Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_2019_sp_banner.thumb.jpg.a0ff260c05b90dead5c594e9b4ee9fd0.jpg

Rhushikesh-Canisminor

Skywatcher, orion, celestron, Meade-general reviews

Recommended Posts

Hello!

So I have been an amateur astronomer since last few years and now I see that so many people have asking me about general telescope suggestions. (Guess the next step will be helping to set up small observatories...Ah dreams!)

We don't have many telescope brands available. The major brands that are available here are Meade, orion, celestron and skywatcher.

The confusion starts to rise when the other party is interested in little larger scopes like 8 inch sct or 12 inch reflector with eq mount or dobsonian mount.

Would like to know overall experience that you guys have had with these brands like optical tubes, mount, eyepiece etc. Sort of like "this is good, this is not so good" type.

 

For e.g. I have used celestron 6 inch sct, 12 inch (sort of) sct and 102mm short tube refractor. Although I love their optics, I haven't had good experience with their mounts.

Meade : Used their 8 inch sct with fork mount (and liked it). Used their 90 mm refractor and didn't like it much.

Skywatcher has given balanced performance overall. Decent mount, decent optics, decent supplied eyepiece etc.

Also, on the same topic, I am quite confused with how much importance does having a good telescope dealer has. As in we do have many dealers here, but many times I have experienced things like overpriced scopes, no decent guidance etc. If I suggest just one dealer with whom I hadam good experience then it looks like biased opinion.

Edited by Rhushikesh-Canisminor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Difficult to say as there is moe then one aspect.

For Newtonians I suspect there is little difference, differences being the added items like focusers, single speed, two speed. Mirrors are going to be simialr as they are all mass produced. Likely not the same place but could be the same machinery used.

Optically I would expect Skywatcher, Orion to be the same as the Skywatcher items are the base product for Orion.

As you mention the 90mm refractor I expect them to all come from the same source with a different name on the side.

SCT/Mak/goto is going to be a lot on electronics. Skywatcher seem to be poor on this. Orion ones I hear less problems about and Meade are kind of quiet. Celestron now owned by Syntat (=Skywatcher) seem to be gewtting a bit worse then they used to be.

There is a lot of historical reports, the common one that Meades stripped gears, the early ones did - I bought one - and I recall that Celestrons also did the same at the same time. For some reason the reports stuck to Meades. I think I bought the Meade over the Celestron as it seemed better on the gear stripping aspect. Another aspect is people will say how poor Meades are but every club I have visited has used a large Meade not a large Skywatcher or Celestron. If so bad why?

Meades may be a bit better electronically, I have a small ETX, takes 9v. But the Weasner site pointed out that Meade said it was the same as the 12v scopes so was fine at 12v, it runs happily on 12v. I suspect you would have a dead Skywatcher if you gave it 15v and not 12v. Long time ago the ETX got way over voltage. It screamed and displayed an over voltage message. I think it was up at 15v or 16v. It was fine afterwards.

I have managed to give my 9v ETX reverse polarity at 12v, nothing on the display but after I changed the leads I was surprised to find it still worked. So early Meades had better protection. Cannot say for the new ones but seems little point is changing.

There is likely more features on a Skywatcher, Meade never went for adding on a great deal of stuff. But I find Meades are easier to align. The start is simpler, they also made a sensible decision on the alignment stars available. Not as many but generally only obvious ones. Synta/Skywatcher have some strange ones.

If I recall Meade have reissued the ETX 125, they have the ETX 80, maybe the ETX 90 also. One thing I have heard about the 125 is that the OTA is removable, meaning you can remove it and possibly swap to say a 72mm refractor. I need to find out about this as it is interesting.

Also think that Meades are configurable for Alt/Az use or Eq use, the Skywatcher seem not to be but I think the Celestrons are - they were not for a spell (one firmware upgrade where it was removed) but it was reinstated. That is a maybe however.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Celestron and Skywatcher and many Orion products are manufactured by Synta so their quality is comparable although each model has it's quirks. Meade equipment is of generally similar quality although again each model has it's good and not so good points.

It's difficult to generalise really without a specific model being specified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you will find is that 'bundled packages' (scope, mount, eyepieces) at the lower price brackets for all of the manufacturers you have listed will normally result in a good telescope, poor (wobbly) mount and 'useable' eyepieces.  So ok for the beginner, but the mount is usually the problem.

When looking at the higher price brackets, you can get a good telescope, good mount  - but again bundled with 'ok' eyepieces.

Many more experienced observers will buy everything separately.  Not unusual to see a Skywatcher mount, with a Celestron Schmitt Cassegrain telescope (SCT) being used with Televue eyepieces.    We can mix and match to get the best for our personal requirements.  I currently use a Skywatcher mount with a Celestron newtonian for deep sky and then change for a Russian refractor on the same mount for observing the moon.  I use Celestron XCel eyepieces which are not Televiews, but they are much better than the bundled eyepieces.

Generally speaking, I think all manufacturers mentioned are very good.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SkyWatcher and Celestron generally offer very good quality. Orion usually offer the same as SkyWatcher but at inflated prices. My own opinion about Meade is that their mounts are often poorly designed and use cheap components. When Meade gets involved with a product, the product quality suffers! 

Stick with Skywatcher/Synta or Celestron and you'll not go far wrong.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Lozscott1971
      Hi there people, 
      Firstly can I say what a joy it has been reading and learning from some great posts by your community. 
      My question (as a complete newbie) has probably been asked and answered many times before but some posts are quite old so I hope that you don't mind me re-asking in case there are more upto date answers.
      Ok, I am looking at purchasing the SkyWatcher heritage 130p as I want a portable telescope to take to South Africa with me and after reading the forums it seems like a good option. I will be there for a few months including being next to the Kruger National Park where light pollution will be at an absolute minimum so I am hoping for good results . 
      I have read that a 150mm would obviously be preferable but is there one that is portable  ?? I carry very little luggage so I can accommodate a reasonable size perhaps upto around 10 kilos or so if such a scope exists and would fit into a case that can go into cargo or would this be a no-no ?
      If there are any options please can someone advise. 
      If I do end up with the 130p then I will have a budget of upto £150 to get any additional equipment (ie :- eyepieces) that may be required or would I be better of spending £300(approx) on a different scope with little to no budget for extras ? My intention initially and perhaps ultimately with a travel-scope would be observing the planets only and would obviously like as much planetary detail as feasibly possible but I certainly don't expect Hubble like images !
      I have intentions of purchasing a larger scope at a later date for home use so it really is just about a portable telescope at this stage. 
      Can I say many thanks already in anticipation of some quality feedback from you lovely people !!
      Laurence 
    • By Michael Hogan
      Hello new to this forum i have a CEM-120 mount and Ipolar camera i have it polar aligned but the it wont go to objects
      only a few i think its the UTC what is the correct UTC for Dublin Ireland is it the same as England UTC +60 i miss the simple
      All-Star Alignment from Celestron only thing i dislike about my mount is Ioptron software


    • By Astrofriend
      Hi,
      I spend a day here to analyze my master flats and what vignetting I have on my lenses and telescopes. It's very simple done but still interesting to set figures on it.
       
      It's done on a full frame camera and I use the values from the center and the corner of the sensor. The corner is 22 mm of from the center on a full frame sensor. I never liked to have strong vignetting in my optics, and in the future I want to go for bigger size than full frame.
       
      I have put together a page over the vignetting I got:
      http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/projects/project-different-lenses-vignetting/01-different-lenses-vignetting.html
       
      Maybe interesting for some of you to have a look at.
       
      My telescope shall handle a medium format sensor of the size 48 x 36 mm with the setup I have now. My medium format optics already do it. Just missing the medium format camera.
       
      /Lars
    • By Joaquim Q
      Hi, i..m on Stargazers Lounge for long time ago, but now i have a new scope at last!!! The scope is a Skywatcher classic200p dobsonian, and i received it just one month ago. I.m really happy with it. For now, i.m using the stock eyepieces that come with the scope, a 25mm and 10mm super plossl 52. Yesterday i was received a Celestron Omni barlow, and that expands my magnification range. I posted some pics with my set. 
      Congratulations to Stargazers lounge team, this is one of the best sites to learn about astronomy and equipment. 
      Besf regards to everybody 




    • By Kronos831
      So, i have settled between 2 eyepieces for my scopes.
      The explore scientific 6,5 mm 52degree 
       
      and the Skywatcher UWA Planetary 6mm
       
      I have read that the explore scientific gives better contrast and views.
      The explore scientific will give me 184x and barlowed 369x So should i trade less magnification for more detail?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.