SW Skymax 150 - First Light, First Thoughts

[iPeace]

3 hours ago, Stu said:

I know there was a lot of tongue in cheek going on there, but don't dismiss other scope types.

Certainly not! I realize such a dismissal could be assumed to be implied but that certainly wasn't my point. I probably won't be satisfied until I've seen for myself what each type does.

[nightfisher]

Excellent, so glad to read this latest instalment, Maks do seem to be subject to seeing conditions, i had a nice )) OMC140 that most of the time gave very average views, but when the conditions where good so was the scope, all down to the huge focal length, I think if you get a really good night with the Luna disk at around 50% and get a few miles out into the countryside the Mak will really sing

[Alan White]

This thread just gets more interesting each visit.

I do think Stanley is safe, he has been too much a part of your journey to date to go. Something about a 80mm that is pleasing.

As for the 150 Mak, I can see this is a transitory scope and you will go on quite some journey yet to find out for yourself what you like and don’t like. The perceived image that you see is the real one that keep or shift decisions are made upon, not others views or opinions, otherwise we would all have very similar kit.

I do await your trial Tak arriving though.......... he he he

[Stu]

7 hours ago, iPeace said:

I would spend a few moments counting pinhole craters and wrinkles adjacent to the larger features, then switch over to see if they were still there; I finally concluded that there was nothing I could see through the one that I could not see through the other

School report: Mr Mike Ipeace, Year 1

Subject: Telescope evaluation

Mark: B-

Comments: Must try harder! 

 

Couldn't resist, sorry Mike , your reports have been very interesting and informative. Results not totally surprising to me.

The simple fact is that there ARE features that will be visible in one and not the other. Try to seek out some of the features mentioned and hopefully you will see.

This may, of course, be irrelevant to whether the scope is 'better' or not in your eyes. If your enjoyment is simply from viewing the moon at different phases, taking in the detail but not being interested in specifically identifying detail then the TV85 will keep you happy. If you want to push for specific objects, perhaps complete the Lunar 100, then you will need a larger aperture to give you the required resolution to see the harder ones easily. The TV85 might show you the central rille in the Alpine Valley or Hadley Rille for example but you would likely need excellent conditions to achieve this. A larger scope should have a bit more performance in hand so would make life easier.

Try my example and see if you can see the crater Ruth in either scope. I will give it another go soon in the 100mm.

[iPeace]

5 minutes ago, Stu said:

Subject: Telescope evaluation

Mark: B-

Comments: Must try harder!

Profound point here - I may not yet be ready to reliably provide evaluation, as there is so much to look at without wondering about what I'm not seeing. Good nights are just too few not to be spent in full indulgence.

So the Mak may be able to show me more, but only if I look for it...sure, I can go along with that.

I may not currently need a Big Lunar Scope at all, or ever, if I'm not ready to seek out features I know to be there, but cannot see with the TV-85.

I didn't mention it in my notes, but I was using a digital lunar map on a tablet computer to indicate what was there to be seen. Such a map has its own limited resolution, of course, and specific challenges may or may not be marked on it (again, depending on what you're looking for) but it gives a clear picture not subject to seeing conditions.

So I wasn't merely comparing views, I was actually using the map to see whether specific details would show up. In the area I had targeted, I couldn't find any specific feature that I could see in one scope but not in the other. I was indeed well below the threshold of my own interest, truly past 'who cares' but continuing in the interest of comparison.

I'm sure it takes time to gain appreciation past a certain level.

[Timebandit]

 

Round 4

Stanley is still holding in there I see?

Maybe you are just a frac man at heart. The quality frac looks at the target?, and not a reflection of the target. A quality frac produces a HD ,sharp crisp view that is so life like that even a good newt or Mak with extra aperture does not seem to quiet replicate IMO.  

I keep the refractor around as I love the HD sharp views it gives on the target. But my larger aperture newt will tease out more detail, due to its larger aperture being able to gather in far more light and it's combined with great optics, but the view in the newt reflector is not so pleasing to the eye as the refractor. The refractor view may not show as much detail as the larger newt , but the views in the refractor are so alive .  

All our eyes are different and we all have our own subjective opinions. But I keep the refractor for its sharp ,crisp life like view and the newt for its extra light gathering ability that can tease out more details, even though these details are not necessarily as sharp and crisp as a overall refractor view.

 

Looking forward to round 5 , 6 ,7 , and I think a newt 6" will be appearing soon . And this could then be a 3 way competition. Going to get a lot more interesting I think?

 

 

   

 

[scarp15]

As above really, perhaps if you become involved in a dedicated Lunar quest, such as in the pursuit of the Lunar 100, to accrue as much visual information towards this aim, larger aperture i.e. 8" F6 dob or similar may be the required tool. In terms of Lunar observing / appreciation, celebrating a Lunar phase, when it is possible to go observing and to gain in knowledge and a degree of understanding (with acknowledging observational features referencing a moon atlas) for the topography presentable, a small refractor is very satisfying.   

[iPeace]

1 hour ago, Alan White said:

I do await your trial Tak arriving though.......... he he he

Far more interesting to not admit that particular elephant to the room.

Stanley is too good to ever replace, and I really don't need another frac that travels less easily than the Borg 71FL. I'm more inclined to eventually get a 90mm objective for it so as to have a Borg 90FL for on the road.

I'm not in denial of the possibility that I may enjoy a Tak 100 more than I would a Mak, Newt, or SCT of any size - but it would most likely be a Super Stanley at best and that slot's filled.

[Alan White]

31 minutes ago, iPeace said:

Far more interesting to not admit that particular elephant to the room.

I'm not in denial of the possibility that I may enjoy a Tak 100 more than I would a Mak, Newt, or SCT of any size - but it would most likely be a Super Stanley at best and that slot's filled.

Would the Super Stanley have to be known as Fat Max perhaps! 
 

2 hours ago, Stu said:

School report: Mr Mike Ipeace, Year 1

Subject: Telescope evaluation

Mark: B-

Comments: Must try harder! 

 

Well done sir, B- is above expected attainment.  

[25585]

As has been pointed out above, the 180 Mak is (for domestic Maks) in a different league for FL, FR & weight. 

Maybe a 120 refractor is a better instrument for lunar. 

Unless you want the Questar SMT on ebay  

[Stu]

Just now, 25585 said:

Maybe a 120 refractor is a better instrument for lunar. 

Mike has already 'been there' with a 120ED. The 150 Mak is more compact which was the appeal, I believe.

[Alfian]

2 hours ago, iPeace said:

but it would most likely be a Super Stanley at best and that slot's filled

"Super Stanley"! Brilliant. Telescope manufacturers do come up with some boring names for 'scopes, with perhaps the odd exception. Its usually just letters and numbers. It would liven astro chat up no end when like minds are gathered. "I've got an Omni XLT102, what have you got"?  (dramatic pause) "Ive got  a Super Stanley". ..... gasps of reverent admiration all round..

[25585]

https://m.ebay.co.uk/itm/1979-Broadband-Duplex-Questar-9-dp-7712-bb-Maksutov-Cassegrain-Telescopic-/132488858881?nav=SEARCH

[nightfisher]

1 minute ago, Alfian said:

"Super Stanley"! Brilliant. Telescope manufacturers do come up with some boring names for 'scopes, with perhaps the odd exception. Its usually just letters and numbers. It would liven astro chat up no end when like minds are gathered. "I've got an Omni XLT102, what have you got"?  (dramatic pause) "Ive got  a Super Stanley". ..... gasps of reverent admiration all round..

As long as skywatcher dont rename the ED range....80mm becomes "little Weiner.....100 becomes "Handy Joe".......120 becomes" Dave the invader"..........got me coat 

 

[iPeace]

10 minutes ago, 25585 said:

Maybe a 120 refractor is a better instrument for lunar. 

 

9 minutes ago, Stu said:

Mike has already 'been there' with a 120ED.

Indeed. I had a 120ED, and I liked it, but I don't miss it. This may be part of why things aren't moving Takwards. I tried the Bigger Frac Thing, but Stanley remains.

[Alfian]

9 minutes ago, nightfisher said:

As long as skywatcher dont rename the ED range....80mm becomes "little Weiner.....100 becomes "Handy Joe".......120 becomes" Dave the invader"..........got me coat 

 

My "Handy Joe" would have to be a "Josie" which is OK by me but point taken. Best draw the line here lest a new thread breaks out. Apologies for the diversion.

[nightfisher]

8 minutes ago, iPeace said:

 

Indeed. I had a 120ED, and I liked it, but I don't miss it. This may be part of why things aren't moving Takwards. I tried the Bigger Frac Thing, but Stanley remains.

Funny how we both had the 120ED and found it just was`nt right for us, despite being very good scopes with lots of fans for this model

[GavStar]

32 minutes ago, iPeace said:

 

Indeed. I had a 120ED, and I liked it, but I don't miss it. This may be part of why things aren't moving Takwards. I tried the Bigger Frac Thing, but Stanley remains.

Yes I remember now - I don’t think a 140mm frac will be right for you then! ?

I’m very biased to refractors but they don’t size up comfortably. I want refractor like views but with good resolution on planets and lunar and also decent dso ability. Unfortunately this does mean fairly large scopes but I’m managing. 

[iPeace]

5 minutes ago, GavStar said:

Yes I remember now - I don’t think a 140mm frac will be right for you then! ?

I’m very biased to refractors but they don’t size up comfortably. I want refractor like views but with good resolution on planets and lunar and also decent dso ability. Unfortunately this does mean fairly large scopes but I’m managing. 

With a fixed observatory and a huge motorized tracking mount, I would be right there with you.

[GavStar]

1 minute ago, iPeace said:

With a fixed observatory and a huge motorized tracking mount, I would be right there with you.

Mike,

This is a portable set up that doesn’t need an observatory - tracks very well as well. ?

[Timebandit]

36 minutes ago, iPeace said:

With a fixed observatory and a huge motorized tracking mount, I would be right there with you.

 

Yes and a lottery win would help also ?

The trouble with us who like frac views but have to watch the pennies, do realise the advantage of the reflector. You just get so much more aperture for your money and still get good  views. A very good size aperture reflector with quality Optics can be had for sensible money. A big refractor and you could be looking at a second mortgage ?

 

[25585]

1 hour ago, nightfisher said:

Funny how we both had the 120ED and found it just was`nt right for us, despite being very good scopes with lots of fans for this model

Ah, but the Equinox is the deluxe version. Fond of both my 100 & 120 'Noxes. 

80 is a neat travel size. Perhaps "baby" if I can find a reasonably priced pre-owned one. Darn this collectionism. 

[Stu]

4 minutes ago, 25585 said:

Ah, but the Equinox is the deluxe version. Fond of both my 100 & 120 'Noxes. 

Same optics, basically the same scope part from some mechnical and cosmetic differences. I don't think an Equinox would suit Mikes needs any better.

[25585]

14 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

 

Yes and a lottery win would help also ?

The trouble with us who like frac views but have to watch the pennies, do realise the advantage of the reflector. You just get so much more aperture for your money and still get good  views. A very good size aperture reflector with quality Optics can be had for sensible money. A big refractor and you could be looking at a second mortgage ?

 

Last year there was an Orion Optics UK VX6L with F11 1/10 wave mirror on ebay. 

OO don't make that FL any more, just the F8. But might do a bespoke one now perhaps. 

@Moonshaneused to own one

 

 

[nightfisher]

2 minutes ago, 25585 said:

Last year there was an Orion Optics UK VX6L with F11 1/10 wave mirror on ebay. 

OO don't make that FL any more, just the F8. But might do a bespoke one perhaps. 

It sounds like Mike has a third contender heading to the party in the form of the 150mm 900mm f/l newt, this will give him a very fair trio of scopes to sample and compare on Luna views, with the bonus that if he hates the F6 newt i may well take it of his hands and go down the "one scope road"