Yet another 'choice between' thread

[DanC1982]

Hey gents.

 

Im looking at getting into the hobby and after a lot of research i have narrowed it down to two.

The

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html

 

And the

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes/skywatcher-skyhawk-1145p.html

 

I understand the flextube is very popular in some of these threads but the 1145p is on my same budget.

 

Your thoughts and ideas on these two are greatly appreciated.

[kev100]

Hi,

Are you planning on doing any astrophotography (AP) with the scope? The Skyhawk comes on an EQ mount, which isn't necessary, and can be a bit of a hassle for purely visual observing. It's not really that good for AP either, though, as it doesn't seem to have drive motors. 

If you just want something that's easy and quick to set up, purely for visual, then go for the heritage.

Kev

[DanC1982]

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

 

For the moment i would just like to use it for looking into the heavens with the possibility of upgrading a couple of bits if needed.

If it takes of then a more serious purchase would be made.

[ronin]

Where do you live? Just it is often best to dig out a localish club or two and pay them a visit and see what is being used. Often it is different to what is spoken about, sometimes 100% different as I found out one day.

Personally I am not a fan of either of the two listed, apologies for that. The table top item sounds small and easy but you need a table to use it on and so the portability suddenly decreases. Not sure of the adjustments available either.

The 114P is fast and may be a little too critical of collimation, it is f/4.4 and at that ratio is I suggest a bit too much. The 114 as FLO mentions in the description has a barlow in the focuser and so that is not a great idea. Principle is reasonable but the implimentation lets it down.

Not being a fan of dobsonians but the 150P dobsonian is going to be a better option but £60 more so not a small increase in cost. And the scope is the start as next (even next day) you will want or need an additional eyepiece or two or three or four or (in my case) six as I biught the BST set. Back to the 114P at f/4.4 getting eyepieces to operate well will also be tricky, and I doubt you fancy spending £250 on a single Delite eyepiece. The f number is significant.

Everything is visual and visual only, if there are and thoughts lurking around of putting a DSLR and showing the world how poor Hubble is at getting images then stop and think again. And yes it happens 80% of the time.

[happy-kat]

I'd pick the heritage it has a bigger mirror and it is compact and flexible. At a later date just the telescope can be put on a tripod including a decent photo tripod with an adapter. I use mine with it on an upturned bucket and I'm on a garden chair.

That 1145p doesn't have a Barlow in the focuser as the focal length is only 500, watch out for the other very similar one that has a focal length of 1000 but is in a tube 500 long that will have a barlow = best chose another.

[kev100]

Whilst I agree with everything Ronin says, apart for the 'not being a fan of dobsonians' bit, if you're observing form the back garden, and if you have, say, a patio table/bench, and if you just want something to look through and begin learning your way around the skies, then a small dob is a very good idea. You definitely don't need an EQ mount, and the heritage will let you see a lot of what's on offer. A lot of people do recommend them. If you can afford it, though, and can store and transport a larger scope, than the 150 dob is definitely a better scope than the heritage, and should do you for a few years before the desire to upgrade kicks in.

One thing I've learned in this hobby is that there's no such thing as the scope. Tastes change, and circumstances change, and it's often the case that you need to buy something and get started before you can understand what you should have bought. The thing is to get started, and enjoy the journey.

[brantuk]

The 130p, being slightly larger aperture, will allow you to see deeper into space so you'll be able to view more objects. That said however, they are both regarded as small aperture beginner scopes and best views will be of the brighter objects. The dob is quick and easy to set up and use and light 'n' easy to transport if you find a darker area to observe from. You will have to nudge it up/down and left/right to track objects.

The 114p is on an eq mount - so you'll need to learn how to do a rough polar alignment which, once done, allows you to track mostly by twisting the flexi cable knob in one axis only. You will only need an occasional tweak of the other axis knob. It takes a little longer to put the tripod, head, and scope together - but we're only talking around 10 mins set up time, give or take a few. And as pointed out above, you'll want to be a little more choosy with add on eyepieces.

Not a lot in it really despite being fairly different mounts - but for a total newbie I'd favour the 130p dob for an easy going intro to the hobby. Hth

[DanC1982]

Thanks guys, your replies are invaluable.

[Astro Imp]

41 minutes ago, kev100 said:

One thing I've learned in this hobby is that there's no such thing as the scope. Tastes change, and circumstances change, and it's often the case that you need to buy something and get started before you can understand what you should have bought. The thing is to get started, and enjoy the journey.

All newcomers should keep this in mind. Reading what others use is all well and good but it's not until you get out with your own gear and get some experience that your in a position to make an informed decision.

[Ben the Ignorant]

I own a 130mm (f/7) newtonian, and I have used 114mm, 150mm and larger scopes of that type. For mostly looking at the brighter, easier stuff, a 130mm is quite gratifying, but more of the fainter stuff requires a 150mm for me. Thus I would not advise someone to get a 114/115mm, that aperture is almost toyish for a reflector. Get the 130 that costs nearly the same, anyway, plus it's easier to use.