Bresser Messier NT150 or NT203 or something else

[Planet Squirrel]

Hi all,

I'm looking to buy a telescope for my wife who has started to show more interest in star gazing over the last year.  After speaking to a shop they recommended the Bresser Messier NT150.  Top reasons being that it has auto tracking and also the ability to use a camera for photos.  Now I didn't even know the photo thing was an option and my wife being a photograher would be over the moon with that sort of thing.

So basically, is the NT150 the best thing for her, is the NT203 even better, or is there something guys and gals would recommend over both of them?

I'm hoping to get something for Christmas, but it's her birthday in January so I can wait for delivery if needed.

 

Thanks for any advice

Squiza

[D4N]

The NT150 is f8 so quite slow for imaging, the NT203 is f5 so more suitable in that respect.  The larger aperture will also give brighter views visually.

Whether either is truly suitable for imaging with though mainly depends on what mount you put it on, the quality of the mount is vital for getting astro images.

 

A word of warning, astro imaging can get very expensive!

[Putaendo Patrick]

I'm a little confused here (nothing new I assure you). There seem to be two 150mm aperture Bresser Messier telescopes. One has a long tube with a focal length of 1200mm and comes with a manual mount. The other has a focal length of 750mm and comes with a computerised go-to mount http://www.bresser.de/en/Astronomy/Telescopes/Bresser-Messier-NT-150-750-Hexafoc-EXOS-2-GoTo-Telescope.html#

In theory this second one might be a very good option for combining visual observation with photography. For photography one of the key elements is a solid and precise mount. I don't personally have experience with the EXOS2 goto mount, but I feel it would work better on the smaller 150mm telescope rather than the larger 203mm telescope which is about double the weight (5.5kg versus 11.2kg according to Bresser specifications) - others who have this mount may disagree and I happily bow to their knowledge and experience. Another disadvantage of larger telescope tubes such as the 203mm is that they are easily affected by quite slight wind, causing the telescope to vibrate. This isn't too big a problem for visual, but isn't at all good for photography.

For visual observing, bigger aperture is generally better - more light enters the scope allowing you to see fainter objects and obtain better resolution at higher magnifications. This said, to be honest the difference between 150mm and 200mm aperture won't give a staggering difference in views, and both can easily reach magnifications of x200 which is often the maximum you can realistically expect in the UK due to atmospheric conditions. And in any case, a lot of observing is done at much lesser magnifications anyway.

The current range of Bresser scopes are relative newcomers on the astronomy scene. Bresser was taken over by Meade and became basically a Meade brand. However, a few years ago, Meade sold Bresser back to its original owners so once again it is "independent". On paper the Bressers have very attractive specifications, and I have been very impressed with a couple of Bresser refractor telescopes I have had the chance to use - so hopefully someone can comment on the Bresser mount.

Edited November 29, 2016 by Putaendo Patrick
Spelin & Grama

[Planet Squirrel]

thank you very much. that kind of covers most things about the bresser.  is there any other unit you would recommend.  the photography is a second thing and I'd rather get a better telescope that didn't have photography capabilities if it meant compromising on quality.

I'm sure the photography isn't as simple as plugging her cannon digital slr into the lens.

 

Edited November 29, 2016 by Planet Squirrel

[Planet Squirrel]

the other thing to say is that the telescope will be used at home 99% of the time so portability is not of huge concern. if that helps get a better scope at the expense of being lighter. 

[Chandra]

I imagine that by now your wife has been enjoying her gift for years. I do not finally know which tube was chosen. A 6" reflector tube is the decent minimum to get started seriously in astronomical observation. Personally, I would lean towards the long tube of Bresser, which is talked about well in forums like CN or reviews like this: https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/reviews/telescopes/bresser-messier-n150/. On the other hand, an F/8 is much less sensitive to decollimation than an F/5, and with its long focal length of 1200mm it allows the use of medium-quality and not so short focal lengths eyepieces without losing image quality. It is true that if its use is going to be mainly for the AP, the long tube is not indicated, since the maximum FOV will always be smaller, and the images will require more exposure. However, if the main use is visual, not only in refractors but also in reflectors, a longer focal length will always give better image quality, which in my opinion more than compensates (especially in planetary observation) what can get lost in field width.

Edited June 11, 2021 by Chandra