Nextstar 127 MAK, 130 SLT or Orion Starblast 6i

[mil5nov]

Hi All,

My husband's birthday is coming up and I decided to give him a telescope - something he's always been dreaming of.

I have narrowed down my research to the 3 below:

Celestron Nexstar 127MAK

Celestron Nexstar 130SLT

Orion Starblast 6i

I am looking for a scope that would be "best of both worlds" - to be able to watch planets and DSO's (since I cannot ask my husband which one he prefers and there is only few planets and many DSOs).

A bit of thinking behind my choices:

Celestron Nexstar 127MAK - best magnification from all 3 choices which will be great for planets but the narrow FOV can be an issue for DOS. It's a MAK so no collination, which we would have no idea how to do. Apparently this scope is a bit sturdier on the mount and tripod than 130 and it's possible to watch stars in zenith which I read is an issue with 130. 

Celestron Nexstar 130SLT - wider FOV which is better for DOS, but will this badly affect planet view? Also, the collination scares me.

Orion Starblast 6i - the obvious advantage is the 6" aperture vs 5" in the other 2. This is a dob with pushto, compared to goto in the other 2. The advantage of this is that it can be operated manually so it can still be used even if power dies, which will be an issue in the other 2. On the other hand the other 2 are tracking the objects where this one does not. Also, it's a tabletop scope so no tripod - not sure if this is a pro or a con. And again - collination. Also, in a lot of posts that I read, dobsonians are recommended as a beginner scopes as apparently you get more scope for your money.

As you can see, all 3 have their pros and cons, which makes it a really hard choice for somebody who has no clue about any of it.

Both of us are total novices so a goto or pushto is a must in order to find what we want to look at.

Additionally, my husband loves photography, so if any of them would be suitable for any photos, it would be a bonus (but it is not a mandatory requirement as I know neither of them is really designed for astrophotography).

Which one of them would you recommend or do you know of any other better scopes that would fit our needs (within budget EUR 550)?

I will appreciate any suggestions.

 

[Geoff Barnes]

Hi @mil5nov, how long have we got to solve your dilemma for you (ie. when is his birthday)?

I don't have experience with any of those scopes, normally I would say go for the biggest aperture of the Dobsonian, but they are not really suitable for photo astronomy, so I'll leave it to forum members with relevant experience to offer advice. Good luck!  

[mil5nov]

8 minutes ago, Geoff Barnes said:

Hi @mil5nov, how long have we got to solve your dilemma for you (ie. when is his birthday)?

I don't have experience with any of those scopes, normally I would say go for the biggest aperture of the Dobsonian, but they are not really suitable for photo astronomy, so I'll leave it to forum members with relevant experience to offer advice. Good luck!  

His Birthday is on the 27th so I guess I should order it next week at the latest.

The photo astronomy would be an added bonus and not really a requirement. So if my choice would be a scope that has photos of not great quality and mediocre viewing quality vs scope without photo option but the viewing quality is better, I would go with the viewing quality.

How hard is the collmination though? This scares me as obviously I don't want to break the new and expensive to my budget scope.

[Geoff Barnes]

29 minutes ago, mil5nov said:

How hard is the collmination though?

I found collimation easy from the get go, but I know a lot of people struggle. A bit like riding a bike, once you get the hang of it it's easy. We can suggest some of the best online tutorials to help you if and when you need them.

[Trikeflyer]

Based on your questions and answers, you have the basic pros and cons.

The mak will be good on the moon and planets.  I have a Meade etc 125 mak and find it poor for deep sky except globular clusters.  As you say, no collimating required. The trouble I find is that the field of view is narrow, making it more difficult to find objects and due to the long f ratio, at higher magnification, the images can be very dark due to the small exit pupil these scopes produce.

My personal view on this is to consider an achromatic refractor for your budget - either 100mm or 120mm.  I think these will be better all round on deep sky nebula and clusters (galaxies are harder but with the apertures you are looking at, galaxies are harder full stop), moon and planets.  They combine good field of view, no collimating, quick to cool down, easy to use and set up. I have mak, reflector and refractor scopes and if I had to lose them all except 1, I’d keep the refractor as an all round tool.  Basic Photography is possible with a refractor.  Consider the following options

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/skywatcher-evostar-120-ota.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-ar-102l-1000-refractor-ota.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-ar-127l-1200-refractor-ota.html

 Then you have to consider the mount if you live in light polluted skies, I think goto makes sense, you will find more stuff, faster once you are set up. if you live in dark skies then maybe a manual mount can be ok. I prefer goto but there are many who don’t and this is personal choice.  I think it can be frustrating searching for stuff and just not finding it when you’re a beginner.  Also if The scope is mainly for visual use, I’d suggest avoiding equatorial mounts and going for alt az mounts.  Here are some possibilities, bot goto and manual - just make sure that the weight limit of the mount is ok for the scope you choose - if the scope is a couple of hundred grams over, this won’t really affect the performance.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth/sky-watcher-star-discovery-wifi-az-goto-mount-tripod.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/sky-watcher-az-gti-wifi-alt-az-mount-tripod.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/sky-watcher-az5-deluxe-alt-azimuth-mount.html

Just my thoughts.

Good luck.

 

[mil5nov]

26 minutes ago, Trikeflyer said:

 

 Then you have to consider the mount if you live in light polluted skies, I think goto makes sense, you will find more stuff, faster once you are set up. if you live in dark skies then maybe a manual mount can be ok. I prefer goto but there are many who don’t and this is personal choice.  I think it can be frustrating searching for stuff and just not finding it when you’re a beginner.  Also if The scope is mainly for visual use, I’d suggest avoiding equatorial mounts and going for alt az mounts.  Here are some possibilities, bot goto and manual - just make sure that the weight limit of the mount is ok for the scope you choose - if the scope is a couple of hundred grams over, this won’t really affect the performance.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth/sky-watcher-star-discovery-wifi-az-goto-mount-tripod.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/sky-watcher-az-gti-wifi-alt-az-mount-tripod.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/sky-watcher-az5-deluxe-alt-azimuth-mount.html

Just my thoughts.

Good luck.

 

It's probably a stupid question but what the heck, can any telescope be used with goto mount? Not based on weight as you mentioned, but are all scopes attached in the same way?

If I would consider this option, I don't want to buy a scope and mount separately and then not being able to attach it.

Also, when converted to EUR it comes a bit above my budget so would have to research if I can get it somewhere bit cheaper.

I live in a town approx 20km from Dublin so the light pollution is not as bad as in Dublin (that's just my observation on how is see sky with naked eye vs what I saw when lived in Dublin) .

[Trikeflyer]

Most scopes come with an attachment called a dovetail which attaches the scope to the mount. They are fairly universal. You might be able to pick up a used combination for your budget. If you had the manual mount it would be within your budget new - I think?

Steve

[RT65CB-SWL]

Hi @mil5nov and welcome to SGL. 

+1 for the advice given by @Trikeflyer in his first reply. 

[Cosmic Geoff]

I hesitate to make a firm recommendation, as it seems risky to suggest a particular telescope as a present for a third party. The differences in telescope design between various types are more than cosmetic and affect their suitability for various tasks. I would suggest that rather than buying from your favorite online retailer, you buy from a specialist astro telescope retailer with a liberal returns policy. Seriously.

Having got that out of the way, here are some suggestions.

The 127mm Maksutov is a quality telescope and stands a good chance of being kept even if the recipient later desires something bigger or different. If you are looking at the Celestron 127SLT outfit, I have one and the tripod is distinctly on the wobbly side (it's almost at the max. load for this mount & tripod design) though far from unusable for visual purposes.

The 130mm Newtonian can be made to do various jobs even if it is not always the ideal instrument for the task.  It will need collimation which will put some people off.

I have not used an Intelliscope but it is a system often used with Dobsonians (mostly in the USA) as a full GoTo pushes up the cost to that of other varieties of GoTo outfit. If you are considering this one you may find you have fewer options for re-mounting it or dispensing with the table which could be a nuisance if you want to take it out into the sticks.

You could get a refractor, but a decent one adequately mounted could cost quite a lot. Beginner refractors tend to be of small aperture otherwise the cost is alarming. (I have a vintage 70mm Ross refractor of long focal length, and I found the cheapest adquate mount cost nearly £200 - and make that £550 for a GoTo mount that would take it.)

I note that all the outfits you cite are either GoTo or push-to.  I rate GoTo highly (as you can see from my sig), but it seems that some people just can't get on with GoTo at all.  In which case you have to balance the aggravation of being unable to make the GoTo work with the aggravation of great difficulty of ever finding any faint object (and no tracking) if you opt for the simple and more-aperture-for-the-money Dobsonian outfits.

Having the battery run out is not in practice a serious issue. You should be using an external power pack, or have spare primary batteries on hand.  I have several powerpacks...

As for "... some astrophotography", I suggest you forget about it till you have tried hanging a camera on the telescope of choice and seen how dire or otherwise the results seem to you.  Deep space and planetary astrophotography have quite different requirements. One cannot guarantee than a general purpose Newtonian will even come to focus with a camera.

Also be aware that whatever you buy it will come with the bare essentials to get it working on the first night, and it will be much improved by spending some money on a set of half-decent eyepieces at £30 to £50 each, and an external power pack in place of the near-useless primary batteries.  Many of the entry-level outfits are under-mounted, giving some owners thoughts about a sturdier tripod.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Cosmic Geoff
Refractor thoughts.

[mil5nov]

30 minutes ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

I hesitate to make a firm recommendation, as it seems risky to suggest a particular telescope as a present for a third party. The differences in telescope design between various types are more than cosmetic and affect their suitability for various tasks. I would suggest that rather than buying from your favorite online retailer, you buy from a specialist astro telescope retailer with a liberal returns policy. Seriously.

Having got that out of the way, here are some suggestions.

The 127mm Maksutov is a quality telescope and stands a good chance of being kept even if the recipient later desires something bigger or different. If you are looking at the Celestron 127SLT outfit, I have one and the tripod is distinctly on the wobbly side (it's almost at the max. load for this mount & tripod design) though far from unusable for visual purposes.

The 130mm Newtonian can be made to do various jobs even if it is not always the ideal instrument for the task.  It will need collimation which will put some people off.

I have not used an Intelliscope but it is a system often used with Dobsonians (mostly in the USA) as a full GoTo pushes up the cost to that of other varieties of GoTo outfit. If you are considering this one you may find you have fewer options for re-mounting it or dispensing with the table which could be a nuisance if you want to take it out into the sticks.

 

I note that all the outfits you cite are either GoTo or push-to.  I rate GoTo highly (as you can see from my sig), but it seems that some people just can't get on with GoTo at all.  In which case you have to balance the aggravation of being unable to make the GoTo work with the aggravation of great difficulty of ever finding any faint object (and no tracking) if you opt for the simple and more-aperture-for-the-money Dobsonian outfits.

Having the battery run out is not in practice a serious issue. You should be using an external power pack, or have spare primary batteries on hand.  I have several powerpacks...

As for "... some astrophotography", I suggest you forget about it till you have tried hanging a camera on the telescope of choice and seen how dire or otherwise the results seem to you.  Deep space and planetary astrophotography have quite different requirements. One cannot guarantee than a general purpose Newtonian will even come to focus with a camera.

Also be aware that whatever you buy it will come with the bare essentials to get it working on the first night, and it will be much improved by spending some money on a set of half-decent eyepieces at £30 to £50 each, and an external power pack in place of the near-useless primary batteries.  Many of the entry-level outfits are under-mounted, giving some owners thoughts about a sturdier tripod.

Thank you.

I am looking as well on refractor telescopes as suggested by Trikeflyer however combined with goto mount they seem to be a bit outside of my price range. 

The goto/ push to is a feature that I cannot budge on. I know there will be a learning curve to align it properly as well but I guess it's still easier than star hopping to see what we want to see

So based on your explanation do you think, the MAK would be the best for our needs based on the 3?

This is somewhat my primary choice but the narrow FOV is bit off putting (as the collimation is off putting in the other 2).

I seriously never knew there is so many factors to consider when buying a telescope.

[Cosmic Geoff]

3 minutes ago, mil5nov said:

So based on your explanation do you think, the MAK would be the best for our needs based on the 3?

I can only say that I have one, and I found it okay for looking at various objects till I had the urge to get something bigger...

Large, bright, star clusters will not go in the field of view. In theory, some large galaxies like M31 will not fit but in practice all you are likely to see is the bright nucleus.  Otherwise, not a problem. A 32mm Plossl eyepiece would gain you some extra FOV compared with the 25mm which (I assume) comes with it.  It works great on double stars (for its size, with an eyepiece upgrade)

The Nexstar+ GoTo is easy to use once you figure it out from the manual. I had some use from mine the first night IIRC.  If you must use primary batteries, get Duracell - cheaper varieties may totally fail to work.

After I bought a specialist planetary camera, I got an image of Jupiter with the Mak which clearly showed the Great Red Spot, which I found almost impossible to see visually. I never even tried to image any deep-space objects with this telescope & SLT mount combo.

[arjunv]

Hi....I had the same question....on this 3 options. Which one do you finally get and howz your experience so far. Appreciate your feedback. 

[Paul M]

A few years ago I was asked the same question by my good friend's wife. He had a casual interest in the night sky and she thought a telescope would make a nice present.

I ended up blindly suggesting the Celestron 127 SLT Mak. 

She bought one from First Light Optics and I helped him set it up. Unfortunately it was just too involved for him. The mount isn't suitable for casual pointing at objects, It requires aligning each time it's used and can only be moved by way of the handset.

I now own that scope but don't use the mount. I use my bigger equatorial mount with it. It's a nice telescope but I wouldn't recommend the SLT mount. A simple Alt-Az mount is a better option to see if Mr. mil5now  gets the bug before over complicating things.

[arjunv]

Thanks. I wanted to go for 127 SLT  MAK. I understand that the brighter DSO's would be smudgier than the 130 SLT. But I live in Abudhabi city which has high light pollution. I'll be viewing from my Apartment balcony mostly which has like 150° view towards south....(Hence EQ allignment without the polestar is difficult and  seemed a bit confusing for me.) With either of the scopes I  would have to travel 30-40 mins out of the city to view the DSO'S in a better way I guess. 

Then there is problem with Dust even during storage or use which am worried coz of which I was slightly tilted towards the 127 SLT MAK as it's a closed tube.

For either I'll be ending up paying close to 800 USD :-0. (THATS the price am seeing in Amazon or local retailers) seems like prices has gone up drastically + delivery charges may be.

Hope 127 SLT would Rekindle my love for stargazing and with go-to feature make it easier. May later once I get hold on things I can move on to bigger and better scopes and EQ mounts.

 

[boulderbelly]

On 08/06/2020 at 10:50, mil5nov said:

Hi All,

My husband's birthday is coming up and I decided to give him a telescope - something he's always been dreaming of.

I have narrowed down my research to the 3 below:

Celestron Nexstar 127MAK

Celestron Nexstar 130SLT

Orion Starblast 6i

I am looking for a scope that would be "best of both worlds" - to be able to watch planets and DSO's (since I cannot ask my husband which one he prefers and there is only few planets and many DSOs).

A bit of thinking behind my choices:

Celestron Nexstar 127MAK - best magnification from all 3 choices which will be great for planets but the narrow FOV can be an issue for DOS. It's a MAK so no collination, which we would have no idea how to do. Apparently this scope is a bit sturdier on the mount and tripod than 130 and it's possible to watch stars in zenith which I read is an issue with 130. 

Celestron Nexstar 130SLT - wider FOV which is better for DOS, but will this badly affect planet view? Also, the collination scares me.

Orion Starblast 6i - the obvious advantage is the 6" aperture vs 5" in the other 2. This is a dob with pushto, compared to goto in the other 2. The advantage of this is that it can be operated manually so it can still be used even if power dies, which will be an issue in the other 2. On the other hand the other 2 are tracking the objects where this one does not. Also, it's a tabletop scope so no tripod - not sure if this is a pro or a con. And again - collination. Also, in a lot of posts that I read, dobsonians are recommended as a beginner scopes as apparently you get more scope for your money.

As you can see, all 3 have their pros and cons, which makes it a really hard choice for somebody who has no clue about any of it.

Both of us are total novices so a goto or pushto is a must in order to find what we want to look at.

Additionally, my husband loves photography, so if any of them would be suitable for any photos, it would be a bonus (but it is not a mandatory requirement as I know neither of them is really designed for astrophotography).

Which one of them would you recommend or do you know of any other better scopes that would fit our needs (within budget EUR 550)?

I will appreciate any suggestions.

 

 celestron nexstar 127 Mak slt for portability 

[boulderbelly]

 this scope is great for planets and its a short tube maksutov 127mm x 1500mm focal length   and only 12 inches in length .  superb!!

Edited September 12, 2021 by boulderbelly

[RT65CB-SWL]

Hi @arjunv and welcome to SGL. 

A few benefits of getting a catadioptric 'scope are...

• long focal length 'scope in a short tube.
• excellent for lunar and planetary observing/viewing.
• can be used for other outdoor moobes/pursuits.
• can get away as 'carry-on' baggage at the airport... pack the tripod and mount in the suitcase.
• hardly ever require collimation.

Below are some images of my 're-modded' ETX105...

 

Edited September 13, 2021 by Philip R

[arjunv]

Thanks @Philip R for the feedback. On further research I was drawn more towards the STARSENSE EXPLORER series. Forgive me for the long post.

My final short list was

NEXSTAR 127 SLT MAK COMPUTERIZED , -900 USD

NEXSTAR 130 SLT NWT COMPUTERIZED-816 USD

CELESTRON 22204 5" ASTRO FI SCT -1000 USD

CELESTRON C22463 STARSENSE EXPLORER DX 6 SCT - 1252 USD

CELESTRON C22462 STARSENSE EXPLORER DX 5 SCT -1000 USD

CELESTRON C22460 STARSENSE EXPLORER DX 102AZ -760 USD

CELESTRON STARSENSE EXPLORER LT 127AZ -430 USD

CELESTRON STARSENSE EXPLORER DX 130AZ- 600 USD

STARSENSE 127 SLTAZ seems to be bird Jones design which no one is recommending.

I wanted to go for SCT due to fear of dust or cleaning in the open tube NWT and COLLIMATION.

I wanted to view planets and more of DSO'S. 127 MAK was my first shortlist even though DSO'S is not it's strong point.

As you can see the prices seems to be higher when delivered to my region :-(. Not getting good value for money.

I have loved to go for DX 6 SCT even though am paying huge money. But being new to this hobby spending 1200 USD for that scope doesn't seem to give me the thrills but close 6", closed tube SCT and star sense does.

DX 130AZ @ 600 USD seems to be a reasonable choice (still expensive compared other region prices 😞 ) . Only open tube and collimation seems to worry me. Am in a highly light polluted zone. Abu Dhabi and finding 3 stars to allign itself seemed to be an issue due to light pollution, hence STARSENSE PUSH TO seemed a better option than the GO TO SERIES.

Appreciate any inputs from you guyx

 

 

 

On 10/09/2021 at 21:05, Paul M said:

A few years ago I was asked the same question by my good friend's wife. He had a casual interest in the night sky and she thought a telescope would make a nice present.

I ended up blindly suggesting the Celestron 127 SLT Mak. 

She bought one from First Light Optics and I helped him set it up. Unfortunately it was just too involved for him. The mount isn't suitable for casual pointing at objects, It requires aligning each time it's used and can only be moved by way of the handset.

I now own that scope but don't use the mount. I use my bigger equatorial mount with it. It's a nice telescope but I wouldn't recommend the SLT mount. A simple Alt-Az mount is a better option to see if Mr. mil5now  gets the bug before over complicating things.

 

Edited September 13, 2021 by arjunv

[RT65CB-SWL]

Hi again @arjunv and thank you.

A few things I forgot to mention when observing with a catadioptric 'scope from the balcony would be better, because...

• you will be behind the 'scope with a Mak or SCT, not at the side as with a 'Newtonian'.
• the image through the e/p is right way up, left and right are reversed.
• whether dew is or not an issue in Abu Dhabi or the rest of the Middle East, I don't know, but purchasing a dew shield will help in reducing stray light and improving some contrast.
• every now and again, wind the focus in & out a few times as this will help spread the grease/lubricant along the baffle tube.
• when in storage, ensure you store it objective end up. You do not what that grease/lubricant dripping onto the corrector plate/menicuis cell when it is hot. 

 

Now for some eyepiece and filter advice, etc...

• don't buy a set of eyepieces because it is at a special price when purchased as a bundle with the 'scope. I used to be anti-zoom e/p. Having one in you 'scope case/bag can give you an idea of what to expect for a fixed length when you decide to purchase individual ones later on.
• Plossl e/p's are the most popular type supplied [usually 25mm and/or 10mm] and have an AFOV of 50deg. BST StarGuider's are 60deg., (here in GB/UK, new BST StarGuider's retail for about £50.00GBP per unit), and you may find these are better for DSO's. Then there are the types offered with 'exotic' names by other manufacturers. Many years ago I observed M31, (Andromeda Galaxy), with with an ETX125, (not mine), at a star party and a Plossl, it filled the eyepiece. Put in a e/p with wider FOV and it gave a better and more rewarding view.
• some filters do improve things. The most popular ones I use are UHC, OIII and Neodymium. For the Moon I use a variable polarising filter. Some light pollution filters 'do work' though not with LED street lighting. I sometimes use colour filters for the planets.     

Edited September 14, 2021 by Philip R