Best Scope for Lunar Observations - Advice Please?

[Rich_B]

Hi

New member, just signed up.

Since childhood I have been interested in astronomy but never taken the plunge to buy a scope. This is about to change!!

I have a budget of £500 - £600 which includes provision for extra eyepieces and accessories.

I am primarily interested in Lunar observation and expect to spend 75% of my time studying the finer details of the Moon. I will of course delve into the other areas of the cosmos but the Moon is where my main interest lies. 

Given the above, the questions I have regarding my upcoming hardware purchases are as follows:

1. What is the best choice of scope for seeing as much lunar surface detail as possible? Am I better off going for a high focal range Maksutov say a 102 to 127 or would I be better opting for more aperture with say a 250 Dobsonian?
2. What eyepieces should I be looking to purchase? I have read the sticky regarding eyepieces at the top of the forum but I would like some advice specific to lunar observing if possible please.

I can always stretch the budget further if need be but for a first scope I presume £500-600 is going to be sufficient.

Having trawled the online suppliers I have provisionally narrowed it down to either:

• Skywatcher Skymax 127 AZ GoTo (£369)
• Celestron 4SE 102 GoTo (£399)
• Skywatcher Skyliner 250PX (£429)

These are my relatively uninformed choices and are not set in stone. I am very open to alternative suggestions. Please keep in mind that Lunar surface detail is my primary objective. 

All advice greatly appreciated.

Many thanks

Rich

[brantuk]

Hi Rich and welcome to SGL.

Larger apertures tend to be used for gathering fainter light from distant deep sky objects. If you have a particular interest in the moon then a longer focal length will get nice sharp contrasty images. Maksutovs, Sct's, and longer refractors are very popular scopes for lunar observation. From your list the 4SE and 127 are both good choices - especially as glass based scopes of the same size are considerably more expensive than mirror based ones. 

Bear in mind that scopes need to cool down to ambient temperature to get the best views. Maksutovs take a little longer cooling than Sct's due to their thick glass meniscus lens (as opposed to the sct's thinner corrector plate).

Hope that helps and enjoy the forum.

[DRT]

Hi Rich,

Very good advice from Kim above but something to bear in mind is that your interest is likely to change over time. The 250 Dob is an extremely versatile scope and would give you fabulous views of the moon, which you might have to dim with a moon filter, but would also give you great views of deep space that could be somewhat limited by the small aperture and narrower field of view on the other scopes you are considering.

One thing I would say is that GOTO is simply not necessary if all you plan to do is look at the Moon. It is extremely easy to find

Derek

[nightfisher]

200 F6 dobsonian will be a very good Luna observing tool plus will show plenty of other sights, it will only let you down when you want to do imaging on Luna surface, though you could fit a camera and take good single frames shots on the dob, I use a 150 maksutov because at times i like to image the Luna surface, and i just dont have room for a dob base

[Putaendo Patrick]

I have the Celestron 120 Omni refractor and find I get superb views of the Moon with excellent contrast and detail. A problem with achromatic fracs can be colour fringing (or chromatic aberration) but with a relatively long focal length this does not bother me at all.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/omni-xlt-series/celestron-omni-xlt-120.html

Specifically for lunar observation I might also be very tempted by a Mak or (more expensive) STC. However the narrower views will not be ideal for other areas of viewing. If you can push you budget up quite a bit, a really superb scope would be a 150mm Mak - but this is 500 pounds without the mount!

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-150-pro.html

Apart from the telescope itself, you should consider the type of mounting. Go-to is excellent but is expensive - i.e. less money goes on the telescope, so it's worth reflecting on whether this is really important for you or whether you would be better investing in a better telescope.

Tripod-based mounts are either Equatorial or Alt-aimuth. EQs allow you to follow the movement of object as they "move" across the sky, however they are a little more complicated to set up. AZs move up-down/left-right and would probably be more than sufficient for primarily lunar observation.

Dobsonian mounts again move up-down/left-right but sit on a simple base on the ground.

Personally I think a 250mm reflector would be a little over-kill for lunar work (ideal however for DSOs). A 150mm or 200mm Dobsonian would be very versatile if your interests develop in other directions.

Your choice of eyepieces will depend on the focal length of the telescope you finally buy. A 10mm EP on a focal length of 1000mm will give x100 magnification but the same EP on a focal length of 1500mm will give x150 etc. Magnification is limited by atmospheric conditions and factors such as light pollution (are you in a rural or urban area etc?). With my own set up, I generally view at approx  x130, x180 and sometimes x260 if conditions are good.

[Rich_B]

24 minutes ago, Putaendo Patrick said:

I have the Celestron 120 Omni refractor and find I get superb views of the Moon with excellent contrast and detail. A problem with achromatic fracs can be colour fringing (or chromatic aberration) but with a relatively long focal length this does not bother me at all.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/omni-xlt-series/celestron-omni-xlt-120.html

Specifically for lunar observation I might also be very tempted by a Mak or (more expensive) STC. However the narrower views will not be ideal for other areas of viewing. If you can push you budget up quite a bit, a really superb scope would be a 150mm Mak - but this is 500 pounds without the mount!

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-150-pro.html

Apart from the telescope itself, you should consider the type of mounting. Go-to is excellent but is expensive - i.e. less money goes on the telescope, so it's worth reflecting on whether this is really important for you or whether you would be better investing in a better telescope.

Tripod-based mounts are either Equatorial or Alt-aimuth. EQs allow you to follow the movement of object as they "move" across the sky, however they are a little more complicated to set up. AZs move up-down/left-right and would probably be more than sufficient for primarily lunar observation.

Dobsonian mounts again move up-down/left-right but sit on a simple base on the ground.

Personally I think a 250mm reflector would be a little over-kill for lunar work (ideal however for DSOs). A 150mm or 200mm Dobsonian would be very versatile if your interests develop in other directions.

Your choice of eyepieces will depend on the focal length of the telescope you finally buy. A 10mm EP on a focal length of 1000mm will give x100 magnification but the same EP on a focal length of 1500mm will give x150 etc. Magnification is limited by atmospheric conditions and factors such as light pollution (are you in a rural or urban area etc?). With my own set up, I generally view at approx  x130, x180 and sometimes x260 if conditions are good.

Thank you all for your responses.

In the last hour or so since my original post I had actually concluded that a GoTo mount is probably unnecessary for my requirements as some of you have pointed out. I am now of the opinion that I would be much better off investing the cash in a more capable scope with a regular mount.

Coincidentally Patrick, I had just been looking at the SkyMax 150 Pro moments before I read your post. I agree this does look a very tempting purchase indeed and may well be worth stretching the budget for. I think an AZ mount would be fine. I like the look of the Skywatcher AZ4 at £169:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth/skywatcher-az4-alt-az-mount.html

This would put my overall spend at £669 with the eyepieces still to purchase. The Skymax 150 Pro has an 1800mm focal length and comes with a 28mm LER (2") EP. 

What extra eyepieces (sizes and brands) would you advise I add to this setup for lunar observations?

I live in a semi-rural area (small village) but I am only a short walk from some very dark rural areas nearby. 

Thank you

[Peter Drew]

From my experience, the larger the telescope the better the Moon looks. Fortunately the Moon is bright and detailed so even small telescopes do well with it. I'm currently using a 20" F3.5 which is giving astonishing views. For a budget of around £500 I would certainly consider a 10" Dobsonian and as said above, it's such a good telescope for many other objects. There is no problem with video for lunar imaging on an alt-azimuth mount.

[Jimtheslim]

I have both a 90mm refractor and a 250mm dobsonian. My primary interest was going to be the moon because that is what I was most familiar with when looking into the night sky and then through a small pair of binoculars. Based on this and an interest in planets I received the refractor for my birthday last year. However, be warned...when it is a good, clear, dark night with no moon I can guarantee you'll start wondering about the more distant DSO's and getting as much aperture on planets as possible. I did, so recently I went for the Skywatcher Skyliner 250px. I can say that the lunar views through this are still as breath taking as they were in the refractor, if not more so. Although I was never bothered about chromatic abberation in my refractor, it was nice that it was no longer present in the dobsonian. 

So, with incredibly pleasing views of the moon and planets I now have my eye on a Telrad so I can start using star charts to learn where everything is in terms of DSO's. I don't have the go-to as I wanted the satisfaction of finding them myself. Set up is quick and easy every time I take it out. 

I haven't used a Mukatov before so I cannot comment other than to say they might be more portable if you wish to travel to a darker site. I would definitely say I have no buyers remorse having bought the 250 dob (which is available for £409 from some suppliers). I would say that buying one of these along with a telrad and a good quality, high(ish) power eyepiece with your budget would be a good investment. A water butt base for about £10 is also a must-have! 

Happy shopping, it's a nice dilema to have! Let us know what you go for

[Louis D]

If you want to go the Dob route, check the classifieds for used 8 inch dobs.  Here in the states, they go for about $200 in good condition.

[Sirius Starwatcher]

Hi Rich have a look at this thread it may answer some of your questions.

 

[Charic]

The Moon is  just stunning through my 8" telescope, amazing detail.
My telescope is  manually operated so I have to keep up the pace  when viewing at powers over 200X but when viewed with my 72° 32mm  Panaview at about 37x  it just seems to float in a sea of space for a while.
A  larger telescope could offer more opportunities as you search deeper into space, but there are so many variables  and conditions to understand and overcome. 

[nightfisher]

I will say you may find the 150 mak a little wobbly at high power on the AZ4 mount, this is where a 200 or 250 dob would be far better

[Linda]

I have a 127mm Mak. I have seen nice sharp crater riggs on the moon at the terminator. Otherwise the moon bug hasn't bit me, so maybe my scope doesn't show as much as bigger scopes do. Also, as a beginner, you might have no idea how interesting the other celestial objects are. Viewing planets is great, especially Jupiter that is high in the sky and shows a lot of detail on a good day. I expected to be most interested in planets, but really fell for hunting deep sky objects.

The scopes that you consider are extremely different, especially in size. The 250mm Dob is very big and some people complain about back pain when moving it. The 127mm Mak is very small and extremely portable. A very good grab and go scope. I have taken it along on camping trips on a cano and on a sledge when skiing.

So you need to consider what you want to do with the scope, where you want to store it and how you want to transport it. For example, if you plan to travel to a dark site with a car full of camping stuff, the 250mm Dob won't fit into the car. If you just travel there with an otherwise empty car, it will probably fit if your car is big enough. A scope with a bigger opening will show fainter deep sky objects and apparently also more details on planets (I need to confirm this yet on my bigger scope).

Most amateur astronomers end up having at least a grab and go scope and a big deep sky sky scope.

[Dave In Vermont]

A 127mm Maksutov-Cassegrain would be ideal as a lunar-telescope. A 200mm Dobsonian Newtonian-Reflector if you think there's a chance you may want to "spread your wings" and develop an interest in Deep-Sky Objects.

I would also sugget downloading Stellarium and the instructions. It's free and will show all of what a 200mm Dob would be capable of showing you. If you elieve this is a possibility, let us know and the links will be happily provided for you!

And welcome aboard SGL - where helping to find answers for other astro-philes is our bread & butter -

Dave

[Dazzyt66]

I'll add another vote for a Mak. I've (literally) just bought the 150 pro (with a HEQ5 GOTO but that is overkill for your budget and just looking at the moon to start). I have also got 150 Dob (which the Mak is replacing) and a 80mm frac. My reasoning for the Mak (over the Dob) is:

I'm more into lunar, planetary and 'regular' DSO's for which Maks excel - there are plenty of posts here to confirm this and my first light view of Mars was amazing albeit brief!

I like to 'snap' what I see as a memento (and I use that term instead of 'image' cos I don't plan to get any awards :)) this is hard to do with a Dob at higher magnifications (although not impossible!). I'm hoping to get some really good high contrast shots of the moon now which was limited with my Dob and ST80.

I also like finding things in the sky but sometimes, when time is scarce, I'd rather GOTO it and not waste time - plus I'm immediately finding it helps me remember what and where things are - you still need some knowledge to use it. Once I've found it tracking will now help me get better images - the HEQ5 is a great sturdy beast.

The mount also future proofs me if I decide to expand or add to my setup - I'm already thinking of mounting my ST80 side by side so that I get the Great Mak plus wide field views.

So, Maks are great for what you want to do initially, will allow to view other things and you may find a decent (non GOTO) alt az mount suits you for around your budget.

HTH

 

 

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I would go for the 250mm Dob any time on the moon. I have looked through quite a few scopes at the moon, and personally always find the view through bigger scopes is better. My C8 consistently hits the superb little APM 80mm triplet for six on lunar observation. My smaller 6" F/8 Newtonian (planet killer with 1/10th lambda mirror and very small central obstruction) could not show the level of detail the C8 can. As others have said the 10" Dob is much more versatile. Having said that, it is quite a beast, and it is important to get a scope that is easy to set up (and take to a dark site).

[Rich_B]

Thank you all very much  for your replies, I didn't expect such a greatly detailed response.

This thread has given me a lot to think about. It is a very tough call and compelling arguments have been provided for both the Dob and Mak routes. 

I think I am possibly swaying very slightly in favour of the Mak purely based on the sheer bulk and lower portability of the Dob. Having said that, the overall cost of the Mak package exceeds the Dob expenditure by over 45% which needs to be considered. 

• Dob 250 + EP's = Circa £550
• Mak 150 + Mount + EP's = Circa £800

Looking at these equations I am almost of the opinion that if I go the Mak route I may as well go the whole hog and get the 180 to round the cost off to circa £1000. 

Would the extra weight of the Mak 180 necessitate the need for a more substantial mount than the AZ4?

Thanks

[Dazzyt66]

27 minutes ago, Rich_B said:

 

Looking at these equations I am almost of the opinion that if I go the Mak route I may as well go the whole hog and get the 180 to round the cost off to circa £1000. 

Would the extra weight of the Mak 180 necessitate the need for a more substantial mount than the AZ4?

Thanks

I think a 180 may be too much for an AZ4 especially at higher powers. Someone here will defo know the answer though.

[brantuk]

The 180 OTA is almost 8kgs so I think you're correct - it's going to want a more substantial mount than the AZ4. I'd suggest something along the lines of a Skytee2 or any of the similar "T" head mounts available from other manufacturers.

[nightfisher]

I did once put my 180 pro on my AZ4 but no way was it usable, even low power ep`s had the image wobbling all over the place, even the 150 pro mak is a bit of a handful on an AZ4, plus the fider scope ends up at 8 oclock position!

I still feel an 8" dob with 1200mm focal length is the perfect scope, using a x2 barlow will give the focal length of the Mak but still be very good for deep sky without this barlow plus you will have 2" extra aperture to get more detail, the dob comes with a very stable mount included

[Dazzyt66]

6 minutes ago, nightfisher said:

I did once put my 180 pro on my AZ4 but no way was it usable, even low power ep`s had the image wobbling all over the place, even the 150 pro mak is a bit of a handful on an AZ4, plus the fider scope ends up at 8 oclock position!

I still feel an 8" dob with 1200mm focal length is the perfect scope, using a x2 barlow will give the focal length of the Mak but still be very good for deep sky without this barlow plus you will have 2" extra aperture to get more detail, the dob comes with a very stable mount included

Except that it's a Dob... Lol ?

[Linda]

Instead of an 8" Dob, you can also consider a C8. Equally big opening, but the scope is much smaller. And under 6 kgs. More expensive as a Dob though.

[CraigT82]

Add in the mount, tripod and counterweights required to use a C8 and you've got as much bulk and weight as the dob with a lot more cost! 

[Stu]

A few thoughts....

Is portability a factor? Given that you can observe the moon successfully from anywhere, you won't need to transport it long distances. Unless of course you would have to carry it up and down stairs to get it to a garden.

A dob will have a faster setup time and faster cool down time. The resolution on a 10" dob would be superior and would show you plenty of detail. Don't forget that if you are making the moon your main focus you will want to be able to see the less obvious features and for that you need the resolution which comes with aperture. Studying the Lunar 100 and 200 would presumably be of interest?

One thing that I've been using lately with both a dob and a refractor is an EQ Platform. I use it for planetary, lunar and solar observing, any time I want to study at target at high power without nudging the scope constantly. I actually think it would be worth considering for your requirement, they are very easy to set up and effectively give you the same sort of tracking you get with an EQ mount but without the complication.

So, my suggestion is a 10" dob on an EQ platform with a couple of decent eyepieces giving you a range of high powers to cater for different conditions and targets. Vixen SLVs have a great reputation and are comfortable to view with due to their 20mm eye relief.

[Rich_B]

21 minutes ago, Stu said:

A few thoughts....

Is portability a factor? Given that you can observe the moon successfully from anywhere, you won't need to transport it long distances. Unless of course you would have to carry it up and down stairs to get it to a garden.

A dob will have a faster setup time and faster cool down time. The resolution on a 10" dob would be superior and would show you plenty of detail. Don't forget that if you are making the moon your main focus you will want to be able to see the less obvious features and for that you need the resolution which comes with aperture. Studying the Lunar 100 and 200 would presumably be of interest?

One thing that I've been using lately with both a dob and a refractor is an EQ Platform. I use it for planetary, lunar and solar observing, any time I want to study at target at high power without nudging the scope constantly. I actually think it would be worth considering for your requirement, they are very easy to set up and effectively give you the same sort of tracking you get with an EQ mount but without the complication.

So, my suggestion is a 10" dob on an EQ platform with a couple of decent eyepieces giving you a range of high powers to cater for different conditions and targets. Vixen SLVs have a great reputation and are comfortable to view with due to their 20mm eye relief.

Thank you for your input Stu.

Portability is not a major concern, plus I am relatively young (36) and very fit so I can cope with lugging it around moderate distances if necessary. Besides, I am starting to realise that a Mak 180 with a suitable mount is all in all a fairly bulky piece of kit anyway, not the ultra portable option I was at first assuming it would be. 

Yes studying the Lunar 100 & 200 is of great interest.

A couple of questions if you don't mind:

1.  Are you saying that the resolution will actually be better with a 10" Dob than say a Mak 150/180? I was kind of under the impression that for lunar detail the Maks were King?
2. The EQ platform does sound a good idea, could you provide a link by any chance? I can't seem to find any to look at on the usual websites.

Cost is also a factor that works in favour of the Dob route. A Mak 180 with a solid EQ mount plus EP's is looking like circa £1250. Whereas the Dob 10" with EP's is less than half that (plus whatever the EQ platform costs). I guess the question is: "Is the Mak 180 option really TWICE as good as the Dob option?" The more I consider this I strongly suspect not.