Meade Polaris 130 EQ vs Celestron AstroMaster 130EQ

[xvariablestarx]

Still looking for a viable companion scope to my 8 inch Dob. I was looking at long tube refractors but those seem to be mostly only good on planets, and I might be limiting myself too much.

The I looked again at reflectors, and two caught my eye; the Meade Polaris 130 EQ and the Celestron AstroMaster 130EQ

 

Both are equatorial mounts, and fairly wide field so I might be able to image brighter DSOs with them. Also because of greater aperture than the 90-102mm refractors I was also looking at, these reflectors might give better views of the planets, I might be able to capture a decent image of Jupiter.

 

Neither, thankfully, seems to be Bird-Jones design, which is a good thing.

 

The Meade seems to come with better accessories at a lower price, as far as I can see, somebody correct me if I am wrong.

I am not sure why the slightly higher price on the Celestron, unless the mount is a bit better?

 

Which one of these scope is better in your opinion?

 

[Knighty2112]

Having owned a Celestron Astromaster 130 EQ I wouldn’t recommend it at all in anyway. Mine now languishes up in the loft gathering dust. Never owned the other scope so can’t say if it is good or bad or not alas. 

[Peter Drew]

I agree with Knighty and would prefer the Meade or Skywatcher versions.

[xvariablestarx]

I have heard some praise elsewhere of the Meade version, but I probably have better accessories already, I was more interested in the differences between the OTA and mount on both scopes. I do like the color of the Meade one more also, not that that is a major factor.

[Geoff Lister]

As my second 'scope, I found my Astromaster 130EQ-MD difficult to set up and track, and it almost put me off astronomy. My third one, a Skymax 127, re-kindled my interest. I still use the Astromaster's OTA (with a different finder - the original RDF did not seem to give much of a red dot) on my Skymax mount, to get a wider view than I can get with the Skymax's Mak.

Geoff

[xvariablestarx]

I have had some people on another website tell me that both the Meade and Celestron 130's have spherical mirrors, which if true means they are not worth the headache.

What do you think of the equipment posted below in the image attached? I am heading towards money territory here where it might be better to get a Celestron 127SLT  or 5SE and be done with it, but I still want opinions:

 

 

[Alfian]

Like Knighty' I have a Celestron 130eq OTA gathering dust somewhere and my experience was similar. As to whether it has a parabolic or spherical primary, I have read comments arguing for both. An F5 spherical primary is not a good idea and it's hard to believe that Celestron would market such a 'scope when the competition uses a pretty decent parabolic item. It's all a bit academic because if you are in the market for a 130 f5 just buy the Skywatcher. Regarding the items on the attached image, I would look to buying optical equipment from proper specialist suppliers who know about and can give advice about astronomy gear. 

[xvariablestarx]

6 hours ago, Alfian said:

Like Knighty' I have a Celestron 130eq OTA gathering dust somewhere and my experience was similar. As to whether it has a parabolic or spherical primary, I have read comments arguing for both. An F5 spherical primary is not a good idea and it's hard to believe that Celestron would market such a 'scope when the competition uses a pretty decent parabolic item. It's all a bit academic because if you are in the market for a 130 f5 just buy the Skywatcher. Regarding the items on the attached image, I would look to buying optical equipment from proper specialist suppliers who know about and can give advice about astronomy gear. 

I am not sure why companies market reflectors with spherical mirrors, let alone the Bird-Jones scope because they turn off future buyers of more expensive scopes just because they want to make a quick buck. As for the items in the Amazon wishlist, I don't use Amazon that often for astronomy stuff, I usually use Orion etc. But I did want opinions more on the equipment regardless of their source.

[Alfian]

7 hours ago, xvariablestarx said:

I am not sure why companies market reflectors with spherical mirrors

I'm no expert optics but I don't think there is anything wrong using a well configured spherical at longer focal lengths (f7.5+?), my old Tal 1 was brilliant, but at F5 it doesn't work well.

[Peter Drew]

There is nothing wrong with spherical optics provided they are corrected when producing the focused image, Maksutovs and Schmidt-Cassegrains have spherical primary mirrors. The Jones-Bird design incorporates a corrector for its spherical primary mirror, on paper this is a decent design, unfortunately it seems to be poorly executed. Most of these corrected examples are in the interests of producing a compact telescope.

[Cornelius Varley]

18 hours ago, xvariablestarx said:

I have had some people on another website tell me that both the Meade and Celestron 130's have spherical mirrors, which if true means they are not worth the headache.

What do you think of the equipment posted below in the image attached? I am heading towards money territory here where it might be better to get a Celestron 127SLT  or 5SE and be done with it, but I still want opinions:

 

Both the Polaris 130/650 and Astromaster 130/650 have parabolic mirrors.

[xvariablestarx]

10 hours ago, Cornelius Varley said:

Both the Polaris 130/650 and Astromaster 130/650 have parabolic mirrors.

I just mentioned what you said on that other site, we will see what they say lol.

I honestly want to believe you, because I really don't want to get goto, because goto means most of the money goes into the computerised system, while the manufacturer puts less money into mount stability and optical quality. I would prefer a simple equatorial mount with a motor, since what I like to look at is usually bright and obvious in the sky.

[xvariablestarx]

Would the Skywatcher Heritage 130 / Astronomers without Borders Onesky 130mm scope be a better fit? I believe they can be taken off their existing alt-az base and put on equatorial mount if it has a vixen style dove tail, unless I am mistaken?

[Geoff Lister]

11 minutes ago, xvariablestarx said:

Would the Skywatcher Heritage 130 / Astronomers without Borders Onesky 130mm scope be a better fit? I believe they can be taken off their existing alt-az base and put on equatorial mount if it has a vixen style dove tail, unless I am mistaken?

Yes, the rear tube has a long dovetail plate, and the OTA is interchangeable with others on different mounts. The photo below shows a range of OTAs and mounts, all interchangeable, but some with altitude limitations. The Heritage 130P OTA & mount is the second pair from the left.

Unfortunately, I do not have the expertise to determine if the Astromaster's mirror is spherical or parabolic.

Geoff

[xvariablestarx]

I read elsewhere that tube rings are needed in order to keep the eyepiece at a comfortable viewing angle on an equatorial mount, any body have any idea what rings to get?

[Alan64]

The Meade and Celestron 130mm f/5 equatorial kits probably do have parabolic mirrors, however the Celestron's mirror is not centre-spotted, to aid in collimating, which is easy enough to apply one, but that unconventional assembly at the rear of the tube looks to be difficult to remove to get at the mirror.  I would bypass the Celestron entirely.  That of the Meade is probably not centre-spotted either, but access to the mirror might perhaps be easier.  But here's another thing: the secondary-spider assemblies, the spider-vanes specifically, of both the Meade and Celestron, are molded and cannot be adjusted in order to centre the secondary-mirror directly under the focusser, if need be. 

The Sky-Watcher and Orion of California 130mm f/5 equatorial kits are identical.  They both have centre-spotted parabolic mirrors, and the spider-vanes can be adjusted.  The entire optical system is therefore fully adjustable, fully collimatable...

https://www.amazon.com/Orion-SpaceProbe-Equatorial-Reflector-Telescope/dp/B00D05BKOW