Skymax 127 Mak or SW 100ED?

[DevonSkies]

I'm still on the lookout for a relatively lightweight scope for lunar, planetary and double star observations. I have a 10" Dob which will obviously wipe the floor with most small scopes, but I often can't be bothered with lugging it out to the garden for a quick look at the moon or Jupiter.

It sounds like the SW Evostar 100ED would be a nice scope for this purpose. But at over £600 for the OTA it would be a major investment for me. So, I wonder whether the Skymax 127 Maksutov would be a worthy alternative,  given the much lower cost (around £350 including a goto mount).

I understand the Mak will have a narrower field of view, but that's OK as I already have an ST102 for wide field. What I'm looking for is nice sharp, contrasty views of planets and the moon, as well as good performance on double stars.

Any thoughts? How different will the view be between these two scopes?

Thanks,

Ed

[nightfisher]

If you keep to the targets listed then the 127 Mak is going to be hard to beat, i am biased as i really like maks, i find the only drawback is some times the long focal length can be a pain, but if you let the mak cool for a while it will give APO like views, remember you wont get a full 127 aperture due to the central obstruction

[dweller25]

I've had both the scopes you mention.

The 100ED was the better of the two scopes on all the objects you mention and cooled down quicker than the Skymax 127.

 

 

[DevonSkies]

21 minutes ago, dweller25 said:

I've had both the scopes you mention.

The 100ED was the better of the two scopes on all the objects you mention and cooled down quicker than the Skymax 127.

 

 

Thanks,  it's good to hear from someone who has had both. In what ways was the 100ED better specifically? And do you feel it was £300 better?

[John78]

19 minutes ago, DevonSkies said:

Thanks,  it's good to hear from someone who has had both. In what ways was the 100ED better specifically? And do you feel it was £300 better?

I saw this got reduced yesterday - I think its a decent price for a 100ED, I need to sort my mounting out before I pull the trigger on an OTA so I'll let this one pass...

http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=108847

What's a bit confusing is there's no difference in price in a 100ED compared to the 80ED as the former comes with the field flattener, and if you add one to the latter you end up at the same price as the former.

[DevonSkies]

16 minutes ago, John78 said:

I saw this got reduced yesterday - I think its a decent price for a 100ED, I need to sort my mounting out before I pull the trigger on an OTA so I'll let this one pass...

http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=108847

What's a bit confusing is there's no difference in price in a 100ED compared to the 80ED as the former comes with the field flattener, and if you add one to the latter you end up at the same price as the former.

Yes, I saw that one. Local collection only though, and Cambridgeshire is too far for me!

[John78]

Its about 30 miles from me, but yes I can see the bit far.  I've been eyeing a HEQ5 in Birmingham myself - bit of a drive tough.

[baggywrinkle]

I have the SW Mak 127 on the goto mount. It is an excellent wee scope, good views and great for exactly what you are looking for.

Though the mount is a tad lightweight a mass placed in the EP tray make it more stable. It is easy to set up.

The only downside are the poor quality ep's and star diagonal. Below two images (not the highest quality) taken with the Mak 127...

[DevonSkies]

1 hour ago, baggywrinkle said:

I have the SW Mak 127 on the goto mount. It is an excellent wee scope, good views and great for exactly what you are looking for.

Though the mount is a tad lightweight a mass placed in the EP tray make it more stable. It is easy to set up.

The only downside are the poor quality ep's and star diagonal. Below two images (not the highest quality) taken with the Mak 127...

Thanks for that. The Mak appeals both for the price and because it should behave better on my Porta II mount than an f/9 refractor. I have some decent EPs already, so that shouldn't be a problem. 

Does it take a 'normal' (i.e. push fit) 1.25" diagonal? 

[Alan64]

2 hours ago, baggywrinkle said:

I have the SW Mak 127 on the goto mount. It is an excellent wee scope, good views and great for exactly what you are looking for.

Though the mount is a tad lightweight a mass placed in the EP tray make it more stable. It is easy to set up.

The only downside are the poor quality ep's and star diagonal. Below two images (not the highest quality) taken with the Mak 127...

Those are actually quite, quite good.

[Bobby1970]

I had, until recently an ST102 and Mak 127. I have replaced 102 woth a 120 and 80 lol. 

 

Anyway. I always found the combination of the two scopes very good. The Mak was excellent on the moon and planets. And certainly more portable than my old 8 inch dob. 

My only complaint is when I use it on the goto mount, it just doesn't seem accurate enough for the narrow field of the scope. But maybe it's just me. 

Edited February 19, 2016 by Bobby1970

[stevend]

14 hours ago, DevonSkies said:

I'm still on the lookout for a relatively lightweight scope for lunar, planetary and double star observations. I have a 10" Dob which will obviously wipe the floor with most small scopes, but I often can't be bothered with lugging it out to the garden for a quick look at the moon or Jupiter.

Thanks,

Ed

Those are my main targets and I find my Mak is ideal for them, plus I like its portability which you imply as well. The 127 Mak is good for up to c200X, above that it needs very good conditions and most of my viewing is done at 100x or 125x. You will need a dew filter, you probably have the EPs and I use an external power supply source (do not rely on batteries for the motor).

[DevonSkies]

1 hour ago, Bobby1970 said:

I had, until recently an ST102 and Mak 127. I have replaced 102 woth a 120 and 80 lol. 

Anyway. I always found the combination of the two scopes very good. The Mak was excellent on the moon and planets. And certainly more portable than my old 8 inch dob. 

My only complaint is when I use it on the goto mount, it just doesn't seem accurate enough for the narrow field of the scope. But maybe it's just me. 

Aside from the goto issue, do you find the mount tracks well enough when it's aligned with the target?

[JG777]

I also owned both and kept the 100 ED for its versatility and fast cool down times. As mentioned these ship with a focal reducer taking it from F9 to F7.65 so this adds useful functionality. I also use a Lunt wedge with it for solar which I recall has a limit of 4 inches so the 100 ED pro matches this really well. 

Didn't use the Mak for for solar but for planets and lunar hardly any difference between the scopes in terms of quality of view its just the Frac releases them to you a lot quicker! The Frac will display minor flashes of CA which disappear as you snap into focus. The Mak is more portable though and easier to mount but I never quite took to it probably because I found it usually needed around 40 minutes before it properly settled down.

So the 100ED pro won it for me mounted on Berlebach tripod it just felt more functional and ready to go.

[Bobby1970]

58 minutes ago, DevonSkies said:

Aside from the goto issue, do you find the mount tracks well enough when it's aligned with the target?

Yes. It did. Well, as well as a goto can. Certainly for visual it was more than good enough. Only thing I have noticed is at high mags when imaging planets or the moon there sometimes appears to be a bit of "drift" so to speak. 

[DevonSkies]

13 minutes ago, JG777 said:

I also owned both and kept the 100 ED for its versatility and fast cool down times. As mentioned these ship with a focal reducer taking it from F9 to F7.65 so this adds useful functionality. I also use a Lunt wedge with it for solar which I recall has a limit of 4 inches so the 100 ED pro matches this really well. 

Didn't use the Mak for for solar but for planets and lunar hardly any difference between the scopes in terms of quality of view its just the Frac releases them to you a lot quicker! The Frac will display minor flashes of CA which disappear as you snap into focus. The Mak is more portable though and easier to mount but I never quite took to it probably because I found it usually needed around 40 minutes before it properly settled down.

So the 100ED pro won it for me mounted on Berlebach tripod it just felt more functional and ready to go.

Thanks, that's really useful information.

It's a tough choice. I can afford the Mak 127 right now, but I'd have to save a bit longer to buy the 100ED. I've also got a feeling I would eventually need to upgrade my mount for the 100ED, as the Porta II suffers from the wobbles at high magnifications, which will only get worse with a longer tube. On the other hand, cool-down is a concern with the Mak, as I tend to have limited opportunities to observe, except on those rare clear, still nights.

[happy-kat]

Would you have to keep it in the warm house or is there an unheated clean/dry garage or something

[baggywrinkle]

My Mak sleeps in the conservatory....keeps pretty cool in there this time of year.

Edited February 19, 2016 by baggywrinkle

[dweller25]

16 hours ago, DevonSkies said:

Thanks,  it's good to hear from someone who has had both. In what ways was the 100ED better specifically? And do you feel it was £300 better?

Because the ED100 was easier to cool and could keep up with dropping temperatures through the night it gave sharper and more stable images quicker than the 127 Mak.

The clear aperture of the 127 Mak is actually 120mm, which means the 46mm secondary gives a 38% obstruction - this reduces planetary contrast to about the same as a 2.9" refractor, so a 100ED will have more contrast - vital on the planets IMO.

I have also compared the ED100 to my Takahashi TSA102. The ED100 gave embarrassingly close planetary views to the TSA102 !!!!

In my opinion the ED100 is superb value for money.

Edited February 19, 2016 by dweller25

[DevonSkies]

1 hour ago, happy-kat said:

Would you have to keep it in the warm house or is there an unheated clean/dry garage or something

I can keep it in an unheated garage. It's still a bit warmer than outside this time of year though. My 10" Dob takes at least an hour to cool, maybe two hours before the star test really settles down.

[DevonSkies]

31 minutes ago, dweller25 said:

Because the ED100 was easier to cool and could keep up with dropping temperatures through the night it gave sharper and more stable images quicker than the 127 Mak.

The clear aperture of the 127 Mak is actually 120mm, which means the 46mm secondary gives a 38% obstruction - this reduces planetary contrast to about the same as a 2.9" refractor, so a 100ED will have more contrast - vital on the planets IMO.

I have also compared the ED100 to my Takahashi TSA102. The ED100 gave embarrassingly close planetary views to the TSA102 !!!!

In my opinion the ED100 is superb value for money.

Thanks for that - I hear what you're saying about contrast. I agree the ED100 is great value for an ED refractor.

[Alan64]

If you didn't have a fast 102mm refractor, I'd say go with the 102mm ED.  What about a 150mm Maksutov; that for lunar and planetary, and the fast refractor for wide-field deep-sky?

[DevonSkies]

Plenty of food for thought.  I've also been considering the Altair 102mm f/11 achromat as an other option. It's a lot cheaper than the 100ED, but obviously will exhibit a certain amount of CA on bright targets. Whether the CA would be bad enough to justify spending the extra on ED glass is not clear to me. The longer tube of the f11 scope also makes mounting more of a problem. 

[nightfisher]

7 minutes ago, DevonSkies said:

Plenty of food for thought.  I've also been considering the Altair 102mm f/11 achromat as an other option. It's a lot cheaper than the 100ED, but obviously will exhibit a certain amount of CA on bright targets. Whether the CA would be bad enough to justify spending the extra on ED glass is not clear to me. The longer tube of the f11 scope also makes mounting more of a problem. 

The 102 f11 would need a minimum of a "fettled" AZ4 or better an EQ5, food for though but what about the skyliner 150 f8 dob........quick set up and quick cool down, 1200mm focal length good for planets and luna, pretty good on deep sky

[DevonSkies]

2 minutes ago, nightfisher said:

The 102 f11 would need a minimum of a "fettled" AZ4 or better an EQ5, food for though but what about the skyliner 150 f8 dob........quick set up and quick cool down, 1200mm focal length good for planets and luna, pretty good on deep sky

I already have a 250 Dob, so I don't really want another dob cluttering up the garage!