Next upgrade choice

[AstroNebulee]

Hi

This question will of been asked a bazillion times so here goes. I have an astromaster 130eq new style on a cg3 eq3 mount I've had it for 3 months now so still finding dso or planets to look at and plenty of life in the scope. But whenever I think of upgrading to another scope I'm looking for some help, I was looking at a skymaster explorer 200p Inc eq5vmount for £469, this is a beast of a size, I live in a first floor flat so this will probably be a bit cumbersome to lug up and down the stairs, I would love this scope but the size it a bit off putting, is there anything in this price range that's better than my 130eq that may be a bit smaller than the 200p explorer I'm open to refractors, maks etc, I realise these are costlier than newts and apperature is king, I like astrophotography but only using my smartphone or webcam to capture images so not worried about using a dslr on the scope. I have been looking on the sale sites for alternatives but require some great advice from the friendly people on here as they've guided mecvery well in the past. I know each scope has disadvantages and advantages. 

[miguel87]

25 minutes ago, LeeHore7 said:

Hi

This question will of been asked a bazillion times so here goes. I have an astromaster 130eq new style on a cg3 eq3 mount I've had it for 3 months now so still finding dso or planets to look at and plenty of life in the scope. But whenever I think of upgrading to another scope I'm looking for some help, I was looking at a skymaster explorer 200p Inc eq5vmount for £469, this is a beast of a size, I live in a first floor flat so this will probably be a bit cumbersome to lug up and down the stairs, I would love this scope but the size it a bit off putting, is there anything in this price range that's better than my 130eq that may be a bit smaller than the 200p explorer I'm open to refractors, maks etc, I realise these are costlier than newts and apperature is king, I like astrophotography but only using my smartphone or webcam to capture images so not worried about using a dslr on the scope. I have been looking on the sale sites for alternatives but require some great advice from the friendly people on here as they've guided mecvery well in the past. I know each scope has disadvantages and advantages. 

Hi Lee,

I would ask what it is about your current view with the 130 that you want to upgrade. That might point you in the right direction.

Brighter - go for more aperture. Even a 150 will make a noticeable difference.

Sharper image - maybe try out a refractor to see how much difference you get.

Sturdier mount - maybe you dont new a new scope at all.

 

Having said that, I have no idea what quality your eyepieces are and an upgrade there can make an old scope feel new.

Mike

[AstroNebulee]

4 minutes ago, miguel87 said:

Hi Lee,

I would ask what it is about your current view with the 130 that you want to upgrade. That might point you in the right direction.

Brighter - go for more aperture. Even a 150 will make a noticeable difference.

Sharper image - maybe try out a refractor to see how much difference you get.

Sturdier mount - maybe you dont new a new scope at all.

 

Having said that, I have no idea what quality your eyepieces are and an upgrade there can make an old scope feel new.

Mike

Hi Mike 

Thank you for your reply. 

The only thing about the 130eq is wanting to get more detail on the planets and moon, I have no issues with the mount per say, I have 4.7, 7.5, 10, 20 and 32mm astro essential plossl from flo a celestron 2x barlow and a 3x barlow on order so this may suffice, I know staguiders are highly recommended on here but we're out of my price range at the time. I was thinking how much difference a 150mm scope would be considering its not much bigger than a 130mm but if you say the difference is considerably better I'd think of the skywatcher explorer 150 as smaller in hugeness than the 200p 

[miguel87]

A boost of more than 30% light gathering if you step up from 130mm to 150mm, so it's pretty considerable.

My personal thoughts would be to invest in eyepieces first. I have never used the astro essential plossly but there design and price suggest they are fairly modest. I have been amazed at the difference using a £50 eyepiece over a £20 one. Especially at short focal lengths which is what you want for planetary and lunar detail. I would buy good quality 6 and 9mm eyepieces.

✌

 

[bottletopburly]

If moon and planets then look at a 127mm mak same aperture 1500 fl  

[AstroNebulee]

46 minutes ago, miguel87 said:

A boost of more than 30% light gathering if you step up from 130mm to 150mm, so it's pretty considerable.

My personal thoughts would be to invest in eyepieces first. I have never used the astro essential plossly but there design and price suggest they are fairly modest. I have been amazed at the difference using a £50 eyepiece over a £20 one. Especially at short focal lengths which is what you want for planetary and lunar detail. I would buy good quality 6 and 9mm eyepieces.

✌

 

Thanks Mike, I may try a couple of starguider eps first as much cheaper than a new scope, but I like the sound of 30% more light than my 130eq (just 20mm makes that much difference) I like my 130eq and a good scope will give it a chance with the starguiders. The astro essentials plossls are medium grade and affordable to have a few in the collection I guess and thought I'd go for these first before going for starguiders. The starguider are either in 8 or 5mm Mike do you suggest the 8mm as my first as cannot afford both 

Edited July 16, 2020 by LeeHore7

[miguel87]

What is the focal length of your scope? If it is 850mm then I would be tempted to get the 5mm for 170x magnification rather than 106x from the 8mm. That's presuming you mainly want it for planetary viewing. The 8km would be more versatile for some deep sky objects.

When viewing planets I guess I use around 150-300× magnification usually.

[John]

One cheap way to get more detail on the moon and planets is to observe them as often as possible and for extended periods.

Its surprising how the eye starts to get "trained" and picking out the more subtle details becomes a little easier each time you observe a particular object.

An eyepiece upgrade can make a slight difference but gaining observing experience and skill somewhat more I reckon.

 

 

[AstroNebulee]

7 minutes ago, miguel87 said:

What is the focal length of your scope? If it is 850mm then I would be tempted to get the 5mm for 170x magnification rather than 106x from the 8mm. That's presuming you mainly want it for planetary viewing. The 8km would be more versatile for some deep sky objects.

When viewing planets I guess I use around 150-300× magnification usually.

The focal length is 650mm so for 5mm= 130x or with x2 barlow =260x which is a very step push put plausible I think. And 8mm will be 81.5x so will go with the 5mm starguider. 

[AstroNebulee]

1 hour ago, John said:

One cheap way to get more detail on the moon and planets is to observe them as often as possible and for extended periods.

Its surprising how the eye starts to get "trained" and picking out the more subtle details becomes a little easier each time you observe a particular object.

An eyepiece upgrade can make a slight difference but gaining observing experience and skill somewhat more I reckon.

 

 

Hi John 

Yes I read this aswell, I will continue viewing the planets as much as I can and already with a photo taken and stacked of Jupiter with my webcam I can see the beginnings of the hrs, but when looking through the ep it's just very overexposed due to chronic abberation and low down, I have used a baader polarising filter aswell before a bit marmite I know 

Edited July 16, 2020 by LeeHore7

[John]

5 minutes ago, LeeHore7 said:

... when looking through the ep it's just very overexposed due to chronic abberation and low down 

Something very wrong there and not with the eyepieces I think.

A 130mm scope will show good planetary details. I could see Cassini's Division in Saturns rings and a number of Jupiters cloud bands with a 90mm mak-cassegrain a couple of nights back. Not an expensive eyepiece either.

You are further south than I am by 150 miles. Jupiter and Saturn will be a bit higher in the sky than they are here.

 

[AstroNebulee]

38 minutes ago, John said:

Something very wrong there and not with the eyepieces I think.

A 130mm scope will show good planetary details. I could see Cassini's Division in Saturns rings and a number of Jupiters cloud bands with a 90mm mak-cassegrain a couple of nights back. Not an expensive eyepiece either.

You are further south than I am by 150 miles. Jupiter and Saturn will be a bit higher in the sky than they are here.

 

Hi John, I have collimated it with my laser collimation tool and checked the laser for collimation and is fine, I centre marked the primary correctly as astromaster 130eq wasn't centre marked, I've a Cheshire on order from flo just waiting on that to check collimation, the star collimation looks good aswell, I've read on the net that the secondary in the astromaster is slightly offset for a reason that escapes me, the top Jupiter and bottom Saturn were stacked and processed but middle Saturn was live view in the ep and venus, can't remember what combination of ep now 

 

 

Edited July 16, 2020 by LeeHore7

[AstroNebulee]

On 16/07/2020 at 19:54, miguel87 said:

A boost of more than 30% light gathering if you step up from 130mm to 150mm, so it's pretty considerable.

My personal thoughts would be to invest in eyepieces first. I have never used the astro essential plossly but there design and price suggest they are fairly modest. I have been amazed at the difference using a £50 eyepiece over a £20 one. Especially at short focal lengths which is what you want for planetary and lunar detail. I would buy good quality 6 and 9mm eyepieces.

✌

 

I've plumped for it and ordered the skywatcher 150p with eq3 mount as it's at the top of my budget for now and can always upgrade the mount later and get goto aswell, this has been funded by the sale of my astromaster 130eq (and xbox which I've not used in ages) now someone else will get the pleasure of astronomy and a wonderful hobby, thank you for your advice, the astronomy bug has well and truly bitten deep 

Edited July 18, 2020 by LeeHore7

[Pixies]

Hi,

There are reports that the later Astromaster 130eq scopes have a spherical primary mirror, rather than a parabolic one. Could it be spherical aberration that is causing these poor images?

[miguel87]

The images dont look great but depends how they were taken? If I just put my phone camera up to an eyepiece for example I wouldnt expect much more than this.

Hope you enjoy the new telescope 😁

[John]

If the scope was in collimation and what you were seeing though the eyepiece was consistently no better than those images I would say that something is amiss with the scope. My 60mm refractor gives better images than that.

Secondary offset is a normal feature of newtonians with focal ratios of F/6 and faster.

 

[AstroNebulee]

28 minutes ago, Pixies said:

Hi,

There are reports that the later Astromaster 130eq scopes have a spherical primary mirror, rather than a parabolic one. Could it be spherical aberration that is causing these poor images?

It may well be that it's a spherical primary rather than parabolic and it's a new astromaster 130eq so not sure but you could be right pixies. 

[AstroNebulee]

6 minutes ago, John said:

If the scope was in collimation and what you were seeing though the eyepiece was consistently no better than those images I would say that something is amiss with the scope. My 60mm refractor gives better images than that.

Secondary offset is a normal feature of newtonians with focal ratios of F/6 and faster.

 

I have collimated the best I can with my laser, I have a Cheshire hopefully coming on Monday so will give it a check then, but as pixies said earlier could be a spherical mirror rather than parabolic even though it says parabolic 

[AstroNebulee]

11 minutes ago, miguel87 said:

The images dont look great but depends how they were taken? If I just put my phone camera up to an eyepiece for example I wouldnt expect much more than this.

Hope you enjoy the new telescope 😁

Yes these are photos with the smartphone using a nexyz phone adapter 

[John]

The Astromaster 130 uses a parabolic primary mirror. F/5 is too fast for a spherical mirror to produce acceptable results.

For a spherical mirror to produce decent images it has to be F/7 - F8. The Skywatcher Explorer 130 I believe does use a spherical mirror but that is F/6.92. I think the Astromaster uses the same mirror set that is use in scopes such as the Heritage 130 and the Skywatcher Explorer 130P.

I've observed with a couple of Astromaster 130's and they can produce very good views. The finder scope was the weakest link with the scope.

I hope you are happy with your new scope though.

 

[Pixies]

10 minutes ago, John said:

The Astromaster 130 uses a parabolic primary mirror. F/5 is too fast for a spherical mirror to produce acceptable results.

For a spherical mirror to produce decent images it has to be F/7 - F8. The Skywatcher Explorer 130 I believe does use a spherical mirror but that is F/6.92. I think the Astromaster uses the same mirror set that is use in scopes such as the Heritage 130 and the Skywatcher Explorer 130P.

I've observed with a couple of Astromaster 130's and they can produce very good views. The finder scope was the weakest link with the scope.

I hope you are happy with your new scope though.

 

I'd seen some reports about this. But then there's this:

https://www.celestron.com/blogs/knowledgebase/does-my-astromaster-130-have-a-spherical-or-parabolic-mirror-what-is-the-difference

 

I know that's from 2011 - but if Celestron are saying that it had a spherical mirror back then, perhaps there are still some out there with them? 

[John]

15 minutes ago, Pixies said:

I'd seen some reports about this. But then there's this:

https://www.celestron.com/blogs/knowledgebase/does-my-astromaster-130-have-a-spherical-or-parabolic-mirror-what-is-the-difference

 

I know that's from 2011 - but if Celestron are saying that it had a spherical mirror back then, perhaps there are still some out there with them? 

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/42362-parabolic-v-spherical-mirrors/?p=550918

I suspect Celestron's advice is incorrect in this instance.

 

[AstroNebulee]

7 hours ago, John said:

The Astromaster 130 uses a parabolic primary mirror. F/5 is too fast for a spherical mirror to produce acceptable results.

For a spherical mirror to produce decent images it has to be F/7 - F8. The Skywatcher Explorer 130 I believe does use a spherical mirror but that is F/6.92. I think the Astromaster uses the same mirror set that is use in scopes such as the Heritage 130 and the Skywatcher Explorer 130P.

I've observed with a couple of Astromaster 130's and they can produce very good views. The finder scope was the weakest link with the scope.

I hope you are happy with your new scope though.

 

Hi John

Thank you for your advice and help, i will definitely love my new scope when o]it arrives, after some good advice of going for the 150p as the 200p was way to big for my purpose in a first floor flat and the weight, so 150p will sit nicely and as stated 30% more light gathering than the 130eq and hopefully the 150p has a centre marked primary mirror, mount arriving on tuesday so hopefully ota arrives then and cloudy skies will ensue after some clear skies forecast for this weekend here in cornwall, this will be my last upgrade for a while now until i move or saved up enough for a better mount, clear skies everyone :)