Sky-Watcher Evostar 150ED DS-Pro - A busted flush?

[paulastro]

Am I the only person wondering why it's all gone so quiet regarding this telescope?  Since the original problems with this scope with packaging and other difficulties (I'm assuming anyone reading this has read comments John made when he had one to review from FLO) it seems as if there is a conspiracy of silence.  For a telescope widely agreed to be  '  this year's most anticipated new telescope! '  this is rather surprising.  Of course, I'm not really suggesting there is a conspiracy, but I am curious.

OK, there has been a S@N magazine review of sorts, but I can't remember any observation made with this telescope mentioned on SGL or any images taken through it posted on SGL - if there are they must be very few and far between. 

Assuming some have actually been bought, I would have expected someone by now would have posted on SGL how pleased they were with their new purchase, or at least seen pictures of it when it arrived in the post!    Likewise no new purchaser has yet added a review or passed any comment on the relevant page on FLO's web page.

 

I have a few theories:

1  No member of SGL has bought one.

2   Some have been sold to SGL members, but everyone found they performed so badly that they feel too embarrassed to mention they have even bought one.

3  Some have been sold to SGL members, and they perfromed so well that the lucky owners want to keep it secret and don't want anyone else to know. (you big meanies !!)

4  Hundreds have been sold to non-SGL members and none sold to SGL members.

5  I'm just not been looking in the right places on SGL so have never come across the numerous comments and observations made with this scope on SGL

6  The performance of the scope is, well, what you'd expect.  That is, it is a slightly better performer than the 120ED Pro version than many of us on SGL own and use and are very happy with.

 

I guess, the answer is either a mixture of the above, or something very different!  At any rate, I'm still curious how it seems to have gone from hero to zero in the 'talked about' stakes.

I would add I am aware there are posts on SGL's distant cousin site over the pond, but I'm interested in why it seems so anonymous this side of the pond.

Edited August 3, 2019 by paulastro

[pete_l]

People are much more likely to post complaints than recommendations. And almost nobody would go to the trouble of writing a post that goes into detail and summaries "it does what it says on the tin".

And for a "mid-range" £1600 refractor there will always be people who retort that "X" is better. Or who suggest that the failings are "unacceptable (even if they don't own any of the kit mentioned)". So there is little to be gained by offering a target for those who will sneer at lower-priced options. Or gloat that what they spent more money on is better.

[johninderby]

Came across this review.

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/0bb5a1_4642ec75dc4444028b7c4deefb13702e.pdf

[paulastro]

Thanks Pete.  I have to say though that to me SGL members are generally helpful and generous in their comments toward other peoples opinions, reviews and observations.  I can't remember reading many 'sneering' comments about other members more humble equipment amd observations.    In fact many members do very well using less expensive equipment.  Good observers/imagers are found using all manner of equipment.

[paulastro]

Thanks for posting that review John, that should boost the sales of the 150

I am happy with my 120ED

I am happy with my 120ED

I am happy with my 120ED

I am happy with my 120ED............

no, honestly, I am happy with it............🥴

[johninderby]

Translation.

I don’t need to buy a 150ED

I don’t need to buy a 150ED

I don’t need to buy a 150ED

I don’t need to buy a 150ED

Who am I kidding. 😁

Edited August 3, 2019 by johninderby

[John]

Here is a positive report on the scope from an SGL member:

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/318766-a-sky-watcher-evostar-ed150-ds-pro-lands-in-yorkshire/

Despite the issues with the 2 examples that I was sent, I still feel that the Skywatcher ED150 has a great deal of potential. At some point I would like to try another example.

 

 

[paulastro]

Thanks John.  In fact this is the one and only positive comment I actually remember reading about the scope.  In part it stuck in my mind as the writer is well within traveling distance to me and I did think of getting in touch and asking if I could visit and try it out.  I never did as I thought it would be a bit cheeky .

It was nice to read it again, and having read the review that johninderby posted the link to (as well as your own comments of course)  I must admit if I had the readies I might be tempted   If it was 'only' as good as a 6 inch version of my 120ED then it would be worthwhile.  It would never replace the 120ED as this scope is so light and portable as you know, but they would make a smashing duo 🤪

[Alan White]

Perhaps the issue is many observe with smaller lighter kit and the ED 150 looks to not really fit that criteria.

I would love a look through one though.

[Mr Spock]

If I was buying a 150 apo it would be the Esprit 150ED. Yes, it's more than twice the price, but, you get what you pay for 

[Alan White]

But is that not a triplet imagers Scope Michael?

Different scopes for different folks perhaps?

[Mr Spock]

A better visual instrument - not just for imagers 

[John]

The ED150 (150 refractors in general actually) is a large instrument and often the additional costs of mounting them steadilly is a major factor in deciding if they are for you. My ED120 (also pictured) is a lot easier to mount steadily:

[Paul73]

And there was me thinking that the ED120 was a big scope!!! 

What mount were you using?

Paul

[GazOC]

I wonder how many have actually been sold? The price isn't terribly off-putting but the mounting requirements would have deterred some people (myself included)

A little like those long focal ratio refractors that people drool over but relatively few people actually buy

[william123]

20 hours ago, paulastro said:

Am I the only person wondering why it's all gone so quiet regarding this telescope?  Since the original problems with this scope with packaging and other difficulties (I'm assuming anyone reading this has read comments John made when he had one to review from FLO) it seems as if there is a conspiracy of silence.  For a telescope widely agreed to be  '  this year's most anticipated new telescope! '  this is rather surprising.  Of course, I'm not really suggesting there is a conspiracy, but I am curious.

OK, there has been a S@N magazine review of sorts, but I can't remember any observation made with this telescope mentioned on SGL or any images taken through it posted on SGL - if there are they must be very few and far between. 

Assuming some have actually been bought, I would have expected someone by now would have posted on SGL how pleased they were with their new purchase, or at least seen pictures of it when it arrived in the post!    Likewise no new purchaser has yet added a review or passed any comment on the relevant page on FLO's web page.

 

I have a few theories:

1  No member of SGL has bought one.

2   Some have been sold to SGL members, but everyone found they performed so badly that they feel too embarrassed to mention they have even bought one.

3  Some have been sold to SGL members, and they perfromed so well that the lucky owners want to keep it secret and don't want anyone else to know. (you big meanies !!)

4  Hundreds have been sold to non-SGL members and none sold to SGL members.

5  I'm just not been looking in the right places on SGL so have never come across the numerous comments and observations made with this scope on SGL

6  The performance of the scope is, well, what you'd expect.  That is, it is a slightly better performer than the 120ED Pro version than many of us on SGL own and use and are very happy with.

 

I guess, the answer is either a mixture of the above, or something very different!  At any rate, I'm still curious how it seems to have gone from hero to zero in the 'talked about' stakes.

I would add I am aware there are posts on SGL's distant cousin site over the pond, but I'm interested in why it seems so anonymous this side of the pond.

 

I have read three or four very positive reviews on Cloudy Nights, Ice in Space, and here, and that does not include the one by Daniel Mounsey,  the one in "Astronomy" magazine (very positive), and the one in "Sky at Night" magazine (somewhat positive).  These reviews can all be found on the web.

One dealer in California (a reliable, confidential source) told me that sales of the 150ED were good but not great, that he had heard no complaints from buyers, and that the scope was a "niche product," i.e., that the market for such a scope was inherently small.

The Esprit 150ED is an alternative, of course, but at a much higher price, and, what is even worse, the Esprit is MUCH heavier, probably too heavy for many.

Edited August 4, 2019 by william123

[AdeKing]

13 hours ago, John said:

The ED150 (150 refractors in general actually) is a large instrument and often the additional costs of mounting them steadilly is a major factor in deciding if they are for you. My ED120 (also pictured) is a lot easier to mount steadily:

I did consider an ED150 and also an Altair Starwave 152, but didn't appreciate the difference in size until @John posted his comparison showing the ED120/ED150/TMB 130 side by side.

Upon seeing this, reality bit and I opted for an older ED120 as it comfortably sits on my current EQ5 mount. An ED150 would need investment in a significantly beefier mount which put me off. 

The ED120 is probably as large as I'll go, any larger and I don't think I'd use it much. 

Edited August 4, 2019 by AdeKing
Correcting spelling / correcting John's scope comparison

[Chris]

Size apart, the price point of these SW ED150's makes it so difficult for QC to be reliable. John's reviews highlight this. It doesn't stop me from really wanting SW to crack the enigma code on this one though  

[John]

9 hours ago, Paul73 said:

And there was me thinking that the ED120 was a big scope!!! 

What mount were you using?

Paul

The mount is a Giro Ercole. It is up to carrying the load but takes 3-4 seconds to settle when higher magnifications are used. I would say that it is getting marginal with the ED150 on board as is the Skytee II. Some people would find it acceptable but some would not.

Really the ED150 would benefit from an EQ6 mount or even a Losmandy GM11. This is the challenge when refractors get over 127mm / 5 inches in aperture - a truly suitable mount can easily exceed the cost  of the scope.

 

[paulastro]

14 hours ago, John said:

The ED150 (150 refractors in general actually) is a large instrument and often the additional costs of mounting them steadilly is a major factor in deciding if they are for you. My ED120 (also pictured) is a lot easier to mount steadily:

I agree with you here John.  This is the main reason that in my heart I know that if I should ever have the means to buy one, I probably wouldn't.  Apart from its' great optical quality, I love my 120ED because it is so portable I really can use it at a moments notice.  In the observatory I use the 120 on my Ercole mount, whilst if I'm using it outside the observatory I'm more than happy to use it on my AZ4.  I often use it with my binovewer at over x150 with no problems on this mount.

A secondary reason for me is that 900mm focal length (as the 120 is) is the ideal focal length  as it enables me to get wider fields which will  enable nice views of around 3 degrees with the eyepieces I like to use.

I picked up the 150ED at the Astro Show last year and it was a real monster compared with the 120.

[johnturley]

18 hours ago, william123 said:

 

 

The Esprit 150ED is an alternative, of course, but at a much higher price, and, what is even worse, the Esprit is MUCH heavier, probably too heavy for many.

Not sure why the Esprit 150 is as heavy as it is with a stated weight of 14.5 kg, in comparison the stated weight of the larger TEC and CFF 160mm triplets is just 12.5 kg.

I don't know whether anyone has actually weighed one, sometimes the stated weight of scopes is actually greater than they actually are, for example the weight of my ES 127 was listed as being 8 kg, but when I weighed it it was just 6.5 kg.

John

[JeremyS]

19 hours ago, paulastro said:

I picked up the 150ED at the Astro Show last year

Crikey Paul. You had me going there! I read "picked up" as in "bought", until I read your earlier posts.

Go on, you know you should.......  🙂

 

[johninderby]

It’s only money 😂🤣😁

[Peter Drew]

48 minutes ago, johninderby said:

It’s only money 😂🤣😁

So true. Just have an SGL whipround and buy me one and then you can all come round and use it for free!. I already have a suitable mount.   😀

[Sunshine]

Having a SW 150 Mak i wondered if this monster frac would be a worth while upgrade considering they're both 15o but, the frac should produce better contrast and wide FOV's, hmmm.

Only issue is it seems to dwarf my Vixen GP mount, im not sure what this beast weighs , i'll check out the specs for the heck of it.

Ooohh, its a 20 lb heavyweight.

Edited August 5, 2019 by Sunshine