Skywatcher 120 ED PRO Triplet v Tele Vue NP127is

[mikeDnight]

The SW ED 120 will give finer, more subtle planetary views than the TV, and will take higher powers well. Unless wide flat field is an absolute must, I'd go for the SW, which will also give a view more akin to fluorite than the TV will. I spent £3,100 on an NP101 nine years ago thinking it would be the perfect combination of rich field/planetary scope in a portable package. I kept it for a year then got rid of it. It couldn't compete visually with the SW ED either in clarity or power range. As regards build quality, the SW's are very well made, as are all the Japanese refractors. I wouldn't give any credence to the claim that Japanese scopes are thin and weak - they are very well made! 

[25585]

I have wide field scopes already so long fl is fine, especially as most of my eps are long fl also - biggest are 2 inch fit.

Triplet v Doublet? Triplet is more expensive, takes longer to cool down, heavier.  Doublet is cheaper but less good focuser, less robust, lighter. 

Use visual only at present. Would my Skytee 2 on SW tripod (for EQ5) take either? 

[John]

Are we talking about doublet vis triplet 120mm or some other comparison now ?

The TV 127is is a quad petzval.

[25585]

21 hours ago, John said:

Are we talking about doublet vis triplet 120mm or some other comparison now ?

The TV 127is is a quad petzval.

Sorry for confusion. Based on what has been said, either doublet or triplet look worthy rivals to the 127. Triplet is slightly shorter fl and f ratio to doublet 840mm f7 to 900mm f7.5.

Perhaps the 130 Esprit triplet is a better match for NP127?

[John]

2 hours ago, 25585 said:

...Perhaps the 130 Esprit triplet is a better match for NP127?

I think thats probably the case but the Esprits go from 120 to 150.