Mak disappointment

[BS269]

10 hours ago, Captain Magenta said:

I can't speak for the C9.25, but I do have an 8" and a 12" SW Newtonian, and currently 3 maks including the mak 180. To answer your question, yes I can definitely recommend the 180 mak, I really really like it, it performs well to my taste. Even after having completely reduced it to its component parts and reassembled and re-collimated it. See here.

One big difference between the 180 mak and, say, an 8" newt is the focal length. My SW 8" f/5 newt is focal length 1000mm, whereas the 180 mak is nominally 2700mm, and with an external R&P focuser more like 3000mm. In other words it's designed for very high magnification, and in that respect some would call it quite specialized, for planets and double stars. I've happily regularly used it on the Moon with a 6mm eyepiece, giving close to 500x magification. But I've also quite happily used it with my 35mm Panoptic eyepiece at only 77x magnification.

They only rarely seem to come up for sale used, which says something!

M

I do really like the idea of having a very high powered one. On a clear night I’m always drawn to the moon and planets. Would you say it’s got a large enough aperture for good detail on them? I’m really stuck between the between the Newtonian or the mak. Newtonian is larger but I don’t have the experience to know how much difference the extra 1” (or 3”) will make. They’re also a lot cheaper so I could buy more gear to compliment planetary viewing with it. But the mak just sounds far more appealing to me. Would you say there’s a notable difference in viewing quality between a 180 mak or an 8” newt?

[BS269]

10 hours ago, Paz said:

They are rare and when they come up I think there's a hardcore of buyers ready and waiting. I really wanted a 180 maksutov and watched the second hand ads for a long time (a couple of years maybe), and got nowhere. In the end I gave up and switched to looking for a C8, and found one within weeks.

Good point, I haven’t seen one of this size up on the used market it all. And I hadn’t really heard much about maksutovs until I looked into it as a potential candidate. This made me think that they weren’t very popular for whatever reason. I think the other thing I was worried about getting this scope was that I’ve heard the planets aren’t in very good positions for the next couple of years. Is there anything you can buy to improve the views when they’re so low in the sky? 

[Captain Scarlet]

2 hours ago, BS269 said:

I do really like the idea of having a very high powered one. On a clear night I’m always drawn to the moon and planets. Would you say it’s got a large enough aperture for good detail on them? I’m really stuck between the between the Newtonian or the mak. Newtonian is larger but I don’t have the experience to know how much difference the extra 1” (or 3”) will make. They’re also a lot cheaper so I could buy more gear to compliment planetary viewing with it. But the mak just sounds far more appealing to me. Would you say there’s a notable difference in viewing quality between a 180 mak or an 8” newt?

7-8" is certainly enough for very good views of Moon and Planets. The two scopes each have similar aperture, and are both "centrally obstructed". The mak slightly loses out on both counts to the newt, likely not at all noticeable to the eye though, but maybe wins out in collimation quality. The mak should not need recollimating from its factory settings, whereas you will have to do the newt yourself, and regularly for the primary. If you're happy collimating a newt, then that's not a problem.

The newt is far more versatile at 1000mm, you can go very wide-field if you want: for example a 35mm eyepiece gives you 29x magnification. But the newt will be a bit more unwieldy. As to how the views might differ, the aperture etc being similar suggests the views mag for mag should be similar. I haven't done a side by side comparison of my two, they live in different places, but I might bring them together soon and compare them.

It sounds to me though that in your heart of hearts you really want the mak...

M

Edited July 5, 2020 by Captain Magenta

[mikeDnight]

I'd say go with your heart! With the Mak you don't need complex eyepieces, so you could invest in a binoviewer and a good diagonal, so as to really get the best lunar and planetary views out of it.  And even though the field may be narrower than a Newt', the Mak will still give some superb deep sky views.

[Paz]

7 hours ago, BS269 said:

Good point, I haven’t seen one of this size up on the used market it all. And I hadn’t really heard much about maksutovs until I looked into it as a potential candidate. This made me think that they weren’t very popular for whatever reason. I think the other thing I was worried about getting this scope was that I’ve heard the planets aren’t in very good positions for the next couple of years. Is there anything you can buy to improve the views when they’re so low in the sky? 

When the planets are low there's only so much you can do, but it doesn't mean they are not worth observing, just that they won't be as good as when they are higher. There will still be good and bad nights of seeing and with patience and perseverance you can get lucky on any given night.

You can also pick the times when they are at their highest to make the best of it.

...but a maksutov will still do things like lunar, doubles, and smaller/brighter dso's very well.  

[BS269]

4 hours ago, Captain Magenta said:

7-8" is certainly enough for very good views of Moon and Planets. The two scopes each have similar aperture, and are both "centrally obstructed". The mak slightly loses out on both counts to the newt, likely not at all noticeable to the eye though, but maybe wins out in collimation quality. The mak should not need recollimating from its factory settings, whereas you will have to do the newt yourself, and regularly for the primary. If you're happy collimating a newt, then that's not a problem.

The newt is far more versatile at 1000mm, you can go very wide-field if you want: for example a 35mm eyepiece gives you 29x magnification. But the newt will be a bit more unwieldy. As to how the views might differ, the aperture etc being similar suggests the views mag for mag should be similar. I haven't done a side by side comparison of my two, they live in different places, but I might bring them together soon and compare them.

It sounds to me though that in your heart of hearts you really want the mak...

M

I’m not sure I’ll go down the Newtonian route until I get a dob. I was certainly leaning toward the mak, until someone has suggested the TS optics 8” classical cassegrain. Had a look at that and I’m very impressed by the look of it. Is about £300 more than a new 180 mak though but I’d be happy with either, as I think I’m getting a little greedy for my 1st “big” scope, especially given I’m not made of money and saving up for travelling next year 😂. If I see a second hand mak I will most likely snap it up, but if I decide to go that bit further with my money then I will go for the CC. 
 

I’m pretty sure either way I’m going to be blown away with the view. My 2nd scope bought will be a small apo triplet for AP but hoping to also get some nice wide field views with that too. Can’t wait to finally get viewing!

[BS269]

4 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

I'd say go with your heart! With the Mak you don't need complex eyepieces, so you could invest in a binoviewer and a good diagonal, so as to really get the best lunar and planetary views out of it.  And even though the field may be narrower than a Newt', the Mak will still give some superb deep sky views.

I never considered a Bino viewer, do they really enhance the viewing experience that much? I’ll take a look into it!

[johninderby]

The mak and CC are similar in weight and not much dofference in size.

[BS269]

27 minutes ago, Paz said:

When the planets are low there's only so much you can do, but it doesn't mean they are not worth observing, just that they won't be as good as when they are higher. There will still be good and bad nights of seeing and with patience and perseverance you can get lucky on any given night.

You can also pick the times when they are at their highest to make the best of it.

...but a maksutov will still do things like lunar, doubles, and smaller/brighter dso's very well.  

Good point.. even a planet at low altitude with a mak would still beat my best viewing experience on Jupiter I’m sure... so I don’t think I’ll be too disappointed with it 😂

[mikeDnight]

40 minutes ago, BS269 said:

I never considered a Bino viewer, do they really enhance the viewing experience that much? I’ll take a look into it!

Personally I feel a binoviewer is the single biggest game changer I've experienced. Intricate Lunar and planetary detail becomes far easier to see, and good quality simple eyepieces can outperform the best high end single eyepiece. I know that some observers seem to struggle with binoviewers, but I think they are worth persevering with. Once you've got it set for your eyesight, don't let anyone else mess around with it. It's almost as if a binoviewer turns a top class 4" scope into a top class 5", a 5" into a 6" and so on. I see more through my 100mm Tak apo using a binoviewer than I ever saw through my 128mm Tak apo with just a single eyepice. 

[johninderby]

1 hour ago, BS269 said:

I never considered a Bino viewer, do they really enhance the viewing experience that much? I’ll take a look into it!

 

It all depends. Some people get on with binoviewers and some don’t If ypu find using binoculars comfortable you will probably like binoviewers. I don’t use binoculars as they always give me a headache but I’m just one of those that isn’t suited to them.

[John]

40 minutes ago, johninderby said:

 

It all depends. Some people get on with binoviewers and some don’t If ypu find using binoculars comfortable you will probably like binoviewers. I don’t use binoculars as they always give me a headache but I’m just one of those that isn’t suited to them.

I'm in the camp that do not get on with binoviewers as well. I have tried them a number of times.

I appreciate that some really do find them game changers though.

 

[BS269]

When I was about 13/14 years old and wanted to buy a telescope, but I was recommended to buy a pair of binoculars instead, much cheaper and good to start out on he said. So I got a pair of 10x50’s and I loved them. The only annoying thing about them was that I couldn’t get a stable enough view with my hands. If binoviewers are a love or hate thing then I’m pretty sure I’d love them. I will definitely look for a way to mount my binos on the EQ6-R, if it’s possible. Talk about wide field!