Planetary views with 127mm Newtonian vs Matsukov

[Revision17]

I have a celestron goto mount and a 130mm "Astromaster" newtonian telescope (650mm focal length).  It works really nicely with a celestron omni 32mm eyepiece for wide field views of star clusters and brighter nebulas and all that stuff.  However planetary views are a bit weak (using 5mm celestron X-Cel LX) eyepiece (giving me 130x magnification).  For example, I can't really make out cloud bands on Jupiter.

I previously had a similar 2.3mm eyepiece, but sold it off because while it would enlarge the planets more, they wouldn't be any more clear than the 5mm.

I was thinking of getting a 127mm matsukov (Orion Apex 127mm) because it's the biggest matsukov that can fit on my goto mount I think.  My 5mm eyepiece plus the 1540mm focal length should give me 308x magnification, which should be atmosphere limited I think.

However I'm not sure if the matukov will really improve the plantary view enough to be worth it.  Let's say I get an eyepiece that would give me 130x magnification on the matsukov.  Would planetary views on the Matsukov at 130x be better than 130x on the same aperture width Newtonian?

 

[Dave In Vermont]

Your F/5 Newtonian gives you quite expansive views of things up there. It excells at gathering light - as a good Newt should - and brings objects to view that are well too dim for our eyes by themselves. Wide-fields are it's predominent forte. But not so much for planets and other things in our local neighborhood.

A Makutov-Cassegrain, on the other hand, has a much narrower field-of-view (FOV) - making these little powerhouses a much better choice for planets. So yes, a Mak will give you finer detail on planets than a fast F/5 Newtonian. Maks are also very nice for splitting double-stars, and looking at comets' nuclei, and some DSO's (Deep-Space Objects) like ring nebulae and globular clusters. Anything that's compact. As well as terrestrial targets.

Is this worth it? That's a subjective question which only you can answer yourself. But all-in-all - yes. A Maksutov makes for a sweet planetary telescope imho. That's why I recently acquired one - as my designated solar-system scope.

And, by the way, welcome to SGL - nice to have you aboard!

Enjoy!

Dave

[nightfisher]

I think best advice, see if you can find some one that has the mak and try it before you buy it

[billyharris72]

Hi, and welcome. As Dave has said, the question of whether it is worth it is a subjective one and only you can decide.

On the "against" side, you're not getting any more aperture with the Mak, and theoretically you ought to be able to achieve the same range of magnification by using shorter eyepieces on the Newt ( they are both limited to about x250 - 260 by aperture). However, the relatively fast F ratio of the Newt starts to become a limiting factor here, as you are asking a lot of your eyepiece. You might want to experiment with a Barlow on that 5mm and see how it works. That's x260, right on the limit of your scope (a Barlowed 6 or 7mm is also worth experimenting with, as you might get a crisper image).

On the "for" side, Maks give lovely, crisp images and are great planetary scopes. I have the Skywatcher 102 and it clearly shows the equatorial belts, tropics and the Great Red Spot at x150. It gets more planetary use than my 8 inch Dob - mostly for convenience, but the fact it even gets a look in speaks volumes for how good they are.

Hope this is some help.

Billy.

[Moonshane]

On axis and with accurate focus and collimation I doubt there would be much difference on solar system objects.  The newt is better for wide field the mak better on double stars.

I agree that if you can compare that would b beneficial

 

[Dazzyt66]

Hmmm I was going to say the ep could make all the difference here but I'm not sure in your case. I use Baader classic Orthos which are great on planets. With my st80 a 6mm Ortho only gives me 67x mag but I still get a crisp image of Jupiter and its moons and I can clearly see banding - albeit in a very small image. My Dob (150p) with same ep gives a much larger image (as its 200x mag) but often detail is more 'fuzzy' due to the atmospheric limits (although I have had some stunningly clear views).

All that said, I am also going to add a 150 mak shortly to my collection, for all the reasons Dave and Billy list above, which may make the Dob redundant (or not... Lol).

So, I guess the combination of ep and atmosphere is what may be most important with what you already have?

HTH.

Darren

[Linda]

I have a 127mm Maksutov and think that 300x magnification is not realistic on Jupiter. On a good night I can use my 8mm eyepiece (187x) and haven't yet felt the need for a more magnifying eyepiece. Often I can only use the 15mm eyepiece (100x).

On the other hand, I have now ordered a good ortho eyepiece 12,5mm and I'm very curious on how sharp the image will be, compared to my cheaper 8mm Planetary eyepiece. Maybe a good eyepiece will do wonders??

[Dazzyt66]

9 hours ago, Linda said:

I have a 127mm Maksutov and think that 300x magnification is not realistic on Jupiter. On a good night I can use my 8mm eyepiece (187x) and haven't yet felt the need for a more magnifying eyepiece. Often I can only use the 15mm eyepiece (100x).

On the other hand, I have now ordered a good ortho eyepiece 12,5mm and I'm very curious on how sharp the image will be, compared to my cheaper 8mm Planetary eyepiece. Maybe a good eyepiece will do wonders??

I love my Orthos - have 10 & 6mm - they give great contrast views. Let me know how an Ortho fairs in the Mak.

[Guy Wells]

They don't call Maks planet killers for nothing.

[Dave In Vermont]

Yes, Linda - please do let us know how an Ortho fares in a Mak. My guess is they will do very well.

Thanks!

Dave

[Linda]

I will receive it the ortho at the end of April, so it will take a while before I can give feedback. But it will come.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I find that in my C8 I don't often use 290x with the Pentax XW 7mm on Jupiter, but I can use it on nights of exceptional seeing. The 8mm Delos and 10mm XW are used more often. A 5" Maksutov is not going to best an 8" SCT on planets, despite the smaller central obstruction. For comparison: I used to have a 6" F/8 Newtonian with very modest central obstruction, and a 1/10 lambda mirror. A real planet killer, but the Celestron C8 shows more detail, if at a slightly lower contrast.

BTW, you could check if your current mount can hold a C8 OTA, because it is by far the lightest OTA for its aperture. Mine weighs in at 4.7 kg, lighter than a 6" Mak.

[Alan64]

8 hours ago, Linda said:

I will receive it the ortho at the end of April, so it will take a while before I can give feedback. But it will come.

I think you'll like it, a lot, and if the mount is motorised you may want the 9mm in addition; and, dare I imagine, the 6mm as well?  Or, the 12.5mm and 9mm can be barlowed, 2x, for a simulated 6.3mm and 4.5mm, respectively.

The greater the magnification, the greater the revelation as to the optical quality of any telescope.

[Linda]

2 hours ago, Alan64 said:

I think you'll like it, a lot, and if the mount is motorised you may want the 9mm in addition; and, dare I imagine, the 6mm as well?  Or, the 12.5mm and 9mm can be barlowed, 2x, for a simulated 6.3mm and 4.5mm, respectively.

The greater the magnification, the greater the revelation as to the optical quality of any telescope.

My mount is not motorised. I will try the 12,5 mm first. If I like it and it is better than the 8mm, I might buy an extra. 

[Alan64]

1 minute ago, Linda said:

My mount is not motorised. I will try the 12,5 mm first. If I like it and it is better than the 8mm, I might buy an extra. 

I got my very first equatorial back in the early 1990s, a Parks PRT-813; an 80mm f/11 achromat mounted on an EQ2-class equatorial...

Later, I added a single motor, for the RA axis only, and was then able to track Venus from 5:30 AM to almost 12:00 PM.  I would take a break every now and again during said span, and when I returned, the planet was still present in the eyepiece.  After the Sun rose, and there in the sunlit sky, Venus appeared as a pale sphere sprinkled with what looked like, sand.  Once in awhile I would have to adjust the declination axis, just slightly, with its slow-motion cable, and to correct the slight tracking errors.  It was no trouble at all.  Adjusting the declination manually is preferred for visual use.  Later, I got a Vixen GP, but it's gone now; destroyed.  In 2013, I got a Celestron CG-4, an EQ3-class, and practically the same as your own.  At the same time, I ordered the dual-motor drive kit, but I will not be using the motor for the declination; only for the RA axis.   

[beka]

Hi Revision17 , as had been mentioned your scope is more suited to wide field viewing. However if you can't see cloud belts at 130x there is something seriously wrong with your scope or your seeing conditions. If it is the latter a Mak  won't show you more! I  suggest you check the collimation of the scope (it may be better to do it with someone with some experience) because this type of fast newtonian is quite sensitive. At times of good seeing you should be able to see the GRS with this scope.

[Revision17]

So I think the collimation was off for the position of the focuser I use.  My focuser isn't square to the tube, and the laser wanders depending on the position of the focuser.  So I got the positions that both my eyepieces used, and collimated a position between them.

I can only collimate the secondary mirror because my primary mirror doesn't have a center marker (kinda lame.. I guess most of the low end telescopes don't have that ).

I also waited for jupiter to be a bit higher (~35 degrees vs ~48 degrees) in the sky.  I'm not sure how much this helped though.

But yeah, was able to see a bunch of features across Jupiter tonight.  No red spot, but that might have been on the other side.  However I can definitely easily see the two dark cloud bands on each side of the equator.

Thanks for the help!  I'm sure a matsukov would help me observe better, but I did like the point a few posters said that it's a bit silly to get multiple scopes of the same aperture.  

[RT65CB-SWL]

On 2 March 2016 at 17:59, Dazzyt66 said:

I love my Orthos - have 10 & 6mm - they give great contrast views. Let me know how an Ortho fairs in the Mak.

My 2x 6mm Ortho's; (1x Circle-T / 1x unknown 0.965" in a 1.25" adaptor); give lovely views in my ETX 105 & C6 SLT. 

[Linda]

Make a center point on your primary mirror.

This site contains a description on how to do that:

http://uncle-rods.blogspot.no/2009/07/zen-and-art-of-telescope-collimation.html

[beka]

Congrats on your success. The issue with the focuser though must be really inconvenient. From your description it means you have to collimate every time you change focus?!! If it can't be fixed this alone justifies a new scope.