Time for a change?

[lancman]

Hello, I currently have a skyliner 200p which I have enjoyed but I feel its a bit big and cumbersome for me. So my question is what next, I fancy a goto scope just for the convenience and easy of use. I have about 400 pounds to spend and enjoy looking at deep space objects and planets. I've been looking at nexstar 102 slt or maybe skywatcher skymax 127 , any recommendations would be greatly received. Thanks in advance.

[TSRobot]

My 130pds has fab reviews on sgl so thats why i bought it. It's easy to mount at only 4kg and has a great wide fov. I've had much bigger before and do not regret this as now i get it out even for 15mins. I don't use goto, but use a porta 2. Love it. Enjoy shopping ;-) 

[rwilkey]

Hi Lancman, there's quite a difference between those two scopes, the SLT being a rich-field scope, good for DSO's and the Skymax 127, good for planets and with a long f/ratio and narrow field of view, chalk and cheese realy, so a difficult choice.  Changing from a 200P, a rich-field scope I suspect the most satisfying views will come from the 127, the smaller aperture will be really noticeable after using the 200P, but at the end of the day it depends on what you think best.  I am not a lover of GOTO scopes I have to admit, in my opinion they are more trouble than they are worth.

[billyharris72]

I'd say both are a big step down in terms of what they will show, but if the Dob really is proving too cumbersome then make the trade - the scope you use is always better than the one you don't. As TSRobot suggested, I'd highly recommend the 130P (a little cheaper than the DS version if you are only doing visual). That will outperform the nexstar 102 by a long way, and will give a better field of view than the skymax (which is a good scope, but at its best on the moon and planets).

This would do it:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/az-goto/skywatcher-explorer-130p-synscan-az-goto.html

Billy.

[billyharris72]

2 minutes ago, rwilkey said:

I am not a lover of GOTO scopes I have to admit, in my opinion they are more trouble than they are worth.

I'd second this! I do use them if I'm doing imaging, or if I am really struggling to find / identify an object, but for everyday visual use I avoid goto like the plague.

[John]

Your challenge is that the Skyliner 200P is a very good scope indeed for observing deep sky objects and the planets. A £400 GOTO scope will be much less capable in terms of the views it gives even if the GOTO function does point conveniently find the targets to point the scope at. Once the scope is on target the experience at the eyepiece is inevitably going to be less satisfying that the 200P gives. 

 

 

[Cosmic Geoff]

For deep space objects (galaxies, star clusters, planetary nebulae etc) it has to be said that a 127mm scope will be nothing like as impressive as a 203mm - this is exactly the area in which the larger aperture scores. For planets though you may not notice a lot of difference. As for GoTo, it is very useful (near essential) for finding faint DSO's but not needed for the brighter planets. (But if you want to find faint planets and asteroids, or view Venus and Mercury in daylight, you will appreciate the GoTo)

If you can increase your budget you might be most satisfied with a 8" SCT on a alt-azimuth GoTo mount - it will be much more manageable than the Skyliner, but have the same aperture +GoTo. Used examples can be found from about £700.

[Nyctimene]

It's not quite clear to me - do you want to change your scope, i.e. sell the 8", or just add another one for reasons of convenience (as your mentioning of the budget suggests)? As an add-on, a 4" or 5" with longer focal length would be ok, IMO. But I'd be very apprehensive to swap the scope. I made this mistake four decades ago - handing back a  borrowed  DIY 9" 3000 mmf Cassegrain on an AltAz mount, that gave me the first view on DSO's and excellent pictures of the moon. I bought instead a first class 6" f/6 Newton from the renowned German maker Wachter (on an excellent GEM), and although this scope delivered many good views, I could not get the  bright and crisp pictures of the 9" out of my mind. I've learnt from this, and, since then, always upgraded in apertures (but, of course, keeping all my scopes; so I can choose, which one will be my "midnight mistress" tonight.... ;-)).

Stephan

[scarp15]

Keep the dob and invest in a good pair of binoculars.

[Stu]

There is a handy bundle with the AZGTi mount too which might be worth considering:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-az-gti-wifi/sky-watcher-explorer-130ps-az-gti.html

This only has a 1.25" focuser, for a bit over budget you could get a 130PDS and the AZGTI. 

[nightfisher]

I went with a 127 Maksutov on a goto mount and in general i have found it a very good set up but like all the other replies, dropping from a 200 to a 127 will leave some of the views lacking 

[alanjgreen]

Lancman,

If you want to buy new then this 6” reflector is about as big as you can get within budget

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/sky-watcher-star-discovery-150p.html

you just need to buy a decent power tank for it, don’t go for batteries as they make the scope behave odd when the power is not constant, plus batteries don’t last long.

Over budget, there is the celestron nexstar se 6”

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/se-series/celestron-nexstar-6se.html

but then you also need the same power tank and also a dew shield!

unfortunately, the drop from 8” to 6” will be noticeable at the eyepiece, but as someone else said, “if it gets you using the scope!”

Is there a second hand market in Cyprus ? as your best bet would be a second hand 8” SCT. Small, compact and with goto. This would match your old dob for views. Alas, even second hand will be over budget.

Alan

[TSRobot]

Have just dropped from an 8inch sct to a 5inch newt now I use it, use it, use it. In fact just used after getting my 4yr old to bed at 7pm for 20mins then putting it away and cooking dins for my better half who got home at 8.10pm. So quick to get out and put away when it's not a goto then it gets used loads and frequent use makes my grey matter my goto instead. After spending a week this summer at ha dark site I realised aperture is second to location for me.

[MBJ]

ive had both the 200p and a skymax 127....both goto for visual use.

never had a problem with either.

i dont know why anyone would say avoid goto for visual as it is a lot better than trying to follow an object manually.

people have different opinions on these things but from my personal experience i wouldnt use a telescope now for visual without goto.

 

as for the views....the 200p gives a nice bright wide view and although the view through the skymax 127 is smaller and a tad darker,with the aid of a reducer you can open the fov up slightly.

i loved both of these scopes and have since moved onto an 8" sct. 

[swamp thing]

On 10/25/2017 at 21:18, TSRobot said:

After spending a week this summer at ha dark site I realised aperture is second to location for me.

Excellent realisation. 

Now, if you can combine both............  

[John]

On 26/10/2017 at 15:56, MBJ said:

....i dont know why anyone would say avoid goto for visual as it is a lot better than trying to follow an object manually.....

people have different opinions on these things but from my personal experience i wouldnt use a telescope now for visual without goto....

 

 

My point was that a £400 budget will limit the amount of aperture you can get attached to the GOTO mount. Nothing wrong with GOTO per se. Very useful for finding fainter deep sky objects but if the attached scope has a small aperture then the views will be lacklustre, or practically invisible.

The magnifications that are most often used to view deep sky objects (low or medium magnfications) make the tracking feature less critical for viewing IMHO.

 

 

[Charic]

On 24/10/2017 at 09:46, lancman said:

Hello, I currently have a skyliner 200p which I have enjoyed but I feel its a bit big and cumbersome for me. So my question is what next, I fancy a goto scope just for the convenience and easy of use.

Do you have the 200P  f/5 Explorer or the 200P  f/6 Skyliner?

If its the Skyliner, then wanting a GoTo for convenience and ease of use does not click with me?  simply the Skyliner can't get any easier to operate, but size and weight can be an issue.
A GoTo, will go no-where, unless correctly setup! I suppose tracking is convenient (essential for photography) but this still requires electronics and careful set up, unlike the Skyliner. 

All said, I would like to try a GoTo system supporting an ED80 - ED120 sized scope, for astro-photography !

[Charic]

On 26/10/2017 at 15:56, MBJ said:

i dont know why anyone would say avoid goto for visual as it is a lot better than trying to follow an object manually.

Until folk have tried something  for themselves, they just won't/don't know what to expect.

My first mount was a GEM and I just found the constant setting changes  to be a burden, and quickly adopted the Dobsonian.
I'm still not sure having something to track my target for visual use would be of any benefit, and I'm so adept at manual tracking, its second nature, and can keep the target on axis effortlessly. For the  tracking system to work properly, it still  needs careful set up, then once in motion, its totally hands free apart from pushing some buttons on a controller. That's fine for delicate work, as in astrophotography, but I feel for me needs, unnecessary  just for visual use.

As you say, "people have different opinions",  each to their own!

[LukeSkywatcher]

Second hand 8se?.

[Tim]

On 25/10/2017 at 21:18, TSRobot said:

After spending a week this summer at ha dark site I realised aperture is second to location for me.

Boom! There's the truth! 

Especially given your postcode, which is where I used to live (Prince of Wales Rd)

[LukeSkywatcher]

I was once at at dark site. The sky was so dark and full of stars and planets................i could not even pick out Orion.

[Louis D]

On 10/26/2017 at 09:56, MBJ said:

i dont know why anyone would say avoid goto for visual as it is a lot better than trying to follow an object manually.

For the same reason I rarely align my DSCs.  I have to be able to see two bright stars to polar align.  This wasn't an issue 20 years ago when the trees in my back yard were 6' tall.  Now they're 30' tall and broad.  My north and east views are all but blotted out and my southerly views are about 30 degrees wide, so I get at most 2 hours on particular targets (west has always been blocked by the house, but that's also the direction of city center, so no big loss).  Also, if I move my scope to get a better view of something; boom, I've got to realign again.  If all you want is tracking, you can go with an equatorial platform.  Rough polar alignment will get you minutes of tracking at a time.

Goto makes perfect sense in an observatory situation.  Perhaps once I get that retirement property in the New Mexico mountains at 9000' I'll go that route.

[Louis D]

As for the original topic, I also have an 8" Dob and wanted something totally different to refresh my interest in astronomy.  I went with a 72mm ED refractor and later a 127mm Mak, both mounted on an alt-az DSV-2B mount.  It's quick and easy to setup, doesn't strain my aging back to carry it out, and opens up larger and different targets that were unsuitable for the 8" Dob.

[JOC]

I spoke to someone with a 6" Mak at the weekend and told him about that great night I had recently when I saw the ring nebula, the dumbbell nebula, Andromeda, the double double, the blue snowball etc.  He said that he had never got close to seeing any of those and was really quite envious.  I would def. make sure that you def. want to go down in aperture.  FWIW I like the idea of getting a pair of binoculars and keeping your telescope as given above.  Or is there any way you could get a really good cover/housing for the Dob (I assume its a Dob you have the 200P on?) and leave it set up outside.  I bet for £400 you could produce a keep it set up outside solution.  I'm even thinking a water but with the top cut off inverted over it and some dehumidifying tech., and maybe the telescope on some paving slabs or a bit of concrete to lift it off of the ground.

[Stu]

22 minutes ago, JOC said:

He said that he had never got close to seeing any of those and was really quite envious. 

I don't disagree that going down in aperture will result in reduced brightness of objects (ok ok, grossly over simplified but you know what I mean!  ), but a 6" Mak is more than capable of showing those objects so in that case it seems more likely observer experience/skill is in play than the scope size. Narrow fov may well contribute too.