Grab n go systems

[Stardaze]

I think that further along the track, I’d like a nice frac, maybe a 120ED. But, I keep thinking about a small mak to complement the 10” dob as a portable scope for lunar, planetary and the odd cluster.
How good are the 127’s? Do they resolve well or is it worth saving a bit for a 150 skymax? Be interested to hear your thoughts.. 

[johninderby]

The 127 mak is a good liitle scope whether you go for the SW one or the Bresser / Omegon one. 

The SW127 OTA is 3kg and the 150 is 5.3kg so will need a more substantial mount.. The 127 will go on an AZ5 just fine but the 150 really needs something stronger like a Skytee and takes a lot longer to cool down and not really grab’n’go.

I just replaced my Omegon 127  f/15 mak with a ScopeTech 80mm f/15 refractor. Completely different but a great planetary scope.

Edited June 30, 2020 by johninderby

[Stardaze]

13 minutes ago, johninderby said:

The 127 mak is a good liitle scope whether you go for the SW one or the Bresser / Omegon one. 

The SW127 OTA is 3kg and the 150 is 5.3kg so will need a more substantial mount.. The 127 will go on an AZ5 just fine but the 150 really needs something stronger like a Skytee and takes a lot longer to cool down and not really grab’n’go.

I just replaced my Omegon 127  f/15 mak with a ScopeTech 80mm f/15 refractor. Completely different but a great planetary scope.

Thanks John. I was looking at those scopetechs earlier. From what I’ve read, seems like you need to spend a bit more on a frac ideally? There’s the AR127?

The mak is nice and portable but how good is the output?! Would it be an impulse buy that gets sold later? Maybe a 130PDS could do a job too for that budget but the smaller form of the mak appeals.

Is the AZ-5 better than a gti Mount?

[johninderby]

The ScopeTech is in a totaly different class to the AR127. The AR127 is better suited to low power observing due to CA when you try to push the magnification whereas the ScopeTech is a great high power scope with great optics and virtually no CA and better than a short focal length 80mm ED scope on lunar and planetray.. Definately a best buy and a classic scope.

The mak will give excellent sharp lunar / planetary views in a very compact package and should never need collimating. The 130pds would be better for DSOs with it’s wider fov but not quite as good as the mak on planetary.

The AZ-GTI is GOTO and the AZ5 is a manual alt-az mount so it comes down to do younwant GOTO or manual?

Edited June 30, 2020 by johninderby

[Stardaze]

50 minutes ago, johninderby said:

The ScopeTech is in a totaly different class to the AR127. The AR127 is better suited to low power observing due to CA when you try to push the magnification whereas the ScopeTech is a great high power scope with great optics and virtually no CA and better than a short focal length 80mm ED scope on lunar and planetray.. Definately a best buy and a classic scope.

The mak will give excellent sharp lunar / planetary views in a very compact package and should never need collimating. The 130pds would be better for DSOs with it’s wider fov but not quite as good as the mak on planetary.

The AZ-GTI is GOTO and the AZ5 is a manual alt-az mount so it comes down to do younwant GOTO or manual?

Manual is good for me. Not bothered about DSO we have the dob for that, just fancy a travel option that is good for planetary and lunar, maybe the odd cluster. Maybe I could ensure the legs are stable enough for a frac addition later on? Could be a xmas present to myself later in the year..

[Greymouser]

You are considering a Mak, which is understandable, but don't forget the little C5s that are available. A little more expensive, but also lighter and more adaptable when you add in a reducer. Two telescope in one at F6.3 and F10. It easily goes on the AZGTi, is without a doubt grab and go. ( As long as you get a good AZGTi... ) Best of all the C5 can be got from £499 at Grovers.

I got the Omni version and got a very good example of C5. Which with the deal FLO were offering at the time, gave me a CG4 for £20!

Edit: In fact they have the same package I got for £ 499!!! Here.

Edited June 30, 2020 by Greymouser

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

For "lunar, planetary and the odd cluster", a 102mm Mak would do the job. Smaller, lighter and much cheaper than a 127 if you just want a little grab and go set up. A tack sharp view up to 200x. Short cool down time (15 mins?). No complaints.

I love mine, it compliments the 6" newtonian really well and doesn't tax the AZ-GTI at all.

 

Edited June 30, 2020 by ScouseSpaceCadet

[Stardaze]

42 minutes ago, Greymouser said:

You are considering a Mak, which is understandable, but don't forget the little C5s that are available. A little more expensive, but also lighter and more adaptable when you add in a reducer. Two telescope in one at F6.3 and F10. It easily goes on the AZGTi, is without a doubt grab and go. ( As long as you get a good AZGTi... ) Best of all the C5 can be got from £499 at Grovers.

I got the Omni version and got a very good example of C5. Which with the deal FLO were offering at the time, gave me a CG4 for £20!

Edit: In fact they have the same package I got for £ 499!!! Here.

That’s an nice looking scope that I wasn’t aware of. I’ll look into that.

[HollyHound]

I’ve got both the C5 and Mak 127 and love both. 

The C5, as was said earlier, is a really nice scope for grab and go. It’s very light, easily mounted on anything (I have it on an AZ5), and gives a useful 5” of aperture (so excellent for DSOs as well as very decent for lunar and planets). It can take a little while to cool down, but certainly very usable immediately. As the earlier post pointed out, a focal reducer can be used which gives a wider brighter field of view.

The Mak 127 is a bit heavier and takes a bit longer to cool down properly, but gives truly excellent views of the moon and planets. Really good for double stars and good on DSOs too.

Both of these attract dew fairly easily, so a dew shield is really required (also protects the front glass correctors).

There are reviews of both scopes here, from a very experienced reviewer...

http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/CelestronC5XLT.htm
http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/SW127Mak.htm

Good luck with the hunt 😊

[HollyHound]

2 hours ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

For "lunar, planetary and the odd cluster", a 102mm Mak would do the job. Smaller, lighter and much cheaper than a 127 if you just want a little grab and go set up. A tack sharp view up to 200x. Short cool down time (15 mins?). No complaints.

+1 for the Mak 102... this was my first scope and used it quite happily, until I gave it to a family member and upgraded to the Mak 127 😊

[Stardaze]

I think I’m swaying towards the SW 127, seem nice little units. How are the stock focuser and diagonal? Do they need upgrading straight away?

[johninderby]

25 minutes ago, Stardaze said:

I think I’m swaying towards the SW 127, seem nice little units. How are the stock focuser and diagonal? Do they need upgrading straight away?

Stock focuser is not bad at all but diagonal is cheap plastic bodied one Best to get a 1.25” dielectric diagonal. 

This is OK.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/stellamira-1-25-90-di-electric-diagonal.html

This is better but more expensive.and has a micro focuser on it.

https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/baader-prism-diagonal-t-2-90-with-focusing-eyepiece-holder-and-125-nosepiece.html

Edited July 1, 2020 by johninderby

[bomberbaz]

A 127 weighs about 3kg, well my celestron one does. I use it on the AZ gti mount although it will soon be stuck on a skytee-2 as well. I originally bought a 102/gti set up but was quickly underwhelmed with the 102. Got a 2nd hand 127 and there is to me quite a difference. 

The az gti is simple and a great bit of kit. Some have struggled with it but from what I can gather much of this has been down to tech issues rather than the actual mount. 

Yes as John says you will need a new diagonal. I gave the one mine came with away as a sweetener cos its better than nothing, but not by much. 

The rdf is the typical cheapo one but it is adequate if you are using goto to just get you set. Once your set, it isn't needed anymore.

[Paz]

Everyone will have different parameters for what is grab and go but for me I would say a 127 Mak is in grab and go territory but a 150 Mak isn't quite.

[Stardaze]

Definitely will go the AZ5 route over gti but not certain about the black bundled tripod in the kit. Prefer the stainless version but, would I still need an extension?

[HollyHound]

12 minutes ago, Stardaze said:

Definitely will go the AZ5 route over gti but not certain about the black bundled tripod in the kit. Prefer the stainless version but, would I still need an extension?

You won't need the extension for a Mak 127. I've had both on the AZ5 on stainless steel tripod and you can go from horizon to zenith easily 👍

[Stardaze]

33 minutes ago, HollyHound said:

You won't need the extension for a Mak 127. I've had both on the AZ5 on stainless steel tripod and you can go from horizon to zenith easily 👍

Super - thanks!

[HollyHound]

The AZ5 can be adjusted into two positions, one is closer to vertical and the other angles back about 45 degrees.

The angled position should really only be necessary for mounting refractors, however I tend to use the angled position as it’s slightly easier to push the mount around in azimuth, but experiment with what is best for you.

Edited July 2, 2020 by HollyHound

[Stardaze]

1 hour ago, HollyHound said:

The AZ5 can be adjusted into two positions, one is closer to vertical and the other angles back about 45 degrees.

The angled position should really only be necessary for mounting refractors, however I tend to use the angled position as it’s slightly easier to push the mount around in azimuth, but experiment with what is best for you.

The bundled black tripod deal works out £100 cheaper then a stainless so might just be the sensible option. I was thinking that the stainless could future proof me for other options later on? Thanks for the info, I like the look of the AZ5.

[HollyHound]

30 minutes ago, Stardaze said:

The bundled black tripod deal works out £100 cheaper then a stainless so might just be the sensible option. I was thinking that the stainless could future proof me for other options later on? Thanks for the info, I like the look of the AZ5.

The stainless steel1.75”  tripod Is much more stable, a major difference. The AZ5 head On its own is £139 I think and the steel tripod is £104. The head with the aluminium tripod is £199, so you’re looking at an additional £40

However, if you’re getting a bundle deal with a Mak 127 or other scope; that should indeed be cheaper.

Good luck with your purchase 😊

[HollyHound]

20 hours ago, johninderby said:

Stock focuser is not bad at all but diagonal is cheap plastic bodied one Best to get a 1.25” dielectric diagonal. 

This is OK.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/stellamira-1-25-90-di-electric-diagonal.html

This is better but more expensive.and has a micro focuser on it.

https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/baader-prism-diagonal-t-2-90-with-focusing-eyepiece-holder-and-125-nosepiece.html

+1 for the Baader prism diagonal. It lives in my Mak 127, although I have replaced the focusing eyepiece with a 1.25" Baader ClickLock. However, I have the 2" version of that StellaMira diagonal and it's really nice, so either is good.