SkyWatcher StarQuest vs other SkyWatchers

[Dimitry 4]

Hi all, 

As I'm selecting a new scope with a great help and advice from this community!

As the optical system is getting clearer, I'm now checking the model. And really puzzled with the new SkyWatcher line: StarQuest. It looks on the paper as exactly the same as the telescopes from the other lines, but costs less.

 

Example:

1. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-az-eq-avant/sky-watcher-skymax-102-az-eq-avant.htm

2. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-starquest/sky-watcher-starquest-102mc-f127-maksutov-cassegrain-telescope.html

Optical specs look identical, mounts are like twins, yet StarQuest is 20% cheaper.

Have you had any experiences with these telescopes, are there any hidden tricks what aren't visible on the paper specs?

Does it makes sense to pay extra for a SkyMax on Avant?

 

And a similar question on a StarQuest refractor https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-starquest/sky-watcher-starquest-102r-f49-achromatic-refractor-telescope.html

There is no direct comparison, but is the StarQuest is a copy of StarTravel 102 (https://www.firstlightoptics.com/startravel/skywatcher-startravel-102t-ota.html), or it's a different telescope optically and functionally? 

Edited August 14, 2020 by Dimitry

[Ruud 3,254]

The tripod explains at least part of the price difference. The StarQuest tripod is cheap and not nearly as good.

[vlaiv 5,315]

Optics of said scopes is most certainly the same and in principle they should show you the same.

What differs is usability and maybe some other features. Let's examine both pairs to see possible differences.

In first example, AZ-EQ avant is a better mount. Although they look the same, az-eq is made so it can be used in both EQ and AltAz mode. With StarQuest that is probably not the case. I'm not 100% sure on that one but StarQuest looks like regular EQ mount from SW in design.

Regular EQ mounts from SW can still be used in AltAz mode, but that requires modification and you can't really make them dual mode easily. This example of EQ3 shows why is that so:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/272037-eq-mount-in-alt-az-mode

StarQuest appears to be the same design.

Then there is matter of tripod. It looks like AZ-EQ avant tripod is better quality / more stable and lighter one. As a bonus, you can take AZ-EQ avant mount head and attach it to any photo tripod (which means that you can upgrade tripod easily).

In second case, scope is the same, but details on scope will be different.

Regular ST102 comes with rings and dovetail and can be carried by different mounts that accept vixen dovetail. One on StarQuest has some sort of bolt connection to the mount head - less versatility.

It could be the case that things on OTA are of lesser quality on StarQuest - for example plastic parts. This is done to save weight rather than to save money as StarQuest is really light weight mount.

Something similar has been done with Newtonain scopes and Maks that go on this light weight mounts. Redesigned mirror cells - ones that don't support collimation and look like they are made out of plastic.

Compare these two images:

Second one does not have collimation screws and back end has been redesigned.

Edited August 14, 2020 by vlaiv

[Dimitry 4]

1 hour ago, vlaiv said:

With StarQuest that is probably not the case

I’ve seen the review here on the forum by @Lockie, 

 

there the mount was transformed to AltAz

 

thank for for the hint with plastic details - I will try to find a proper review or call the shop

[vlaiv 5,315]

14 minutes ago, Dimitry said:

I’ve seen the review here on the forum by @Lockie, 

Lockie has done several of these entry level scope reviews and I think it's worth having a look at each one of them. You'll find all the scopes mentioned here being reviewed in one way or the another - ST102, Mak102, etc ...

[Dimitry 4]

Hello again,

what do you think about these offers:

StarTravel 102 on EQ1 vs StartQuest 102R on it’s own mount?

Which set would you think perform more stable?

https://www.teleskop-spezialisten.de/shop/Telescope/Refractor/100-115mm/Skywatcher-Startravel-102-on-EQ1-Mount-Large-Field-Refractor-102mm-500mm-f-5-Telescope::217.html?language=en

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/startravel/sky-watcher-starquest-102r-f49-achromatic-refractor-telescope.html
 

they look similar, I’ve just read that EQ1 might be not stable enough. Would newer StarQuest behave better?

on the other side, in ST102 a Barlow is included, does it any good or I’ll need anyways another barlow to be able to see some details on the planets with this scope? 

 

[vlaiv 5,315]

I think that ST102 will be under mounted on either of those two mounts.

I had ST102 and used it on AZ3 and AZ4 - it was much better on AZ4 but I did miss slow motion controls sometimes. For this reason if you want to get ST102 bundled with a mount, maybe look at this one:

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p10003_Skywatcher-Startravel-102-on-AZ5---Rich-Field-Refractor-on-alt-azimuth-Mount.html

ST102 is not the best scope to observe planets with - there will be a lot of chromatic aberration. Barlow included is together with other starter kit included - very basic and while it will do what it is supposed to do (give you bigger magnification) - it is not going to be very good. Same holds for 10mm eyepiece. 25mm is actually quite decent eyepiece and you won't need to replace that one for some time (until you acquire taste for better eyepieces and you have the budget for it). Diagonal is also not quality item - it serves its purpose but there are better items out there.