AP Telescope for small DSO's

[Nigel G]

Evening all.

I'm looking for a scope suitable for small DSO AP, limited budget around £300. As usual I really don't know what to look for with so many different reviews and scopes available.

Something that will capture the smaller galaxy's and clusters with better detail than my 150p.

It needs to be around 4-5 kg as it will be used on an EQ3 Pro with a DSLR and mini guide scope setup.

Am I asking for to much with a small budget.

Your guidance is greatly appreciated.

Nige.

PS. is the skymax range good for AP.

 

[Tommohawk]

An interesting question not least because I think that's the way I want to go - smaller DSOs.

Trouble is, whilst the Skymax 150 might give the optical performance you're after, its 5.6kgs I believe, so pushing it with an EQ3 especially at F12. Also a bit more tricky to keep free from dew. Of course the Skymax is more compact.

Your 150PDS is lighter - why not just use a good barlow - optically I think you'd get a similar result.

See what others say!!

 

[Nigel G]

36 minutes ago, Tommohawk said:

An interesting question not least because I think that's the way I want to go - smaller DSOs.

Trouble is, whilst the Skymax 150 might give the optical performance you're after, its 5.6kgs I believe, so pushing it with an EQ3 especially at F12. Also a bit more tricky to keep free from dew. Of course the Skymax is more compact.

Your 150PDS is lighter - why not just use a good barlow - optically I think you'd get a similar result.

See what others say!!

 

I was thinking about the skymax 127 rather than the 150.

I like to push the boundaries of my equipment  ( performance wise ) my eq3 has been professionally serviced and so far has given me great guided images upto 8 minutes exposure times and I think it's worth trying a longer focal length. 

A better mount is on the cards for next year.

Nige.

[Tommohawk]

I certainly agree that the EQ3 is a very capable mount.

Skymax 127 is 1500mm EFL.

150P with x2 barlow is also 1500mm EFL, but F10 rather than F12, and (theoretically) better resolution, and cheaper.

But Skymax is more compact and wind resistant.

You pay your money, etc ......

[Nigel G]

26 minutes ago, Tommohawk said:

I certainly agree that the EQ3 is a very capable mount.

Skymax 127 is 1500mm EFL.

150P with x2 barlow is also 1500mm EFL, but F10 rather than F12, and (theoretically) better resolution, and cheaper.

But Skymax is more compact and wind resistant.

You pay your money, etc ......

 My reflector is a star discovery 150p with a nasty plastic focuser which barely stays stable with the camera at prime focus, I don't think it would cope with a barlow and dslr, but I do intend to give it a try when the persistent clouds finally part.

[Tommohawk]

1 minute ago, Nigel G said:

 My reflector is a star discovery 150p with a nasty plastic focuser which barely stays stable with the camera at prime focus, I don't think it would cope with a barlow and dslr,

Ahhh thats a good point - you would want it pretty stable.

[DaveS]

Mount, mount, mount.

Think about the image scale in " / px. I plugged your kit into FLO's CCD calculator and it gave 0.59"/px. That would be asking a lot of a premium mount let alone an EQ3.

Think about upgrading the mount first. Also the Skymax 127 is slooow, and the one thing DSLRs don't like is a slow scope.

By all means go ahead and try it, just don't expect an easy ride.

[Nigel G]

4 hours ago, DaveS said:

Mount, mount, mount.

Think about the image scale in " / px. I plugged your kit into FLO's CCD calculator and it gave 0.59"/px. That would be asking a lot of a premium mount let alone an EQ3.

Think about upgrading the mount first. Also the Skymax 127 is slooow, and the one thing DSLRs don't like is a slow scope.

By all means go ahead and try it, just don't expect an easy ride.

Thanks for the info Dave.

As you have probably noticed I have only been doing AP for a year and don't really know that much  

I am going to upgrade the mount asap, also a CCD is on the cards eventually, both will probably within a year.

I'm in no rush to get a new scope so maybe the mount should be first  Thanks, this is the info I need.

I thought I might be asking to much from my mount, although it would be fine for planetary imaging which is also a reason for a longer FL.

Now I am going to research "/ px.  I have no idea at the moment what it is.... I'm guessing pixels per something  

Cheers

Nige.

[MattJenko]

The RC6 might be worth a look at that price range, focal length and weight. Quite an ask for an EQ3 for any small DSO really though, but I would look at this scope for them given the criteria.