SkyWatcher Explorer 150pds Vs 200pds

[Saketh]

I am a newbie here and this is my first post!

I have been a naked eye/binoculars stargazer for quite some time. Now I am planning to step into DSO astronomy - both Visual and AP.

After a lot of research and deliberation, I have decided to buy a Newtonian and an HEQ5 mount.

I have narrowed it down to 2 scopes - SkyWatcher Explorer 150 PDS and 200 PDS. I would like to know the inputs from the experts here if either has an advantage on the other. Specifically the following points:

1. Planetary Visual Astronomy

2. DSO Visual Astronomy

2. Planetary Imaging

3. DSO Imaging

150 PDS has a wider FOV, which probably makes better for viewing/imaging larger objects. But will it give a clearer image when magnified with EP?

Thanks in advance for any pointers with this

[Ags]

Welcome to the forum! For DSO imaging on a HEQ5, a smaller scope is a better choice (because it would be easier on the mount and less focal length makes tracking easier) so the 150 would be my choice over the 200 for that. For planetary imaging the 200 would be better as it offers better resolution, and planetary imaging can tolerate poorer mounting. For visual DSO and planetary observation the 200 would have a slight edge - giving 33% more magnification for the same brightness (i.e. a nebula will be the same brightness but slightly bigger). 

I have owned a 150 PDS and it is quite large already. Another thing to think about is that  a Newt on an EQ mount can be a bit awkward for visual use - the eyepiece can get into awkward positions.

Edited July 4, 2020 by Ags

[Saketh]

7 hours ago, Ags said:

Welcome to the forum! For DSO imaging on a HEQ5, a smaller scope is a better choice (because it would be easier on the mount and less focal length makes tracking easier) so the 150 would be my choice over the 200 for that. For planetary imaging the 200 would be better as it offers better resolution, and planetary imaging can tolerate poorer mounting. For visual DSO and planetary observation the 200 would have a slight edge - giving 33% more magnification for the same brightness (i.e. a nebula will be the same brightness but slightly bigger). 

I have owned a 150 PDS and it is quite large already. Another thing to think about is that  a Newt on an EQ mount can be a bit awkward for visual use - the eyepiece can get into awkward positions.

Thanks very much for responding. Those are some good points. I will consider them in my weight age matrix - it is a tough thing to make a decision 😄.

Incidentally I already thought about the point you made about eyepiece position of a Newt on and EQ mount and read about various workarounds people have been doing. But that surely was a compromise that I thought I could make.

[happy-kat]

Will you be moving and assembling and disassembling after each use? Is storage location to setup far and are stairs involved? Is your site exposed to regular wind?

Just a few thoughts

Edited July 5, 2020 by happy-kat
Spelling

[Saketh]

7 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

Will you be moving and assembling and disassembling after each use? Is storage location to setup far and are stairs involved? Is your site exposed to regular wind?

Just a few thoughts

 

I wouldn't probably have to unmount/mount when doing it at the back garden. But I may have to swap between back and front back gardens depending on what my target is, but it is unlikely that it will be on a single night.

However the light pollution where I live is quite high. So I am planning to drive to some countryside once in a while - may be once a month is what I imagine.

So mobility factor is moderate I would say.

8 hours ago, Ags said:

Welcome to the forum! For DSO imaging on a HEQ5, a smaller scope is a better choice (because it would be easier on the mount and less focal length makes tracking easier) so the 150 would be my choice over the 200 for that. For planetary imaging the 200 would be better as it offers better resolution, and planetary imaging can tolerate poorer mounting. For visual DSO and planetary observation the 200 would have a slight edge - giving 33% more magnification for the same brightness (i.e. a nebula will be the same brightness but slightly bigger). 

I have owned a 150 PDS and it is quite large already. Another thing to think about is that  a Newt on an EQ mount can be a bit awkward for visual use - the eyepiece can get into awkward positions.

Thanks very much for responding. Those are some good points. I will consider them in my weight age matrix - it is a tough thing to make a decision 😄.

Incidentally I already thought about the point you made about eyepiece position of a Newt on and EQ mount and read about various workarounds people have been doing. But that surely was a compromise that I thought I could make.