Mak question?

[Andy78]

This is a simple question.... Is a 90 mak good enough for planetary observstions? Or would a 127 mak be a lot better?

thanks in advance, Andy

[philj]

Yes and Yes  Sorry bout that I couldn't resist. If your restricted to budget or size then the 90 is a fine performer but if you can stretch to the 127 that will be better for grabbing more photons and resolution. I used a 127 for some time on planetary and was so impressed I now have a 180

[nightfisher]

Yes the 127 is going to be better on planets but it weighs more and needs a better mount than a 90, have a look at the 102 mak, a nice compromise 

[Chris]

I had a 90mm years ago, and recently had the 127mm. The 127mm was very good on planets once cooled. The 90 didn't really have the resolving power to show anything other than basic planetary features, but it was great on the Moon and super portable. 

[Mak the Night]

The 102mm Skymax is pretty sturdy on an EQ 2 mount. It's a nice compromise between weight, size and portability.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-102-eq2.html

[Cornelius Varley]

The 90 will give you nice views, the 127 will give you better views, the 150 will give you even betters views and the 180.. you get the picture.

[Andy78]

Thanx for all the advice, I'll have a look at the 102, but I had my eye on the 127 on an eq3-2 mount! Once again, thank for thi info and advice!!

[Linda]

2 hours ago, Andy78 said:

Thanx for all the advice, I'll have a look at the 102, but I had my eye on the 127 on an eq3-2 mount! Once again, thank for thi info and advice!!

That is a good combination of scope and mount. If you also want to look at deep sky, I wouldn't get any smaller than 127mm. I sometimes think that I should have bought the 150mm.