Scope Recomemdation for clusters

[Olli]

Hi,

Yes. it’s me again Sorry to  keep asking questions about scopes please forgive me  I appreciate all the help from previous posts

After having a clear night yesterday after about a week of clouds, I must of spent maybe two hours outside with my binoculars and may have developed an obsession with Star clusters....  ( would’ve like to see some Nebulae but my binos just aren’t that powerful ) So I think I’m looking to get a scope that’s capable for showing nice sharp images as possible but also good FOV too for my price range (200-300). I was looking at the star travel series specifically 102 and 120 on the az3 Mount (I know theses aren’t the best mount for them but it’s the best in my price range  I think) I want something that’s easy to lug around as I will be having short walks to near by fields so need as portable as possible and that takes dobs Out the question after my last post ( who knows might get one for my second scope) Are these two good choices for what I want to see I know it’s got ca but not that fussed and heard it’s onoy on planets so it won’t be an issue.

many Thanks 

 

Clear Skies  

[cloudsweeper]

The ST120 is a great 'scope - widefield views, portable, quick and easy to set up.  I too love clusters, and CA is not a problem with them - it only kicks in around the edges of bright objects, and even then you can mask off the aperture, so no problem as far as I'm concerned.

Mine is on an Az4, so I can't comment on the Az3, but I would not hesitate about getting the 'scope itself.  For clusters, you don't need so much aperture, so maybe a smaller ap on a better mount??  Check out what's available.

Doug.

[Olli]

8 minutes ago, cloudsweeper said:

The ST120 is a great 'scope - widefield views, portable, quick and easy to set up.  I too love clusters, and CA is not a problem with them - it only kicks in around the edges of bright objects, and even then you can mask off the aperture, so no problem as far as I'm concerned.

Mine is on an Az4, so I can't comment on the Az3, but I would not hesitate about getting the 'scope itself.  For clusters, you don't need so much aperture, so maybe a smaller ap on a better mount??  Check out what's available.

Doug.

People seem to say it is capable on az3 but not ideal I’ll try look for more reviews. Was thinking of going with the 102 as it’s abit smaller but not sure how much difference is between the two. 

[Knighty2112]

The ST120 is a very good beginner scope, and will show clusters well. The AZ3 mount is OK, but does require careful balancing when in use. I did a mod on mine to add a weight to the front so that when it was at high elevations the scope wouldn’t go down at the back due to weight of EP’s etc. 

[Paul67]

I have the 102 and can confirm the images of clusters are very pleasing, the scope itself is very easy to carry and would probable fit in a rucksack if needed, cant comment on the mount though as dont have an AZ.

[Olli]

10 hours ago, Knighty2112 said:

The ST120 is a very good beginner scope, and will show clusters well. The AZ3 mount is OK, but does require careful balancing when in use. I did a mod on mine to add a weight to the front so that when it was at high elevations the scope wouldn’t go down at the back due to weight of EP’s etc. 

Thanks I really would prefer to get the 120 but the Mount is putting me off a bit there was a thread on here I saw someone saying it’s fine. The max payload is about 5kg and the ota is 4 I think. I did see eq3 Mount with it for a extra 100 but not a fan of them.

[Olli]

9 hours ago, Paul67 said:

I have the 102 and can confirm the images of clusters are very pleasing, the scope itself is very easy to carry and would probable fit in a rucksack if needed, cant comment on the mount though as dont have an AZ.

Hi, how is it for DSOs ? Sounds like a good size.

[Paul67]

17 minutes ago, Dinoco said:

Hi, how is it for DSOs ? Sounds like a good size.

The only ones Ive looked at are m42 and m31, m42 i struggled but think that is down to light polution and need a filter as the stars there were very sharp. m31 was easily viewable but in all honesty I havent had the scope out enough due to the EQ mount Im fighting with, saving for the star discovery az goto.

[cloudsweeper]

I've seen some galaxies with the ST120, but for faint objects I generally use the 8SE.  A 102 would show you a good number of the Messier objects, but would probably struggle with fainter galaxies and nebulae (depending on sky conditions).

Doug.

[Knighty2112]

49 minutes ago, Dinoco said:

Thanks I really would prefer to get the 120 but the Mount is putting me off a bit there was a thread on here I saw someone saying it’s fine. The max payload is about 5kg and the ota is 4 I think. I did see eq3 Mount with it for a extra 100 but not a fan of them.

There is an AZ4 Mount on sale on ABS for £85 near Kenilworth, so you could buy just the ST120 OTA only for £239(price from FLO), and then use this mount if your willing to meet up to get it. It should balance better, however it doesn’t have any slow mo control like the AZ3 has. 

http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=134437

[Stu]

For £300 you could get a 200p dobsonian. Ok, the focal length is 1200mm so you won't get the same fov as an ST120, but with a 24mm 68 degree afov, you would get x50 with a 1.36 degree field of view, enough for all but the biggest clusters. A 2" eyepiece would get you more. The extra aperture will show you fainter stars in clusters and more image scale on DSOs. I comes down to the age old argument of refractor contrast and star shapes vs dob greater brightness and DSO performance. Worth considering perhaps? 

[Olli]

10 minutes ago, Stu said:

For £300 you could get a 200p dobsonian. Ok, the focal length is 1200mm so you won't get the same fov as an ST120, but with a 24mm 68 degree afov, you would get x50 with a 1.36 degree field of view, enough for all but the biggest clusters. A 2" eyepiece would get you more. The extra aperture will show you fainter stars in clusters and more image scale on DSOs. I comes down to the age old argument of refractor contrast and star shapes vs dob greater brightness and DSO performance. Worth considering perhaps? 

Hi Stu, I was thinking about a 200p after you helping me in my older post. However not really that portable for me and storage is an issue I would love one that was my main scope I was set on but Ive realised that it’s inconvenient for me. won’t be able to walk to fields with it  unless I get both..

[Knighty2112]

19 minutes ago, Dinoco said:

Hi Stu, I was thinking about a 200p after you helping me in my older post. However not really that portable for me and storage is an issue I would love one that was my main scope I was set on but Ive realised that it’s inconvenient for me. won’t be able to walk to fields with it  unless I get both..

I did have a 200 PDS, which did give great views, but I got rid of it for a few reasons; one of which was it was quite bulky to use, and two I never have got used to looking in on scopes from the side (something I may have to get used to as I plan at some point on getting a 12” dob perhaps). The third reason was I had too many scopes also at that point too!  

[Cosmic Geoff]

I have a Startravel 102mm (f5 achromat).  This is a very portable telescope and easy to handle. It is good for looking at star clusters which are often large, but would not be my first choice for any other task. I have also used mine from a dark skies site for looking at galaxies (mounted on the SLT GoTo) and as a grab'n go for various things including looking for a bright comet.  Note that the ST120 may not seem much bigger on paper, but will be around 1.44x bulkier and 1.7x heavier. 

I don't hear good things about the AZ3 mount and suggest you avoid it and instead get an AZ4 with steel legs (for the backyard) or a AZ5 or other new mount, for portable use.

In a similar price & focal ratio, you could look at a small Newtonian reflector. 

[Olli]

16 minutes ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

I have a Startravel 102mm (f5 achromat).  This is a very portable telescope and easy to handle. It is good for looking at star clusters which are often large, but would not be my first choice for any other task. I have also used mine from a dark skies site for looking at galaxies (mounted on the SLT GoTo) and as a grab'n go for various things including looking for a bright comet.  Note that the ST120 may not seem much bigger on paper, but will be around 1.44x bulkier and 1.7x heavier. 

I don't hear good things about the AZ3 mount and suggest you avoid it and instead get an AZ4 with steel legs (for the backyard) or a AZ5 or other new mount, for portable use.

In a similar price & focal ratio, you could look at a small Newtonian reflector. 

Thanks for the input I have seen the size of a 120 it’s quite big compared to the 102. My other choice was the 130p on a az5 for £250 which someone suggested to me in a older thread but didn’t know how much of a difference is between the two and I don’t have any where local  I can try them out 

[Stu]

The Heritage 130p is a very good option, short focal length, light, very portable and has a decent aperture.

Whereabouts are you Dinoco?

[Olli]

15 minutes ago, Stu said:

The Heritage 130p is a very good option, short focal length, light, very portable and has a decent aperture.

Whereabouts are you Dinoco?

West Sussex, the closet shop to me according  to google is Brighton or Worthing which I think is an hour or so each way. Think I may go with the 130p on the az5 as I want to get a skymax down the line so the az5 should be a good mount for both.

[Nyctimene]

With a 32 mmf Plössl, an ES 26mmf/62° LER, or the more expensive ES 24mmf/68°, the Heritage  130 P will show a 2,5° TFOV (True Field of View), large enough, to frame almost all open clusters comfortably, e.g. Pleiades, M 35, M 44. Ok, not Hyades (they are observed best with binos); but, on the other hand, it's capable to give excellent, sharp views of  moon and planets without any chromatic aberration (false colour); no filter needed. It's also a decent scope for observing different types of DSO's. Wonderful as a grab-and-go or travel scope.

Stephan

[Olli]

9 minutes ago, Nyctimene said:

With a 32 mmf Plössl, an ES 26mmf/62° LER, or the more expensive ES 24mmf/68°, the Heritage  130 P will show a 2,5° TFOV (True Field of View), large enough, to frame almost all open clusters comfortably, e.g. Pleiades, M 35, M 44. Ok, not Hyades (they are observed best with binos); but, on the other hand, it's capable to give excellent, sharp views of  moon and planets without any chromatic aberration (false colour); no filter needed. It's also a decent scope for observing different types of DSO's. Wonderful as a grab-and-go or travel scope.

Stephan

Thanks Stephan, I wasn’t  getting the heritage version I was going to get this https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-az5-deluxe/sky-watcher-explorer-130ps-az5-deluxe.html but they’re are basically the same in terms of specs just different mounts right? And would those EPs you suggested be good for that model?

[Nyctimene]

10 minutes ago, Dinoco said:

they’re are basically the same in terms of specs just different mounts right? And would those EPs you suggested be good for that model?

The same specs: 130 mm/650 mm, so f/5; and the same 11/4" eyepiece barrel diameter. I guess, it's supplied with a R+P (rack and pinion) focuser instead of the Flextube's helical focuser (that some dislike).

A 30-32 mm Plössl would be the "budget" eyepiece variety; the ES 26 mm/62° is in the middle price-and weight-wise; the ES 24/68 is highly praised, but not cheap with 135 GBP, and with 370 g somewhat heavier. All seem to work well with the Heritage (I'm using the 26mm/62°).

Stephan

[Geoff Lister]

I bought the ST120 & AZ3 as a package, and find that they work well together. But, and it is a big "but", the 2 individual parts are not, without modification, interchangeable with any of my other mounts or OTAs. Most of my mounts and OTAs use side-mounted dovetail plates and clamps. The ST120/AZ3 uses base-mounted 116mm diameter rings. So, to use the ST120 on my GoTo mounts, and my other OTAs on the AZ3, I fitted the rings on a dovetail plate, and mounted a dovetail clamp (with wooden spacer) above the AZ3's main channel. The other OTAs have their finders and focus knobs at 90 degrees from normal, but the star diagonals rotate for easy viewing. The AZ4 & AZ5 mounts use side-mounted dovetail clamps as standard, and are thus more "future proof".

Geoff

[Stu]

3 hours ago, Dinoco said:

Thanks Stephan, I wasn’t  getting the heritage version I was going to get this https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-az5-deluxe/sky-watcher-explorer-130ps-az5-deluxe.html but they’re are basically the same in terms of specs just different mounts right? And would those EPs you suggested be good for that model?

Ah yes, that's a nice little package. As Stephan says, it has a better focuser than the Heritage but is a little less portable. Still very much grab and go though.

@dick_dangerous has one I believe, sure he brought it to a meet we had recently. Perhaps ask for thoughts but it looked like a nice setup to me.

[Olli]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Ah yes, that's a nice little package. As Stephan says, it has a better focuser than the Heritage but is a little less portable. Still very much grab and go though.

@dick_dangerous has one I believe, sure he brought it to a meet we had recently. Perhaps ask for thoughts but it looked like a nice setup to me.

The az5 mounts look the easiest to use to me, kind of want to stay away from the eq mounts. I was thinking of getting the 150p dob as it’s not as heavy as the 200p is there much difference between the 130p and 150p If there is then I might get a proper grab n go scope down the line. If not then I’ll get the 130 but seems silly to me that spending £50 more for less arperture.

[Red Dwarfer]

4 hours ago, Dinoco said:

The az5 mounts look the easiest to use to me, kind of want to stay away from the eq mounts. I was thinking of getting the 150p dob as it’s not as heavy as the 200p is there much difference between the 130p and 150p If there is then I might get a proper grab n go scope down the line. If not then I’ll get the 130 but seems silly to me that spending £50 more for less arperture.

Here is a screen shot of the specs for the 150P from FLO - look at the bottom , there is significantly more light gathering ability compared to a 114mm reflector ... 

[Paul67]

The  CA with the 102 shows like a thin felt tip blue/purple line drawn around the circumference of the moon,  I found it didn't effect the disk view in any way.