SW Skymax 150 - First Light, First Thoughts

[iPeace]

The Story So Far

* I have been in this business for just under two years.

* I'm a strictly manual, alt-az, wide field, star-hopping sort of geezer. I do like my lunar.

* I have a modest herd of small (immodest) fracs, and love them for reasons I have ranted about elsewhere.

* I tried a 120ED and loved the views, but decided its physical dimensions were not suitable for me at the time - just a bit too long.

* I tried a 102 Mak and liked the form factor, but it wasn't giving me any more than the TV-85 on Moon or planets.

* I've never tried a newt (dob or otherwise) or SCT, and am not (yet?) ready to commit to collimation duties and/or storage space requirements.

* I still want more oomph for those perfect residential (as in: at home at a permanent star base) lunar occasions - and just to see what aperture will do for a few planets.

* I swerved from the 180 to the 150 Mak at the very last moment in order to err on the side of caution and not overcook things; I'm prepared to upgrade in the future if that seems worthwhile.

Preparation

I've done the homework and had the gear shipped in. Beefy tripod, dew shield, heater tape, SCT focuser, airtight case, desiccant canisters. Reserved corner in unheated shed. If this doesn't work out, it's not for lack of trying.

First Light

Last Saturday night held the promise of a few hours' continuous clear sky, a most welcome break from the solid cloud cover delivered with the scope. To be clear, this scope is primarily - if not almost exclusively - meant (by me) for observing the Moon - and that's what it will have to excel at if it's going to continue living in my unheated shed with its desiccant canister friends. The Moon was out of reach, so it was more of a getting-to-know-you occasion, just to see what it could possibly do. I mounted it on the AZ8 opposite the Borg 71FL f/5.6 frac, not for comparison but for support as a super-finder. More on that later. The Mak works perfectly on this mount - I'm already convinced the AZ8 will carry a 180 with no problem.

Fit and Finish

Solid rather than refined, the build quality instills confidence. The SkyWatcher brand has apparently applied a couple of small changes to the livery; a metallic green dovetail and subtle green stripes on the tube nicely match the lettering on the eyepieces. 

Fit? Well, the dew shield doesn't. Not properly, at least. It's a commercial job, lovely, just as bendy as it has to be but no more, with flocking and very good velcro - but its diameter is just not large enough to properly fit over the front of the Skymax 150 - even though it's so advertised. I can *just* get the very edges of the velcro to connect and hold, so it was usable in this particular pinch, but it's not what one wants to work with on a regular basis. Rather than try and source a larger one - and somehow make that fit - I've opted to make my own, so camping mat is incoming. To be continued.

Conversely, the dew tape is indeed long enough to comfortably get 'round the tube, even including a bit of dovetail. Nice quality, seems to work.

The scope came with a straight-through finder which seems nice enough, but not really my thing. The finder shoe is a basic, single-screw affair, serviceable but possibly up for replacement (I have a double-screw Baader somewhere in the spares box). I was interested in how the Skymax could possibly be used in a stand-alone configuration - without a frac as a super-finder - so I dug out a bracket that would hold both an RDF and a RACI to provide the much-lauded two-stage targeting workflow. As stated above, more on this later.

The primary focuser is solid and works well, but even though I knew this I have added a Baader Diamond Steeltrack SCT focuser to give the scope every chance of success. It cannot be easily rotated - if I was intent on using the scope in varying orientations, I might opt for a Moonlite - but it's otherwise excellent. Very sturdy, I can imagine sticking a heavy camera on it with confidence - not really my thing, but for what it's worth. I really like it, and actually prefer it in use to the Moonlite I had on the 120ED - but tastes will vary. Slowly turning the large knob, I can feel the focuser gently moving from one "notch" to another - a secure feeling - while the small knob provides very smooth fine tuning, as if somehow between the "notches", but continuous as if the "notches" aren't there. Not quite sure how Baader has achieved this, but it's a very nice, dependable, heavy-duty feel.

Finding Stuff

My usual observing routine involves pointing a Red Dot at the sky and, if necessary, star-hopping from there. That's what a frac with widefield capability does. It's also what this Mak doesn't do as well for me. Even with the two-stage combination of RDF and RACI and the widest-field eyepiece I could provide, I concluded that this would take a bit of practice - and that I was possibly spoilt beyond redemption in any case. For my purposes, it hardly matters - I will most likely only be using it on a dual-scope mount, and the Moon is the one target which I can probably get in view without any finder support.  Suffice to say that for the rest of the session, the Borg 71FL happily pulled finder duty. Bjorn doesn't seem to mind the menial stuff.

The Dews

None. Either the conditions weren't con-dew-sive - I suspect this is true, for none of the myriad of unheated finders fogged up - or the dew shield / heater tape combination worked as it should. I am confident we will be able to handle dew and will be fully sorted when the DIY shield is finished.

The Views

Straight from the unheated shed, there seemed to be no cooling time necessary - but I must be careful on this point, as I'm not sure what the views through an insufficiently cooled Mak look like. Perhaps you know it when you see it.

Deep Sky

This is not a frac; I was careful not to expect it to be one. Even at minimal magnification, the stellar view doesn't equal the magic of a good refractor - but it's pretty good. Its obvious power lies in the combination of aperture and focal length, or larger exit pupil at higher magnifications (hope this isn't nonsense - I've tried to pay attention to what you've all tried to teach me, honest). So, without referring to a comparison chart (I wasn't in the mood), I tried to see how the view differed from that which I usually get at comparable magnification using my refractors. This is something that requires some getting used to - a 24mm Panoptic now gives the same magnification as would otherwise a 9mm or even a 5mm Nagler (depending on the frac). And here's where it gets interesting: with the Mak, while the higher magnification does dim the image (as expected), there's still a lot more visible at that power. And this is indeed what I experienced; I could get up close and personal with old favorites like the Messier Thirty-Somethings in Gemini and Auriga and resolve more individual stars - just not with quite the same magic diamonds-on-velvet effect as when observing with lower power with a frac (while seeing fewer individual stars). For open clusters, the scale and density of the target seems to determine just how much more enjoyment this provides. It didn't really enhance my appreciation of the Pleiades (which doesn't fit in the view anyway) or of the Owl Cluster, but picking more detail out of the individual bits in the Double Cluster was fun. Same deal for Andromeda and Bode's fuzzies - more photons seem to make it all the way at higher mags. I know the Maks are lauded for their views of globulars - and I will be sure to try that in the future, as none were on show. But the biggest revelation was Orion - the most nebulosity I've ever seen there. I couldn't get more than four stars in the trap, though - but I wasn't very patient, either and this is not a prime observing location for that sort of thing.

Double Stars

With the 24mm Panoptic, Castor is delivered pre-split - which is good, of course. The view will take some getting used to; being used to fracs, it's hard to tell just how sharp I can get stars to appear and the longer focal length means that the focus feedback isn't as instantaneous. Getting to know when the focus is as good as it will get - certainly when focusing on stars - will take some practice.

Planets

My favourites, Jupiter and Saturn, were out of reach, as was Mars. But one I hadn't ever seen yet was on display: Uranus. I knew better than to expect a lot, but what the Herschel, the Mak is supposed to be a "planet killer", so it was worth a try. Easily found with Bjorn's help, there it was, sure enough, a minute blue dot. I didn't take the time to see what the Borg could do with it, but the Mak was just able to show me that it was, after all, not a blue star, but a very tiny blue disk. Not impressive in the outreach category, but cool for us geezers.

So...

I (still) really like the form factor and the additional focuser is great. I really enjoy using the scope. The views of DSOs are interesting and revealing - but currently, while they do impress me, they don't quite inspire me as do wider-field views with a good frac. Fuzzies are easier to see and see more of - but they're still faint. Picking apart a dense cluster can be rewarding - especially if one is inclined to study and sketch. At the moment, I can't imagine this 150 Mak as my only scope. It just works at a different level, one I do enjoy dipping into, but not exclusively. I can certainly see plenty with it, but can understand why Maks - even big ones - aren't rated as DSO scopes (as stated, I can't comment on newts or SCTs). I can imagine that it will grow on me with further use and become more satisfying as I get to see stuff I couldn't previously see at all.

But for me, this is all really beside the point. The 150 Mak is meant to be(come) my Big Lunar Scope, so how happy I am to be with it is TBD. At best, it will completely outclass the TV-85 on Luna - and that's what I hope for, but I'm cautious. Somewhat less spectacularly, I'm prepared for it to show me more lunar detail but a little less crisp than a good frac, in which case it may or may not be worth keeping. If it shows me lunar details I wouldn't otherwise see at all, but with an image that is a bit less pleasing, well...maybe this is the Big Compromise all of us geezers are up against. Almost two years in, I have to hit that bump sooner or later.

To be continued; bring on the Moon!

Thanks for reading.

 

[Stu]

Interesting commentary Mike, probably about how I feel about Maks too  

I look forward to the TV85 vs Mak on the Moon, as you say...bring it on!

[Stu]

By the way, I can't quite see but was the dew shield going around the dovetail too? You can get shield with a cutout to sit around the dovetail on Maks and SCTs, maybe this would help? It might also be neater to get a heated dewshield, no need for separate dew strip then.

[iPeace]

1 minute ago, Stu said:

By the way, I can't quite see but was the dew shield going around the dovetail too? You can get shield with a cutout to sit around the dovetail on Maks and SCTs, maybe this would help? It might also be neater to get a heated dewshield, no need for separate dew strip then.

The dew shield is only clinging to the front white ring on the tube, I suspect that ring holds the corrector plate? So it's not even wide enough to reach the dovetail. I agree a heated dewshield with dovetail cutout would be ace - if I'm not satisfied with camping mat, I'll have to bring the scope in to a local retailer to ensure proper fit. So tiresome, online retailers who specify something fits when they obviously have no clue...

[Stu]

Just now, iPeace said:

The dew shield is only clinging to the front white ring on the tube, I suspect that ring holds the corrector plate? So it's not even wide enough to reach the dovetail. I agree a heated dewshield with dovetail cutout would be ace - if I'm not satisfied with camping mat, I'll have to bring the scope in to a local retailer to ensure proper fit. So tiresome, online retailers who specify something fits when they obviously have no clue...

I contacted Astrozap directly just to check which one would fit my Tak. They asked me to measure the dewshield diameter and recommended the best one. The 150 Mak is a fairly common scope to need a dewshield for, so I'm sure they would know.

[John]

Nice, detailed and balanced review Mike - I look forward to your further thoughts on the 150 mak-cass in due course

[Alan White]

Nice interesting review in progress Mike, look forward to the Lunar comparison.
I have an ED80 and a 6" Newt so it has an interest to me also.

You have such a nice looking set up, that mount is wonderful, the tripod makes me woozy.
Now a dual scope set up, bring it on.

[JeremyS]

Just read this review Mike - you have done a great job in providing an objective report as possible. I am sure many people will find it useful when weighing up their next purchase.

Jeremy

[RT65CB-SWL]

Good down to earth and unbiased review/report. 

[Timebandit]

 

 

Nice initial impression?

 

I still get the sneaky feeling that that the Mak has still got some work to do to convert you from a frac.

Anyone who has looked through a good quality refractor never forgets the sharp crisp views a refractor can deliver. So I look forward to your future posts and first light on the Moon, to see if you can be converted from the frac pack ?

 

 

 

[Chris]

Firstly, I enjoy your writing style it's very enjoyable to read. Secondly, I think it might be a keeper when you get it on the Moon, fingers crossed you feel that way as you've obviously gone all in with the extras exploring this option.

Nice one Mike, I look forward to the next instalment  

[Astro Imp]

A Chris above, you have a very engaging style which makes your report fun to read while still getting the facts across.

As others I look forward to your lunar update.

Good luck.

 

[nightfisher]

Mike, great first impression, i like that your not pulling your punches here, I think you will be impressed with Lunar views, i honestly think the 150 pro outclass`s an ED120 on Luna, also keep in mind Maks are prone to poor seeing, on a really good night i think you will be very happy on all targets

[25585]

Impressive mount and tripod you have Mike! 

If you find you want to up-aperture, a 8 inch, 200mm SCT is still compact, still F10 but more aperture. 

[Stu]

10 minutes ago, 25585 said:

still F10 but more aperture. 

The Mak is f12, 1800mm focal length so not far off the f10 SCT at 2032mm.

[chiltonstar]

Great stuff, and nicely balanced. The lunar views will be interesting though, particularly wrt contrast.

My Astrozap dew shield, bought for my 180 Mak, didn't fit either - I've had to tape it with black tape.

Chris

[Mr niall]

Great report, sort of sums up how I felt when I moved from frac to Mak too. Good to know it’s not just me!

[iPeace]

2 hours ago, iPeace said:

So tiresome, online retailers who specify something fits when they obviously have no clue...

 

14 minutes ago, chiltonstar said:

My Astrozap dew shield, bought for my 180 Mak, didn't fit either - I've had to tape it with black tape.

I am happy to report that my ill-fitting dew shield issue was caused quite inadvertently - and it has been addressed most admirably by the retailer.

My "no clue" remark was heartfelt and in good faith - but obviously too hastily placed. Least said, soonest mended.

[Highburymark]

Great report Mike. I agree with nightfisher that this scope should certainly be capable of ED120-like views of the moon at equivalent magnifications (though it's easy to carried away with such a long focal length - the Mak may require its own eyepiece strategy - how about a 10mm ortho, 11mm TV plossl or 9mm TV Delite for super sharp lunar views at a sensible power level ?). Look forward to reading the next instalment.

[John]

I used to have a great Intes 152mm mak-newtonian which has a much smaller central obstruction than a mak-cassegrain. It and my ED120 ran pretty much neck and neck on the moon, planets and double stars with the additional 32mm of the MN pulling ahead on DSO's. It will be interesting to see how the Skywatcher 150 Mak-Cass compares with an ED120 but you need to put these things side by side on the same targets under the same conditions to get a real feel for it IMHO.

 

[iPeace]

1 minute ago, John said:

It will be interesting to see how the Skywatcher 150 Mak-Cass compares with an ED120 but you need to put these things side by side on the same targets under the same conditions to get a real feel for it IMHO.

Absolutely. To be clear, I won't be able to make this comparison and would feel the utmost reticence to give comparative comments based on memory of how the 120ED performed.

In my own case, it will be a side-by-side with the TV-85 which will determine the worthiness of the Skymax 150.

All I can confidently say re. the 120ED is that its performance in excess of that of the TV-85 wasn't enough to make me keep it - but such decisions are complex and I cannot speculate as to whether I would have kept the 120ED if it had the size, shape and weight of the Skymax 150.

[John]

2 minutes ago, iPeace said:

..... whether I would have kept the 120ED if it had the size, shape and weight of the Skymax 150.

For a 120mm F/7.5 refractor the ED120 is about as compact and portable as it gets. Sounds like you want mak-cass proportioned refractors ?

Hope the next stages of your MC 150 findings go well and I'll look forward to reading them

[Trikeflyer]

Good report, I don't fave a frac ( I know ?).  I do have a mak etx 125, which I use exclusively for lunar, planets and whiltelight solar. It performs well compared to my 12 and 8 inch dobs on these selective targets.  If you can, try and get a binoviewer for the mak and look at the moon through it.  It'll feel like you are there ?. Once you have seen the moon in the mak with a binoviewer, you will absolutely hype amazed.  One day I might own a frac and I'm sure that is just as impressive looking at the moon with binoviewers. 

Steve

[iPeace]

1 minute ago, John said:

For a 120mm F/7.5 refractor the ED120 is about as compact and portable as it gets.

Without any doubt. Anyone who passes one on, or passes one up, should do so in full knowledge of this fact. I certainly did.

4 minutes ago, John said:

Sounds like you want mak-cass proportioned refractors ?

Careful reading of my text hopefully belies this...

I'll settle for a Mak that out-performs the TV-85 on Luna. 

Good point though, and central to my particular quest. It's important to be honest with one's self on the subject of what works for you, no matter how good the views.

Aside, I had a good, honest run with the ED120 - maybe I wasn't doing it right? Perhaps I could have stripped it right down to absolute minimum weight, lightweight diagonal and eyepieces (such as I use now) and taken it as far as possible before deciding to pass it on. At the time, the decision was good and helped move things along.

Who knows what I'll end up with? Whatever works, eventually. I was once offered a time share in the Hubble - but I failed to convince anyone that it was tragically under-mounted.

[scarp15]

Very interesting initial review Mike and look forward to follow-up comparative accounts, particularly as I have quite recently begun Lunar observing with a TV-85, highly impressive and engaging with a 4mm DeLite (has got me curious for a 3mm).