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.

  • Announcements

    sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_rgb.jpg.9467c4d39b22ba8239e1b5ad252fcee2.jpg

Mark at Beaufort

Observing session with Skywatcher Heritage 130P

Recommended Posts

Littleguy80    1,041
27 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

 

Hope you don't mind the question. Are we saying one is better than the other because of focal length ,or is the one better than the other due to a different primary ,parabolic. If you could explain which is better, and the reason behind this as a 130 v  130 . Does the little heritage give way to the the bigger brother when push comes to shove as it's compact size comes at a cost in performance?

 

 

The parabolic mirror is the thing that makes the difference. The Heritage 130 definitely has the edge on my scope. Here’s the SkyWatcher blurb on the parabolic mirror:

 feature premium-quality Parabolic Primary Mirrors, normally found in larger more expensive telescopes, to eliminate spherical aberrations, producing even sharper, higher-contrast images which are full of detail. A parabolic or more accurately a "paraboloidal" mirror, is ground to a shape which brings all incoming light rays to a perfect focus, on axis. In addition they feature 0.5mm Ultra-Thin secondary mirror supports, to reduce diffraction spikes and light loss.”

Edited by Littleguy80
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stub Mandrel    5,857

The longer the FL and smaller the aperture, the less the aberration caused  by a circular rather than parabolic mirror,  so your scope is probably not much inferior to a parabolic one.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Littleguy80    1,041
11 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

The longer the FL and smaller the aperture, the less the aberration caused  by a circular rather than parabolic mirror,  so your scope is probably not much inferior to a parabolic one.

Thank you. That’s interesting to know. I’ve often looked back and wished I’d gone for the 130p or Heritage 130. I feel a little bit better about that now :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jetstream    4,165
2 hours ago, Littleguy80 said:

The ES68 needs the Neodymium filter to get the best results with the moon. The orthos do well without. There's a lot more fine detail visible once you add the filter to the ES68. I guess this would be, at least partly, down to less light and therefore less light scatter? What are tell tale signs you look for when identifying light scatter? I should have an opportunity to test on the moon tonight so can try and get you a better answer :) 

I like to approach the bright side of the moon and watch to see any field lightening before it comes into view. Also, a really widefield full view of the moon will show the light blown all over with scatter.

Do you always observe the terminator? The ES 24/68mm should show more along the terminator with out a filter ( I have a NEO too) IMHO, unless the filter is reducing a pile of visible scatter... My 18ES 82 is fine with no filter (other scopes/2" EP).

Eagerly waiting your report!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark at Beaufort    2,630

Gerry here is my challenge report. Really good sky, no lights or pollution. Decided to wear my observing hood to go really dark. Before setting out I studied the area via my Interstellarum  deep sky atlas which gives a very large detailed view of M45 and the Merope Nebula. Used just the ES68 24mm EP. Did I see it? - yes  I think I got it - certainly something there exactly in line with the map. I don't think it was wishful thinking. I did go to other delights after the Merope Nebula - will write up another report.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Littleguy80    1,041
5 hours ago, jetstream said:

I like to approach the bright side of the moon and watch to see any field lightening before it comes into view. Also, a really widefield full view of the moon will show the light blown all over with scatter.

Do you always observe the terminator? The ES 24/68mm should show more along the terminator with out a filter ( I have a NEO too) IMHO, unless the filter is reducing a pile of visible scatter... My 18ES 82 is fine with no filter (other scopes/2" EP).

Eagerly waiting your report!

Just back inside and warming my toes after a great open cluster session and some eyepiece testing on the moon. As soon as I looked at the moon through the ES I said “wow”! Lovely sharp image with lots of detail. The terminator showed the ripple of atmosphere. I then went to the 5mm BGO another big “wow” moment. Incredible amounts of detail. Followed the full perimeter of the moon. Similar ripple from atmosphere but nice dark sky surrounding the moon. I didn’t feel like the quality varied noticeably between the two views. I took a picture using my phone through the ES. There’s no processing on the image. I just set the exposure low to bring out as much detail as possible. 

18F356C3-A439-4FF3-8979-9DE98B1B9BCB.thumb.jpeg.7b47066ddeb1a2c227a2bf72b937cd47.jpeg

Tonight’s little experiment has made me realise that I’ve neglected the moon. I do have the “21st century atlas of the moon” book on my Santa wish list. I’m really looking forward to some lunar sessions after this :) 

Anyway, I hope that’s helpful, Gerry! Perhaps a more experienced eye would have picked out more issues with the ES vs BGO but I personally thought it held up remarkably well!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×