Mak 127, some information and help please

[Alan White]

Ongoing from my back issues and other postings, an Equinox 80 or Mak have been given a lot of support by the SGL gang.
If I were to try and find a Skymax 127 or similar,  I have a few questions:

What sort of real world magnification could I push it to in reasonable UK seeing?

Would I be able to see Pleadies in the full at all?

Any known issues with them that I should be aware of?

How does it balance up on an alt-alz mount?

Any foibles or oddities?

 

Thanks folks.

[Peter Drew]

I've been using one recently. I would say that on average 250x is the general limit although higher is possible for the Moon and double stars when seeing is good. I think you might struggle for a full view of the Pleiades. The main inherent issues are cool down time and dewing of the corrector lens. It's a fairly heavy OTA and it will depend a lot how it is mounted on an alt-az, the SkyTee types are probably the best. A good telescope for the price.     

[John]

I've had some great views through Skywatcher Mak 127's but I've only owned one myself for a short time - it's cool down time was a little longer than I like.

What I learned about them is:

- dew can be an issue so you will need a dew shield at least.

- I think you would need to use a 2" format eyepiece to get a really wide view (eg: the Pleiades) but I don't think the 127 maks can take advantage of the larger eyepiece format.

- They work slightly less than 127mm aperture - I think the figure is 121mm. This is to do with the mak-cassegrain design needing an oversize primary which I don't think the Skywatcher maks have ?

- I felt the ones that I've looked through give very similar planetary / lunar performance to a 100ED refractor and slightly better deep sky views because of the larger aperture.

- They seem to be consistently optically good.

 

[iPeace]

Good post, will follow with interest. My Mak is only a 102 and I often ponder getting a bigger one. It's only seen limited use - clouds - but has given me some nice lunar views over 200x.

Factor in a dew shield and some cooling time and/or cool storage. No big deal.

The 102 comes with a very short dovetail; I have removed it and use a longer one on a couple of tube rings. No balance issues to speak of. Works great on my range of alt-az mounts.

Haven't tried the Pleiades with it. Suggest a simulation with Stellarium or similar.

[nightfisher]

With A 127 Skymax i would say on a good night you should be able to get a max x250.....a 7mm ep would get you x214.

The best field of view will be with a 32mm plossl, so you wont be able to fit M45 in the field of view.

you would need a dew shield, easy to make.

Might be an idea to get a used one and see how you get on, Maks are marmite, you love them or hate them, i rather like them as they give great contrast with sharp stars like an ED frac, a good option is a 127 Mak and a widefield frac like a 102 F5

[Northern Soul man]

Hi Alan, Just another point - if your thinking of using a 2" diagonal with 2" EP's - I think the Skywatcher offers an adaptor,  but the Celestron one doesn't so bare this in mind - but I think I read somewhere that if you buy the adapter and try the 2" way - the diagonal snags on the focuser  (due to  its larger size) - but I'm not too sure of this - as said, I've only looked for the adapter for my Celestron Mak and couldn't find much advice - I've posted this so someone who has a 2" setup on the back of a 127 Mak can advise.

I've used mine for white light solar in 1.25 "Mode" - I've changed the metal screws in the diagonal and the Visual Back for nylon ones to save the dreaded barrel scoring but have to take care especially using the Bino Viewer with the added weight - either way - mono or Bino work very well on Solar - adding green and very light blue filters helps very much with the granulation on days of better seeing, but for the Planets, These Maks work very well, If I can't be bothered to get the 1100 out - and in comparison with only half the aperture of the 1100, the 127 Mak works with excellent views for such a small and light scope.

 

Paul.

[spaceboy]

I've had three 127 Skymax. I don't know what it is about them but I want one then when I have one I no longer want it and sell it.....then end up wanting another  

I did a loose comparison review against an EVO120 and C100ED to which I found the ED to be the better scope. I always wondered why the larger MAK wasn't a clear winner but reading John's post maybe it's as he says and the MAK didn't actually have a full 27mm advantage over the 100ED as marketing would have us believe (wouldn't be the first time.) As for seeing M45 in all it's glory you'll fall ever so slightly short http://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/

Where I feel the SW MAK's surffer is a lack of ota rings and a dovetail but this can easily be fixed.

[spaceboy]

3 minutes ago, spaceboy said:

 

I did a loose comparison review against an EVO120 and C100ED to which I found the ED to be the better scope.

 

 

[Mr niall]

I've got a skywatcher Mak 127 as my only scope, would thoroughly recommend it. Very compact for the aperture and not overly heavy either. I go up to about 250 on Saturn but find about 175x is the max cruising speed in the uk. I can more or less fit Pleiades in with a 30mm eyepiece but it's not going to be as good as a a nice wide field refractor - best views I've had of them was through my starwave 70ed but then again that scope was weaker on the planets and splitting doubles. Horses for courses! Not too sure about mounts - I use an eq3 but I would guess that the fact they are very short tube lengths means they have a much smaller moment which can only be a good thing! 

[Alan White]

Thanks for the answers and feed back folks, helping me get my head straight.

One more question, anyone do solar with this scope and if you do, how and how does it fair?

[nightfisher]

16 minutes ago, Alan White said:

Thanks for the answers and feed back folks, helping me get my head straight.

One more question, anyone do solar with this scope and if you do, how and how does it fair?

I tried solar white light with a 150 pro mak and i did not rate it, the black tube suffered thermal currents 

[Alfian]

The Mak 127 is good for many objects but open clusters like M45 isn't one of them. IMO to see M45 in its glory you need a wide field scope or binos.

[cloudsweeper]

I had a Celestron Nexstar 127 Mak.  With a 40mm EP, it gave mag x38 at a FOV of 1.1/1.2 degrees.  So it's not a widefield 'scope, and the Pleiades (at nearly 2 degrees) would not all fit into the view.

But for other uses it was a great telescope, and very portable!

Doug.

[Alan White]

So reading this a 127 Mak will be a reasonable all round scope with ED like view but narrow FOV.
Add in my ST80 for widefield for the minute, upgrade later perhaps on widefield.

Oddly this is the same plan put forward previously when I asked about scopes to use with my back issues, 
good quality control check on SGL here going on, consistency of advice 10/10.

So one final thought,
put it on my AZ4? or
buy a Skytee as Peter suggested ?
or risk an AZ5 kit and see how it really acts as true grab and go?

[cloudsweeper]

4 minutes ago, Alan White said:

So reading this a 127 Mak will be a reasonable all round scope with ED like view but narrow FOV.
Add in my ST80 for widefield for the minute, upgrade later perhaps on widefield.

Oddly this is the same plan put forward previously when I asked about scopes to use with my back issues, 
good quality control check on SGL here going on, consistency of advice 10/10.

So one final thought, put it on my AZ4 or risk an AZ5 kit and see how it really acts as true grab and go.

Yes.  Most objects are not very large, so it's not a problem, and an ST is great for when you DO want a wide view.  (My ST120 is excellent in this respect, and I don't even feel a strong desire to upgrade it now it has a Crayford focuser.)

Can't comment on using a 127 Mak on a different mount, although I find hunting round the sky (i.e. without GoTo) is easier with a widefield 'scope.

Doug.

[laudropb]

Just a word of warning. The Skytee 2is a fairly hefty mount and I do not know how that will go with your bad back.

[nightfisher]

I would completely scrub the Skytee of the list for a 127 Mak, they only weigh about 3kg, the AZ4 will be plenty for it, i have gone AZ goto for mine, this gives me the option of using the scope to try to find harder solar system objects like the outer planets and a few of the messiers like globs when there is no moon (and no cloud)

[John]

I tend to agree that the Skytee II is a bit over the top for the 127 mak. I reckon an AZ-4 would be good. I've seen them on AZ-3's !

The fine slow motion controls of the AZ5 might be useful though - it's a long focal length scope.

[nightfisher]

Alan, have you got nearer a decision yet?   if i lived closer i could loan you a Maksutov to see if its what you like but your not "just round the corner"

[Alan White]

14 hours ago, nightfisher said:

Alan, have you got nearer a decision yet?   if i lived closer i could loan you a Maksutov to see if its what you like but your not "just round the corner"

No Jules I am wavering all over at the minute as I want to get this right.

Thats a kind offer, but as you say we are not round the corner to each other.

I am down to a 127 mak or a 150p dobsonian or a 150p newt on my AZ4.

I had a 150p on the AZ4 and liked it, sold it to buy the ED100 and have regretted it ever since, so I waver toward the 150p but because it's a known view and a comfy slippers kind of thing, hope the makes sense.

I am normally someone who makes my mind up fairly easily, but it's not being the case this time round.

[iPeace]

Nothing wrong with comfy slippers.

[nightfisher]

Alan.....before commuting to a 150p see if any one local to you has a 127 that you can blagg a look through, you may like it

 

[Alan White]

As an update to my posting,

I have purchased a Celestron 6se optical tube lightly used off fleabay.

This is a first sct for me as had refractors and newtonian to date so not sure it's right for me as a only scope, but that's what the st 80 covers for at the minute,  mount now may be the next challenge, have posted on this in the mounts section.

Thanks for the various inputs, much appreciated.

[cloudsweeper]

I reckon you'll like it, Alan!  Reasonable aperture, good magnification, easy on eyepieces, and a 42mm EP will give you a decent 1.82 degrees of TFOV at a sensible 4.2mm of exit pupil.  (Assuming it can take 2" EPs like the 8SE, which I guess is most likely!)

Have fun!

Doug.

PS: It would be good to use that 'scope on a suitable az mount/extension.  Unfortunately, my 8SE won't go on the AZ-4.

[Alan White]

Thanks Doug

Happy with choice but not sure it will take 2" so but at present I use 1 1/4 anyway

As to the mount, I am in a quandary but waver to an equatorial

But will try the AZ first as it may surprise me