for me. But with a little practice you soon get the hang of it. It is more difficult at higher magnifications. I started sketching the Moon and planets and to make this easier I bought a 127mm Mak with tracking and go to facilities. I still use the Dob for everything else. As you gain experience you start to build up equipment and your bank balance diminishes in proportion. Having said that, you may find that the Dob meets all your needs. The whole point is to enjoy yourself on your journey.

[ecuador]

Before getting a dobsonian, I'd suggest you try using it first. As I kid with a 4.5" equatorial I was dreaming about owning a large dobsonian when I grow up. When I grew up and I tried one, I immediately saw that it was not for me, harder to find things (the charts are on the equatorial grid which is exactly how the eq mounts move so you learn to use that) and once you find them you have to keep going after them - especially annoying for high power planetary. And I was not crazy about goto, but it comes in handy sometimes, for example we had a blackout at my vacation one time so that an entire valley darkened and I saw 15 targets in half an hour of black-out as I'd never seen them before, thanks to Goto...

[BritAngler]

The 200P on an EQ5 mount is a popular combination even though the mount takes a bit of time to set up properly (a Dobsonian mount is both easier and faster to set up). However, if you want to go down the Goto route later on, the EQ5 can be easily converted for about £300. If you then want to start astro-photography, you could buy a smaller refractor as the 200P/EQ5 is a bit of a struggle if it is windy (some claim it is impossible to take astro-pics with that combination, but it isn't).

If you are good with DIY, there's nothing to stop you building your own dobsonian mount for the 200P for those quick stargazing sessions, that's what I will be doing in the near future....

[spike95609]

The 200p would be an excellent choice, you'll see an awful lot more detail than you would in a 4se with all that extra light coming into it. Personally I'd go for the dobsonian version, it's cheap, completely solid and takes no time at all to set up. If you're using the scope for visual only and you already know the basics of how to find your way around the sky, you shouldn't need a goto either. You learn so much more about the sky, and I'd argue enjoy it much more, by trying to find an object yourself. Once you get used to everything being back to front when looking through the finder, and once you've figured out how to hop from one star to the next to find your target, you should be able to find most objects in the sky within a couple of minutes. And keeping up with it once you've found it is easy too, a couple of nudges is all that's needed. And you can track quite fast too, I've followed the space station at 38x and been able to control it enough to clearly see its shape.