Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

SkyWatcher StarTravel or Heritage

Mike_S

Recommended Posts

Mike_S

Mike_S

Posted
Posted

Hi,

I have recently bought some 10x50 binoculars and after my first scope soon.

I had basically decided on the SkyWatcher Skyliner dobsonian 200 or even 250 but decided against it due to the size and collimation for now so let’s see how much I use the smaller stuff first. I’m after something more grab n go style.

I have been researching and gathering advice. I’m after a scope that gives a wide field of view as that would be nice if I end up getting an 8 or 10 inch dob later so the two would cover different types of gazing. 

I think the skytravel 120 sounds ideal but also intrigued about the Heritage range? Somebody said one of them was a mak class that has pros and cons? I feel I understand the pros and cons between the Skyliner and the StarTravel range but really not sure where the Heritage range fits into it? Other than they all seem to come highly recommended. Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LukeSkywatcher

LukeSkywatcher

Posted
Posted

It seems you've thought things through. Dobs can be big and heavy. Cant say i know anything about the Skytravel. The Heritage 130P is a great scope. It will probably never need collimated. Ive had mine since 2009 and never collimated it. 

You also dont strictly need to put it on a table. Sitting down puts your eye within reach of the Eyepiece, when the scope is sat i=on the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LukeSkywatcher

LukeSkywatcher

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, MSammon said:

Ah okay brilliant thanks. But I would get the CA issue with the 120mm short tube refractor?

Most likely get some CA. You do with any refractor. The Bresser AR 102 XS, has absolute minimal CA. Its not a 120mm, but its a cracking short tube refrac. Theres one for sale in the sales thread here on SGL. The finderscope and diagonal are a bit rubbish, but the rest of the scope is solid quality. Focuser is a dream.

ar102xsf.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike_S

Mike_S

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks. I think for the price (up to £300). I’m going to go for the StarTravel 120 then  when I start finding the planets I might get the 8 or 10 inch skyliner or another brand. I think wide view will be more useful for now even though I could get a 2 inch eyepiece on the dob. Hmm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LukeSkywatcher

LukeSkywatcher

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, MSammon said:

Thanks. I think for the price (up to £300). I’m going to go for the StarTravel 120 then  when I start finding the planets I might get the 8 or 10 inch skyliner or another brand. I think wide view will be more useful for now even though I could get a 2 inch eyepiece on the dob. Hmm

I just looked up the Star Travel 120. Doesnt look too big or un-wielding. The OTA is only 4.1Kg. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Size9Hex

Size9Hex

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, MSammon said:

I have recently bought some 10x50 binoculars and after my first scope soon.

 I had basically decided on the SkyWatcher Skyliner dobsonian 200 or even 250 but decided against it due to the size and collimation for now so let’s see how much I use the smaller stuff first. I’m after something more grab n go style.I

Hi,

Don’t be too worried about the collimation. It’s a bit fiddly first time, but you soon get the hang of it. Takes me about a minute to collimate the skyliner 250 these days, and I’m far from expert in such things. The 250 holds collimation well, so it doesn’t need doing often, and I’d suspect the 200 would be even better. I consider my dob to be grab and go, but it depends where you keep it (heated or unheated room) and how far you fancy lugging it of course. A 200 or 250 would give you something in a completely different league from the binos. For me, a wide field grab and go is the very much second in line after the dob.

That said, there’s no right or wrong order to buy them in. My second scope was the star travel 102. Chromatic aberration for sure, and I’d expect the heritage to be better for planets and lunar (not from first hand experience of the heritage I should caveat), but the 102 is a splendid wide field deep sky scope. A refractor would be a nice option for solar white light too (but get a filter!), which would help keep it relevant if you later got a dob.

Not sure if that helps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
happy-kat

happy-kat

Posted
Posted

Your binoculars give a wide field of view.

I'm very happy with the heritage 130p plus the telescope can be removed from the base and used on a tripod so can make a pretty portable setup beyond the bonds of the garden. I either use mine from the floor or an upturned bucket while I sit on a garden chair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LukeSkywatcher

LukeSkywatcher

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

Your binoculars give a wide field of view.

I'm very happy with the heritage 130p plus the telescope can be removed from the base and used on a tripod so can make a pretty portable setup beyond the bonds of the garden. I either use mine from the floor or an upturned bucket while I sit on a garden chair.

The Heritage 130P has the universal dovetail size. It can be mounted on a lot of mounts/tripods. Its very versatile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
parallaxerr

parallaxerr

Posted
Posted

The ST120 is a very versatile and well loved scope.  It's in no way unwieldy and is easy to handle. Visually, the CA wasn't an issue for me, especially with a semi-apo filter.

I only upgraded when I started imaging because the CA does become an issue then. I still miss my ST120 despite owning an Equinox120! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike_S

Mike_S

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I’ve just learned the calculations for CA and for magnification. I want a refractor for now. It’s now either the SkyWatcher Evostar 90/900 or the Celestron Astromaster 90/1000. Magnification is the same on both. The only difference seems to be the trade off between focul view degree and CA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ricochet

Ricochet

Posted
Posted

Of the two the Evostar is the better version of the scope. I think the mount is a bit lightweight  but I don't know that the Astromaster mount is any better.  Neither is particularly a wide field scope which is what you initially were looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
parallaxerr

parallaxerr

Posted
Posted

I've owned the Astromaster 90 and the ST120. The ST120 is the better scope imho. The AM was my first scope and proved quite frustrating with the limited field of view.

The astromaster uses lots of plastic, where there is none on the ST. The AM has a much narrower fov and was OK for globs and smaller targets. Yes it offers higher mag for any given ep but didn't have the resolution to be useful.

CA is spoken about like it completely ruins the view, it does not. Furthermore the ST controls it well for an F5 achro. There is no need to buy lots of accessories to cut it down, the semi-apo filter is just a "nice to have".

The ST120 reaches surprisingly deep on DSOs whereas the AM could not. Moon is awesone with the ST with little colour fringing but higher mags required on other planets do show some colour, but they are a small percentage of targets and are not well placed for the next few years anyway being low in the horizon, many of us with better scopes are struggling with the planets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.