130pds vs 66mm zenithstar

[matt-c]

I know this is apples and oranges but I'm finally moving from lenses to a scope for imaging and can't decide between the 130pds which I can't seem to find a bad word about.

And

William optics zenithstar sd 66mm scope which I must say...wow so beautiful.

I know people don't like how you have to buy a WO finder but can anynone offer one guidance? 

Thanks

[Daniel-K]

10 minutes ago, matt-c said:

I know this is apples and oranges but I'm finally moving from lenses to a scope for imaging and can't decide between the 130pds which I can't seem to find a bad word about.

And

William optics zenithstar sd 66mm scope which I must say...wow so beautiful.

I know people don't like how you have to buy a WO finder but can anynone offer one guidance? 

Thanks

the 130 is a great scope. 

the 66 is a very nice scope but there are a few designs out there some better than others so make sure you get the "good" one 

[matt-c]

4 minutes ago, Daniel-K said:

the 130 is a great scope. 

the 66 is a very nice scope but there are a few designs out there some better than others so make sure you get the "good" one 

Yeah I've heard that, the one Ive been offered is the apo sd zenithstar version which I hope is the good?

Trouble is its more than the 130pds(new) and I can easily attach a finderguider to the 130 and it also has scope rings....I sound biased.

[Uranium235]

The 130 will offer better colour correction, higher resolving power, and more speed. Between the two, I'd go for the 130 every time (unless I was deliberately looking for a big FOV).

[Daniel-K]

the 66 is one of my first scopes, i regretted selling it. they dont come up for sale that often anymore.  

the 130pds strikes again bang for buck!!

[Chris]

Hi Matt, what kind of focal length do you want to image at? The 130pds is 650mm and the WO66 is 388mm. If you want a significant jump in image scale from your lenses I would go for the 130pds, but if you still want really widefield views then the WO66 is a good scope for this.

The version you want if going for the WO is the 'SD' model not the Petzel design. 

It's really hard to argue with the 130pds when it cost £159 new, has no CA, and is very fast at f/5 natively.

having said this, if you see a WO66 SD for sale sub 200 quid then it would be worth grabbing  

[matt-c]

1 hour ago, Chris Lock said:

Hi Matt, what kind of focal length do you want to image at? The 130pds is 650mm and the WO66 is 388mm. If you want a significant jump in image scale from your lenses I would go for the 130pds, but if you still want really widefield views then the WO66 is a good scope for this.

The version you want if going for the WO is the 'SD' model not the Petzel design. 

It's really hard to argue with the 130pds when it cost £159 new, has no CA, and is very fast at f/5 natively.

having said this, if you see a WO66 SD for sale sub 200 quid then it would be worth grabbing  

The one Ive been offered is sub 200 but only just 

Part of me thinks I have some decent glass up to 200mm why not take a leap and get a lot more focal length.

But since I'll only be using narrowband the ca isn't an issue and the lack of collimation sounds nice.

But £159 new from an excellent retailer....it's impossible I might have to get both

[ollypenrice]

I have a Zenithstar 66SD and wouldn't go overboard about it. The focuser is the usual slippery Crayford. You also need the correct flattener. There was a dedicated one which I have. It's a nice little scope with reasonable colour correction and is incredibly handy, being so small. So I'd give a reasonable mark but wouldn't rave about it.

If you don't mind collimating then I think the 130 would eat it for breakfast, especially with the DSLR which would thrive on the speed. We are seeing remarkable images from these small Newts.

I used my ZS66 a long time ago with a camera similar to your CCD, an Atik 16HR. The 66 was at its best in narrowband. Star sizes were quite large in LRGB. Here are some examples. (Beginner images!)

 

 

Olly

[matt-c]

38 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I have a Zenithstar 66SD and wouldn't go overboard about it. The focuser is the usual slippery Crayford. You also need the correct flattener. There was a dedicated one which I have. It's a nice little scope with reasonable colour correction and is incredibly handy, being so small. So I'd give a reasonable mark but wouldn't rave about it.

If you don't mind collimating then I think the 130 would eat it for breakfast, especially with the DSLR which would thrive on the speed. We are seeing remarkable images from these small Newts.

I used my ZS66 a long time ago with a camera similar to your CCD, an Atik 16HR. The 66 was at its best in narrowband. Star sizes were quite large in LRGB. Here are some examples. (Beginner images!)

 

 

Olly

Thanks for that olly, your name actually pops up alot when I Google the 66mm.

I'll be using this with my atik 16hr for narrowband  and after seeing uraniums pictures (not that I'd achieve a fraction of them) I'm tempted to just go for the 130pds.  

[nightfisher]

the 130 pds is a really nice little newt, its what i would go for, i had one, did not get to use it, sold it, regretted selling it so bought another, did not use it so sold it as i just dont do deep sky imaging, but wanted to keep it because they are so nice