Best planetary telescope for my or an individuals needs.

[Guest]

I have been thinking about a telescope that will give sharp views with high contrast for observing the planets. I have had some fine views of planets over the years. A 12 inch f 6 Newtonian trained on Saturn. But this scope did not get used often. Too heavy. Like lifting a wardrobe out every time I used it. An 8 inch LX 90 Meade on Mars.My circumstances are that I cannot have a permanently mounted telescope. It has to be lighter weight and appealing to setup. If I could permanently setup a telescope. Then the larger the better. Bring on the Celestron C14's or the Skymax 180mm Maksutov.

I am thinking of scopes such as a Meade ETX 125, Skywatcher Skymax 127. These can easily be handled and setup.  Or even an Orion Optics VX 6 F8 with 1/10th wave optics. Skymax 150 is slightly too heavy at 6 kgs. The Stella Mira 80 mm F 10 looks good. But I believe may be heavy.

I remember my older long gone

80 mm Towa 339 refractor. F 15. Always gave pleasing views on all the visible planets and moon. Also easy to setup.

Edited October 13, 2020 by Guest
Title of post altered slightly.

[vlaiv]

6 minutes ago, Grumpy Martian said:

Or even an Orion Optics VX 6 F8 with 1/10th wave optics

I vote for this one, although, if Mak150 is too heavy - I think 6" F/8 will be as well and much bulkier.

[Louis D]

21 minutes ago, Grumpy Martian said:

Skymax 150 is slightly too heavy at 6 kgs.

Are you saying the OTA is too heavy to lift onto a mount or that the OTA would be too heavy for your current mount?  My 127 Mak was showing just as much detail on Mars the other night as my 90mm APO triplet, but not as much as my 8" Dob.  I would lean toward a 6" f/8 for 8" f/6 Dob, perhaps mounted in aluminum rather than particle board if weight is an issue.

[dweller25]

Hello @Grumpy Martian I had similar issues and have ended up with a lightweight 4” F/8 refractor.

Anything small with a central obstruction will be visually compromised on the planets.

A 6” F/8 Newt would be a good second choice.

Edited October 13, 2020 by dweller25

[Timebandit]

 

Hi . If your main interest with this scope is mainly planetary and Luna. And if size and weight are an issue. Then I would opt for a nice high quality 100ED refractor. 

 

 

[Trentend]

Just about to post the same question!

 

I have a big dob and night vision goggles for DSO in the light polluted back garden. I'm surrounded by buildings though so looking for something ultra portable purely for lunar and planets, e.g. last night Mars appeared for about 20mins inbetween a gap so really need something I can just grab and go. Used to have an 8" Reflector on an EQ5 mount but found that a pain to move around - so one of my key criteria now is AZ mount only ideally being able to lift and move the whole setup in one piece. Have narrowed down (I think) to Mak127 or VX6L. Also considered an ED120 refractor, but suspect that's too big. Will be using binotron and panoptic eyepieces so I like the idea of OO being able to fit a more heavy duty focuser to prevent slop. Also don't want to be mucking about with collimation (presume less of an issue on an F8 compared to a F3.9 Dob). Fortunately circumstances mean cost is not an issue.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Louis D said:

Are you saying the OTA is too heavy to lift onto a mount or that the OTA would be too heavy for your current mount?  My 127 Mak was showing just as much detail on Mars the other night as my 90mm APO triplet, but not as much as my 8" Dob.  I would lean toward a 6" f/8 for 8" f/6 Dob, perhaps mounted in aluminum rather than particle board if weight is an issue.

Heavy to lift onto a mount

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Martian said:

Heavy to lift onto a mount

Good to know.  What is the maximum weight you feel confident lifting onto a mount?  What is the maximum weight you can hug against your body and confidently lift?

Personally, I had to quit using my 15" Dob after an auto accident 20 years ago ripped up my back, and I couldn't hoist the 65 pound mirror box any longer.  That didn't bother me as much as not being able to lift my own kids anymore.  My back has healed up enough to lift 40 to 50 pounds with only some soreness afterward, so the 8" Dob is okay to use.

I do better lifting if I can keep the weight close to my center of gravity and my back straight.  That's why moving my 8" Dob isn't so bad.  In contrast, trying to lift my fully rigged alt-az mount on a tripod with a 90mm APO and a 127 Mak is a whole lot more challenging due to the awkwardness of the whole rig despite it weighing about the same.  It can't be hugged close to my body, it's top heavy, and it wants to catch on the doorway going out.  I don't like rigging it up outdoors for multiple reasons, so multiple trips are not an option.

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Louis D said:

Good to know.  What is the maximum weight you feel confident lifting onto a mount?  What is the maximum weight you can hug against your body and confidently lift?

Personally, I had to quit using my 15" Dob after an auto accident 20 years ago ripped up my back, and I couldn't hoist the 65 pound mirror box any longer.  That didn't bother me as much as not being able to lift my own kids anymore.  My back has healed up enough to lift 40 to 50 pounds with only some soreness afterward, so the 8" Dob is okay to use.

I do better lifting if I can keep the weight close to my center of gravity and my back straight.  That's why moving my 8" Dob isn't so bad.  In contrast, trying to lift my fully rigged alt-az mount on a tripod with a 90mm APO and a 127 Mak is a whole lot more challenging due to the awkwardness of the whole rig despite it weighing about the same.  It can't be hugged close to my body, it's top heavy, and it wants to catch on the doorway going out.  I don't like rigging it up outdoors for multiple reasons, so multiple trips are not an option.

I have had an on/off relationship with refractors since a motorcycle accident in 2016. My ribs were injured and cause discomfort when bending down to the eyepiece on a lo g tube refractor.I enjoy using my short tube length 80 mm Skywatcher Equinox. But would like something with more light gathering power but still within the realms of easy yo use.

Edited October 13, 2020 by Guest

[mikeDnight]

I'm not a fan of the Dob mount for lunar & planetary observing, although I'm not totally aversed to using other altazimuth style mounts. I think a SW 150L F8 on some sort of gyro style mount would be a nice planetary scope. It would glide more easily than a Dob and could be set at any height for comfort. The SkyMax 127 & 150 are a good choice too, both able to show wonderful detail. Nothing quite matches a refractor for sharpness though, but there's the smaller aperture and higher price bracket to consider. A 120ED is still quite a beast, but if 102mm is an aperture you'd be happy with, there are quite a number of very nice ED's at around F7 to choose from that may not break the bank.

And I didn't use the T word! ☺

Edited October 13, 2020 by mikeDnight

[Stu]

@Grumpy Martian what scope/s do you currently have? I seem to remember you’ve had a few which would likely give good planetary views. I think a lot of the time it is the sky conditions that determine image quality as much or more than the scope itself. As an example I’ve had very credible and enjoyable views of Mars through my Heritage 150p, a cheap f5 newtonian with plastic helical focuser!

Personally I think you can’t go too far wrong with a decent 4” apo refractor, they generally deliver good views even when conditions are variable. The ED100 may be a bit long to be convenient, so perhaps an f7 from TS or similar.

Alternatively, how about the Bresser 127mm Mak, which is a true 127mm rather than the 119 of the Skywatcher, they get good reviews.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-mc-127-1900-maksutov-cassegrain-ota.html

Or, how about the new StellarLyra 6” Classical Cassegrain? This would avoid the cool down issues of a mak and should give great views.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-mc-127-1900-maksutov-cassegrain-ota.html

[Roy Challen]

4 hours ago, Grumpy Martian said:

80 mm Towa 339 refractor. F 15. Always gave pleasing views on all the visible planets and moon. Also easy to setup.

Here's my vote! If it made you happy, and was easy to set up, get another one. You might have to wait a little while but they're not so rare that you'd never see one come up for sale.

[Roy Challen]

20 minutes ago, Stu said:

 

Or, how about the new StellarLyra 6” Classical Cassegrain? This would avoid the cool down issues of a mak and should give great views.

These really are causing a stir, so much so that even I, a long f/l refractor diehard, am seriously tempted. I just need to find something I own that worth enough to sell!

Edited October 13, 2020 by Roy Challen

[Stu]

1 minute ago, Roy Challen said:

These really are causing a stir, so much so that even I, a long f/l refractor diehard, am seriously tempted. I just need to find something I own that worth enough to sell!

Yep, reckon they could be very nice! The long focal length 80mm scopes are nice; I’ve got one of the Scopetech 80mm f15s at the moment. The challenge for me is floaters due to the small exit pupils, and ultimately planetary viewing is helped by resolution, which means aperture so the 6” CC may well be a great combination of just enough aperture, quick cooling, long focal length but in a very useable package. From the numbers already sold I think we will hear results as soon as the cloud disappears. Likely a couple of weeks, after Mars has cleared off a bit! 🤬🤬🤬🤬

[John]

A few years ago I owned an Intes 150mm F/6 mak-newtonian with a central obstruction of 19.7% and no secondary vanes of course. It was a really excellent planetary and double star scope which also could do rather well when observing deep sky objects because of it's relatively fast focal ratio.

I then acquired a very nice Skywatcher ED120 refractor, as it happens from the same person that I had bought the Intes mak-newtonian from. For around 6 months I owned both of these fine scopes and had plenty of chances to compare their planetary and deep sky performance.

On the planets, I found that the ED120 was the equal of the 150mm mak-newtonian but on deep sky objects the additional aperture of the Russian made Intes scope allowed it to have an edge.

In the end I parted with the mak-newtonian, with some regrets and kept the Skywatcher ED120, which I still have today. The mak-newtonian was a lot heavier than the ED120 and took longer to cool down and those two factors were what swayed me at the time.

The relevance of this is that I feel that a good 120mm refractor can equal of a good reflecting system (the Intes MN61 is a very good reflecting system) of 150mm aperture for planetary observing.

It would be interesting to compare one of these new 6 inch classical-cassegrains to see if my experiences comparing the ED120 with the MN150 are replicated or maybe, differ   

 

Edited October 13, 2020 by John

[Louis D]

40 minutes ago, Stu said:

Or, how about the new StellarLyra 6” Classical Cassegrain?

At 14 pounds, that's about as heavy as the 150 Mak, so too heavy to hoist for the OP as well.  Same goes for the SW 120ED.

Figure 8 pounds (the Towa frac) to 10 pounds (the 127 Mak) would be the max weight for the OP.

The Celestron C6-A at 10 pounds might be another light-weight option.  A SW 100ED comes in at 8.5 pounds.  These might make for two decent alternatives for the OP.  Any others I've missed in this weight range having 4" to 6" of aperture?

[Stu]

11 minutes ago, John said:

A few years ago I owned an Intes 150mm F/6 mak-newtonian with a central obstruction of 19.7% and no secondary vanes of course. It was a really excellent planetary and double star scope which also could do rather well when observing deep sky objects because of it's relatively fast focal ratio.

I then acquired a very nice Skywatcher ED120 refractor, as it happens from the same person that I had bought the Intes mak-newtonian from. For around 6 months I owned both of these fine scopes and had plenty of chances to compare their planetary and deep sky performance.

On the planets, I found that the ED120 was the equal of the 150mm mak-newtonian but on deep sky objects the additional aperture of the Russian made Intes scope allowed it to have an edge.

In the end I parted with the mak-newtonian, with some regrets and kept the Skywatcher ED120, which I still have today. The mak-newtonian was a lot heavier than the ED120 and took longer to cool down and those two factors were what swayed me at the time.

The relevance of this is that I feel that a good 120mm refractor can equal of a good reflecting system (the Intes MN61 is a very good reflecting system) of 150mm aperture for planetary observing.

It would be interesting to compare one of these new 6 inch classical-cassegrains to see if my experiences comparing the ED120 with the MN150 are replicated or maybe, differ   

 

I’m mindful of the fact that Martin had a lovely Vixen 115mm apo previously and didn’t get in with it, I think for ergonomic reasons so the 120ED would be similar or worse. I agree the 6” CCs could be a good compromise.

[Stu]

2 minutes ago, Louis D said:

At 14 pounds, that's about as heavy as the 150 Mak, so too heavy to hoist for the OP as well.  Same goes for the SW 120ED.

Figure 8 pounds (the Towa frac) to 10 pounds (the 127 Mak) would be the max weight for the OP.

The Celestron C6-A at 10 pounds might be another light-weight option.  A SW 100ED comes in at 8.5 pounds.  These might make for two decent alternatives for the OP.  Any others I've missed in this weight range having 4" to 6" of aperture?

The Bresser 127mm is the full aperture and only 7.5lbs so might be a good option.

[John]

23 minutes ago, Stu said:

I’m mindful of the fact that Martin had a lovely Vixen 115mm apo previously and didn’t get in with it, I think for ergonomic reasons so the 120ED would be similar or worse. I agree the 6” CCs could be a good compromise.

Good point Stu.

I've sort of lost track of what scopes Martin has owned in the past

[Highburymark]

22 minutes ago, Louis D said:

At 14 pounds, that's about as heavy as the 150 Mak, so too heavy to hoist for the OP as well.  Same goes for the SW 120ED.

 

That was the only negative that struck me about the new CC range too. Excellent value, good optics - I’d definitely consider one over an SCT, but just a little heavy for those of us with knackered backs

[vlaiv]

8 minutes ago, Highburymark said:

That was the only negative that struck me about the new CC range too. Excellent value, good optics - I’d definitely consider one over an SCT, but just a little heavy for those of us with knackered backs

It's actually lighter than that - only 11.9lbs.

If length is not an issue, I would still consider 6" F/8 planetary newtonian first. 1/10th wave optics and less than 25% central obstruction is bound to give views that are refractor like.

[John]

2 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

If length is not an issue, I would still consider 6" F/8 planetary newtonian first. 1/10th wave optics and less than 25% central obstruction is bound to give views that are refractor like.

Similar to the 150 mak-newt that I mention above. But quicker to cool down and a little lighter, especially if it is an Orion Optics.

 

Edited October 13, 2020 by John

[Stu]

46 minutes ago, John said:

Good point Stu.

I've sort of lost track of what scopes Martin has owned in the past

Tee hee, me too John. That’s why I was trying to check what the current fleet is, in case there is something that will perform the job just as well as the options we are discussing.

32 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

It's actually lighter than that - only 11.9lbs.

If length is not an issue, I would still consider 6" F/8 planetary newtonian first. 1/10th wave optics and less than 25% central obstruction is bound to give views that are refractor like.

I do agree that a long focal length newt will give excellent images, but they can be unwieldy on anything other than a Dob Mount, even on a Dob Mount! My 8” f8 gives excellent results, better than an 8” SCT in my eyes but is challenging to handle. A 6” f8 would be relatively easier to handle and quite light weight, especially an Orion Optics VX6L as I think you are alluding to. 11lbs without tube rings which may be on the limit for handling.

[Louis D]

Just found the Meade LX85 6" Modified SCT at 9 pounds.

There's also the 6" f/5 Newtonians at 10 pounds.

[vlaiv]

47 minutes ago, Stu said:

I do agree that a long focal length newt will give excellent images, but they can be unwieldy on anything other than a Dob Mount, even on a Dob Mount! My 8” f8 gives excellent results, better than an 8” SCT in my eyes but is challenging to handle. A 6” f8 would be relatively easier to handle and quite light weight, especially an Orion Optics VX6L as I think you are alluding to. 11lbs without tube rings which may be on the limit for handling.

I'm only mentioning it because it was on the list of possible scopes in the initial post. In my view, except for the high end ED refractor (or triplet) which is not considered both because of price and bulk, this scope will give best views of the lot. Every other design is compromise in some respect.