Today is the Day SW 150 or SW 200

[rml63]

Hello All,

Today I am going to the shop to buy either the 150p or 200p.   I am interested in visual only and I am going to start with lunar observing .

I want something I won't be bored with in three months and something that I can manage weight wise so that I will be able to take it outside with not alot of effort.  I am sure you guys have either been in this dilema or know someone who has, I was leaning towards a 130p for a light G&G but I want as much aperture as I can manage.  I have read in other posts ,as far as newts go ,that the 200p is the sweet spot in the lineup is this true?

Thanks in advance for any help you could offer.

Mike

[knobby]

Both nice scopes, the 200 is manageable in one go and easy if you take the base and ota separately, the 150 is obviously more manageable ... biu smaller !

I started with a 150, really liked it but soon wanted more ... 1 year down the line got a 250.

Good luck choosing.

[brantuk]

Yes the 200P dobsonian can be regarded as a sweet spot. It's a very good starter scope and is probably the largest size of the small scopes and the smallest of the larger scopes. With 8" of aperture you can see all the popular brighter objects - but it also allows you to peer a fair bit deeper into space too. So from a dark site on a clear transparent night you can eek out a heck of a lot of fainter objects.

I started with a 150P which is also good - but 18mths later I wanted more aperture. Also - mine was on an EQ mount/tripod and was a bit shaky - took a while for vibrations to calm down. A dobsonian (rocker box/turntable) mount is much more stable. But of course a dob mount is alt/az so doesn't lend itself easily to photography - something to consider maybe.

That said - either is a good starter scope - and both will sell fairly easily when you want to upgrade. For a home based instrument I would go with the larger aperture and easiest to set up. For me that would be the 8". Hth

[nightfisher]

If using it from your home go for the 200p, they are very good scopes

[Timebandit]

Hello Mike and welcome to SGL. Firstly you have done the right thing of asking us chaps on here for opinions and advice, before you spend your money, good move.  

For me on a like for like basis aperture rules. The general rule why this is as the more aperture the more light that enters the scope means that you can get higher magnification on those fainter objects . I think the 200p allows 77% more light gathering in than the 150 if I remember correctly  

If it was me I would go for the 200p , size wise it will be a bit larger to move , but not that much, if you can manage the 150 then the 200 will be fine. But the big difference will be that the 200p should take you into the more intermediate /advance stage of the hobby before you may think about upgrading. You do not want to buy a scope and then think about upgrading a few months down the line.

If your choice is the 150p or the 200p then IMO go for the 200p as will give better views of faint fuzzys and you will not have the " what if factor" that you probably will get if you go for the smaller aperture 150

I hope the above helps and enjoy your purchase , both nice scopes. 

I hope this helps☺

[rml63]

First off thanks to everyone for their very helpful comments.   After moving a Celestron 150xlt on a cg4 mount I knew that was not the goto for me.  Just looking at the 200p I knew it would not fit in it's assinged corner in the living room (close to the door to the front yard)  I then picked up  and played with a Meade Polaris 130 and that size really appealed to me.  I just wanted something a little higher end 

So I ordered a SW BKP 130 DS, on a vixen portaii mount.  With the money I saved on aperture I am trying to decide  between Hyperion zoom or single ep's with a barlow.  What ep's do you guys like the best for your reflectors.

 

Mike

[N3ptune]

I had interesting observations with a 130mm telescope for 5 great months. If you like to spend time looking at the sky, your instrument will pay for itself in only a few trips outside. Mine paid for itself after 5 trips at most.

[spike95609]

I'd also go for the 200p personally. You'll have a lot of fun with either of them, especially on the moon, but if you find yourself wanting to look at other things in the long-term then those extra two inches will give you the power to do it. It doesn't sound like much but it brings a considerable amount of additional light to the eyepiece, so you'll get a glimpse of details which just aren't there on the 150p, and galaxies, star clusters etc, will be that bit more rich and distinct. It's a scope that can keep you busy for years, in fact some people never see the need to upgrade.

[popeye85]

On 17/09/2016 at 11:05, Timebandit said:

If your choice is the 150p or the 200p then IMO go for the 200p as will give better views of faint fuzzys and you will not have the " what if factor" that you probably will get if you go for the smaller aperture 150

Have to agree with this- I have got the 150 and although it is a great scope and servers me week I do have the constant bag in my head about what i an missing it on by not going for the 200.

[Waldemar]

"I do have the constant bag in my head about what i an missing it on by not going for the 200"

Now that is called apperture feaver... 

[rml63]

I have ordered  a Baader zoom with 2.25 barlow, no thats going to be some serious, mags.

MIke