Skymax 180 Pro thoughts please

[iwols]

hi all just wondering what peoplrs thoughts were on the above scope cheers guys

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have not looked through one, but seen many excellent planetary images taken with them, and heard many excellent reports of these scopes. The only drawback is the limited maximum FOV, even compared to my 8" SCT. The OTA is quite heavy, much heavier than my SCT, so it will need a sturdy mount to bring out the best of the optics. Despite it often being labeled a planetary scope, it is fine for viewing the smaller DSOs (i.e. the vast majority).

[Marky1973]

As you know IWOLS, I am very tempted with this scope - the other thing to think about is the cool down time - although it is not as long as many claim, it does need time to adjust to be at its best.

These are the things I have been reading mostly about it!

http://www.opticalvision.co.uk/user/Skymax-180%20REVIEW%20S@N.pdf

http://www.astro-baby.com/reviews/Skymax%20180/Skymax%20180%20Review.htm

 

 

[Marky1973]

It would also be interesting to hear how it compares to the 150Pro, which still has an impressive Focal Length, but is a couple o' hundred cheaper...

[ollypenrice]

For what purpose? For deep sky imaging, all but useless. For planetary, very promising.

Olly

[Marky1973]

Hi Olly

Yeah, sorry, I think IWOLS and I were continuing a discussion from another thread, so something probably got lost in translation...

I have the ED80 for widefield DSO's, and a very good scope it is too.  But planets (well Jupiter so far) are just too small in combination with my ZWO sensor, even though the sensor is tiny. I am also getting back into observing as the more you get into astrophotography, the more you realise you are missing out on - and visual gives you something to do while you wait!

So a MAK seems like the perfect complementary scope for Planetary Imaging and Planetary Visual. I have read the 180 is "okay" at smaller DSO work and brighter clusters, but that would be a bonus, not the primary reason for purchase.

As I have an NEQ6, I am not worried about mounting the larger of the two MAKs (although I may need something else further down the line - Skytee 2 or similar) I am just wondering whether I am getting FL giddy! Will the extra aperture make a massive difference for someone still "getting" into this hobby? Its the old, "am I going over the top too quickly?" rationale, against the "will I regret it in two months time?" mentality! The price difference is not insignificant, so I guess that is what I am trying to weigh up at the moment, against the additional aperture and FL, in light of my needs (wants) and against the desire for shiny new things..... :-)

Either way, they look like fantastic planetary scopes from what I have read. In fact, I am seeing some great shots from people with the 127, so have started thinking the 150 might be a sensible compromise....

[riklaunim]

180mm Mak will be harder to use for planetary imaging than 8" SCT - it's heavier and the meniscus is thick so it will have to cool down too and with that mass staying at ambient temperature will be a bigger challenge. SCT corrector plate is very thin compared to Maksutov meniscus so no problem (but still closed OTA). And if you want imaging - you have to max out the aperture Small scopes won't be as fun as the bigger ones for imaging planets.

And there is a big market of second hand SCTs in USA. The prices are so low that it's very worth it to buy and ship from USA those things in many cases (that's how I got my C8 and C14).

[Marky1973]

I had heard about long cool down times with the MAK, but it would be stored in a cool room/outside to keep it ready, so i am not too worried about that. I haven't written off an SCT completely, but I like the (supposed) lack of requirements (or much lower requirement) for collimation on the MAK.

I'm too paranoid to buy second-hand from the US being in the UK... too much of a hassle if something goes wrong. Have bought stuff second-hand in this country, but would be a little worried about importing.

[riklaunim]

It's not initial cooling but keeping it at ambient - temperature will drop during night and the telescope must follow or it will start lagging, which creates air currents in the OTA = dead for imaging.

C8 - rather never lagged

C11 - initial fan cooling, sometimes lagged after 2-3h if the drop was quick.

C14 - lagging most of the time after 45-60min after fan cooling to ambient

 

[Paz]

If its for visual use the 180 has the advantage of giving good views at high magnifications with cheaper eyepieces due to its long focal length, Maks generally keep collimation for ever, it's small and compact and so easy to manhandle, because it is short the eyepiece location doesn't swing all over the place when you change targets, and chromatic aberration isn't an issue.

The key down side is the limited maximum field of view.

I don't rate the DSO thing as too much of a negative - in the end it's a 180mm scope (or maybe a bit less - users say not quite all of the primary mirror is utilised) and will do DSO's broadly as well as any other 180mm scope will at the same magnifications.

However, in the end aperture kills and a bigger reflector (that costs less) will beat a 180 Mak every way you look at it except for things like compactness, collimation workload, and ability to give good images with cheaper eyepieces. Even a bigger aperture reflector of a shorter focal length will give better high magnification planetary images with larger image scales at the same magnifications - it would just need shorter focal length (and better quality) eyepieces in order to do it.

Having said all that I've got a 127 Maksutov which I have found to be really good and have been thinking about a 180 a lot(!), but I am going to try and stay disciplined and just go for a good dobsonian reflector of a larger aperture that will cover more bases in one scope.

[jambouk]

The NEQ6 will be fine with the 180 mak; just get it balanced.

James

[Marky1973]

7 hours ago, Paz said:

If its for visual use the 180 has the advantage of giving good views at high magnifications with cheaper eyepieces due to its long focal length, Maks generally keep collimation for ever, it's small and compact and so easy to manhandle, because it is short the eyepiece location doesn't swing all over the place when you change targets, and chromatic aberration isn't an issue.

The key down side is the limited maximum field of view.

I don't rate the DSO thing as too much of a negative - in the end it's a 180mm scope (or maybe a bit less - users say not quite all of the primary mirror is utilised) and will do DSO's broadly as well as any other 180mm scope will at the same magnifications.

However, in the end aperture kills and a bigger reflector (that costs less) will beat a 180 Mak every way you look at it except for things like compactness, collimation workload, and ability to give good images with cheaper eyepieces. Even a bigger aperture reflector of a shorter focal length will give better high magnification planetary images with larger image scales at the same magnifications - it would just need shorter focal length (and better quality) eyepieces in order to do it.

Having said all that I've got a 127 Maksutov which I have found to be really good and have been thinking about a 180 a lot(!), but I am going to try and stay disciplined and just go for a good dobsonian reflector of a larger aperture that will cover more bases in one scope.

Cheers Paz... obviously every scope has its advantages and disadvantages, and I get what you are saying about the Dob. If this was purely for visual, I might be tempted back to a dob (I had one a while back) and got some great planetary views from it. But for planetary photography, I will need something I can use on the NEQ6 that is stable - and larger reflectors are going to be more susceptible to the wind... although that may be less of an issue for planetary astrophotography...

Plenty to think about...

Cheers, Mark

[jambouk]

Wind wouldn't be a problem; a bit of movement in planetary isn't the end of the World, and if it's windy the seeing is likely not to be great anyway so pretty much pointless imaging anyway.

Mak's are supposed to retain their collimation but presumabely they must get knocked out of collimation over time, at the peimary end of things, and I wonder what Damian Peach would advise? He collimates his scope every time he sets up - I wonder if he would say "why get a scope that you are unable to collimate yourself..."

Jamee

 

[dweller25]

I bought a new 180 Pro for visual planetary viewing........

Cooling the scope down whilst temperatures dropped during the evening was VERY difficult. A thin boundary layer of air sat on the primary for hours and made the views mushy, the corrector would dew up before the primary cooled. It was replaced with an Intes Micro 715 with active cooling - views through this scope are superb - I'm sure this would be true of the Skymax 180 too if it had active cooling.

 

[Stu]

I would agree with Dweller's comments. I had a 200mm Mak, and never felt like I got on op of the cooling regardless of how hard I tried. The views were almost always affected by boundary layers or tube currents so it was only occasionally that I got the best out of it. I note that the latest version of these scopes (OMC200) does have much better cooling capabilities. For visual I feel I have had significantly better views either with a 6" refractor or newts of 8" or above.

[Marky1973]

So would the 150 PRO provide a compromise on the cooling front? This still seems to give good views of planets and is cheaper - which means I could upgrade the focuser at the same time. One of the other reasons for a MAK is the need for ease of storage, so size is also a major influence.

[Marky1973]

44 minutes ago, dweller25 said:

I bought a new 180 Pro for visual planetary viewing........

Cooling the scope down whilst temperatures dropped during the evening was VERY difficult. A thin boundary layer of air sat on the primary for hours and made the views mushy, the corrector would dew up before the primary cooled. It was replaced with an Intes Mocro 715 with active cooling - views through this scope are superb - I'm sure this would be true of the Skymax 180 too if it had active cooling.

 

That looks like a lovely scope David, but a bit outside my budget! :-(

[Dave In Vermont]

In terms of the optics, they are quite likely impressive for what a high-powered, narrow FOV (field of view) scope does best: Zero in on planets and comets and other compact targets. On some DSO's, these should also be very good. Such as a globular-cluster like M13. And ring-nebulae like M57.

I have it's smaller brother, the 150mm Skywatcher. But if the 150mm is excellent for what it does and is - I'm sure the 180mm is also outstanding! These are made by Synta in China (Taiwan I think). Sold under other brand-names, the Skywatcher's are the pick of the litter mechanically and well equiped. So if you've understood what they're good for and it's what you want, you should be good-to-go.

Enjoy!

Dave

[Marky1973]

Thanks Dave - I am sure the 180 i superb, but the 150 sounds great too... I am not too worried about cool-down times - like every scope, everyone has a different view, so i will just have to get used to it's own temperament!

Have you done any planetary photography with the 150?

[Dave In Vermont]

No photo work was, or is, planned at this time. I set it up on a simple altaz-mount, what you have there as the Skywatcher AZ-4 (or AZ4?). Called here as the Orion VersaGo II. Orion-USA, different animal from your Orion Optics. But I have seen many images taken through these 150mm. They do require an extended cool-down (or up) due to their thick corrective-plates, but the 180mm seem to take quite a bit longer to reach ambient temps.

I do have a few representative images taken with a 150mm though. I'll leave one here to give you a rough idea.

Enjoy -

Dave

PS: The photographer says the 150mm is F/16, but it's actually a F/12.

Click image for full size, I think.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

The 150 mak is heavier than the C8 OTA. The C8 OTA will hit the Mak150  for six on planets, and more so on DSOs. Regarding collimation: SCTs may be sensitive to collimation, but the image below was taken with my C8, which hasn't been collimated....

Ever....

In 20 years.

I check collimation every time I want to image, and sometimes when I just want to observe. My old 6" F/8 Newtonian needed frequent tweaks, but the C8 seems to be rock solid. I did get Bob's Knobs for thise scope recently, but I am hesitant to install them, because I then would need to collimate it. Other C8 OTAs may well fare differently

[iwols]

is the c8 were talking 

CELESTRON C8-A XLT (CGE) OTA

cheers

[iwols]

im more confused than ever now

[jambouk]

Get a C11.

James

 

[Marky1973]

Thanks Dave and Michael....so that's throws the C8 into the mix against the 150...