Which telescope

[Spier24]

Hi all, I've been interested in astronomy for quite a few years and have studied the topic pretty well. However I've never actually gotten round to buying a telescope before, until now. After doing some research I've narrowed my choices down to 3 and would appreciate some feedback on which telescope you think would be best. 

The celestron nexstar 6 slt

Skywatcher skymax 127 

Skywatcher star discovery 150p 

 

At the moment I'm leaning towards the 6 slt. Mainly because I want something that is equipped to give me good views of the planets whilst also being able to have a nice view of some deep sky objects. I'm happy to stretch my budget for the 6 slt if that's the one that gives the best of both worlds.

 

[malc-c]

There is no one scope fits all.  The Nexstar 6 has a focal length and ratio that is twice that of the 150p, making the Nexstar a good choice for planetary work, but not as good for DSO's as the 150P, which is a faster scope, giving brighter images, but not as magnified as the Nexstar.  The same target in a Nexstar will seem fainter by comparison.

Focal reducers are often used with scopes with higher focal lengths, and barlow lenses are used to double or treble the focal length of shorter scopes, so in someway compromises the shortcomings, but the more glass you pot between your eye or sensor and the target can affect the image. 

We can't advise you which to get... that will be down to you.  Your location, the quality of the skies, the subjects that interest you most etc is personal to you.

[Tiny Clanger]

I've no idea about the go to mounts, because a) I like simplicity and finding objects for myself and b) I'm cheap.

But, an my first 'scope (purchased in the summer) was a 150 newtonian (actually a heritage dob) with similar characteristics to the 150p, and my second was a 127 skywatcher mak bought around 6 weeks ago I can say that the two are different tools ideal for different purposes.

Briefly, the reflector has a 750mm focal length, the mak has double that at 1500mm (as does the other mak you mention) Greater magnification comes with longer focal length, but with it also comes a smaller field of view. If I want to look at a planet, I use the mak, if I want to look for messier objects etc , I use the dob.

Heather

[Waddensky]

Hi, and welcome! These are all capable scopes, but for different purposes. How did you end up with these three in your selection? Is GOTO a must?

At first glance, I'd say the 150P is the best all-round option (wide field of view for deep-sky and possibility to increase the magnification with additional eyepieces for planets) but you'll save a lot of money if you buy one on a dobson base.

[Zermelo]

Welcome to the forum.

I agree with the foregoing on faster Newtonian vs slower mak: while either can tackle bright, small planets or wide, faint DSOs, neither will be optimal on all targets. A strong preference for planets would push you in the direction of the mak.
GoTo adds a significant chunk to the cost, especially on a less expensive scope, so you should be sure that you want it. I have the Star Discovery 150i (the wifi version of the one you mention) and I really appreciate the GoTo. (the wifi version also saves the cost of a handset, which has both pros and cons). If you think you will make use of it regularly then it's worth it. The 150 has a 750mm focal length and with the eyepieces supplied gives up to 75x. If you did go with the Skywatcher I would budget for at least one more eyepiece for planets (or an eyepiece + barlow), as you will want to push the magnification higher when conditions allow (and also because the 10mm eyepiece supplied is mediocre).

[Spier24]

I appreciate all the feedback, the reason I've narrowed it down to 3 totally different types of scopes is because I'm still a bit stuck on weather I want to focus on the planets or deep sky objects. 

 

That's why I added the nexstar 6 slt into the mix. From what I can tell, it would be better for observing planets than the 150 Newtonian and better for observing deep sky objects than the 127 mak. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's the right.

Edited January 2, 2021 by Spier24

[Tiny Clanger]

9 minutes ago, Spier24 said:

I appreciate all the feedback, the reason I've narrowed it down to 3 totally different types of scopes is because I'm still a bit stuck on weather I want to focus on the planets or deep sky objects. 

 

That's why I added the nexstar 6 slt into the mix. From what I can tell, it would be better for observing planets than the 150 Newtonian and better for observing deep sky objects than the 127 mak. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's the right.

Or for the same outlay as the nexstar, you could buy the 150 newtonian and the 127 mak ota, which I think (do check this though , I've not !) can be used on the mount the newtonian comes with !

So I'd buy the newtonian, and then see if I was happy with it, and think about adding the mak later.

[Cosmic Geoff]

19 hours ago, Spier24 said:

The celestron nexstar 6 slt

Skywatcher skymax 127 

Skywatcher star discovery 150p 

Nexstar 6 SLT - a good SCT OTA, but the mount is on the limit, with a wobbly tripod. OTOH, with some deals you are in effect getting the SLT mount for free.  (Check the price of the OTA on its own!) You could get a better mount later.

Skymax 127. A good Maksutov. Very few people ever complain about getting a bad Mak.  Like the C6, a long focal length scope. You do not say what mount you propose to get with it.

Skywatcher Star Discovery 150p.  It's a 6" Newtonian with GoTo, but a cut price one.  Non-collimatable main mirror, plastic parts, etc.  Unlike the other two it has a short focal ratio.

Your choice...

You can observe deep sky objects with all three, but some wide objects will not fit in the fields of the first two.

[Waddensky]

10 hours ago, Spier24 said:

That's why I added the nexstar 6 slt into the mix. From what I can tell, it would be better for observing planets than the 150 Newtonian and better for observing deep sky objects than the 127 mak. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's the right.

As to observing planets, I doubt the difference is that noticable. Both the Nextar and the Newton have about the same resolving power and the same maximum useful magnification, which is well over what is usually achievable under normal atmospheric conditions anyway. The advantage of the Newton is the lower focal length and therefore wider field of view. But if you skip the GOTO, you can get a larger aperture for the same budget: better resolving power for planets and more light grasp for deep-sky objects. A SC or Mak design scope also takes much longer to cool down than a Newton.

[johninderby]

To totaly change things how about a StellaLyra 6” CC on a Skytee mount or other Alt-Az mount. 

Great optics and a proper crayford focuser and quick cooldown and no dewing problems as it doesn’t have a corrector plate. 

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/stellalyra-telescopes/stellalyra-6-f12-m-crf-classical-cassegrain-telescope-ota.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth-astronomy-mounts/skywatcher-skytee-2-alt-azimuth-mount.html

Mine with an upgraded focuser.

Edited January 2, 2021 by johninderby

[malc-c]

21 hours ago, Spier24 said:

I'm happy to stretch my budget for the 6 slt if that's the one that gives the best of both worlds.

 

Care to share what your budget is?  - It's no good us recommending alternative mounts or set ups if it's way outside your budget.

• Is a goto synscan mount important to you
• Do you intend to try and image through the scope rather than do purely visual observing
• Do you need portability, or will you be observing from your garden or somewhere specific like a balcony 
• Do you have limited storage space - this would rule out suggesting dobsonian scopes and the like

 

Edited January 2, 2021 by malc-c

[RT65CB-SWL]

Hi @Spier24 and welcome to SGL. 

I own the Celestron C6/SCT and a ‘re-modded’ Meade ETX105 and both excellent lunar and planetary ‘scopes. (image below)

.

There are a few downsides to owning a catadioptric. Some of these are...

• dew magnets - a dew shield is a must have.
• long cool down - I give mine 30-60 minutes.
• narrow field of view. Can be an issue if on a manual alt-az mount if you have never used either before.
• long exposures if astro-imaging - the C6 is f/10 and the ETX105 is f/14.

Edited January 4, 2021 by Philip R

[Spier24]

Really enjoying all the feedback. From what I can tell you're all saying that the nexstar 6 slt Schmidt Cas won't be much better for observing deep space objects than the 127 mak? I want to know what advantages the 6 slt has over the 127

[Spier24]

1 hour ago, malc-c said:

Care to share what your budget is?  - It's no good us recommending alternative mounts or set ups if it's way outside your budget.

• Is a goto synscan mount important to you
• Do you intend to try and image through the scope rather than do purely visual observing
• Do you need portability, or will you be observing from your garden or somewhere specific like a balcony 
• Do you have limited storage space - this would rule out suggesting dobsonian scopes and the like

 

 

 

My budget is around £680 but prepared to stretch it to just over £700 if anyone knows of something very good available at that price range.

 

I'm only interested in scopes that have a GoTo mount.

 

Portability is not an issue for me. I'll be using it in the back garden and don't mind having to travel with a big scope to dark spots.

 

Imaging is not something I'd be doing to start with but is something that I may pursue later down the line. So it would probably be best if I did get a scope that is capable of that in case I decide to go down that road later.

Edited January 2, 2021 by Spier24

[RT65CB-SWL]

13 hours ago, Spier24 said:

I appreciate all the feedback, the reason I've narrowed it down to 3 totally different types of scopes is because I'm still a bit stuck on weather I want to focus on the planets or deep sky objects. 

 

That's why I added the nexstar 6 slt into the mix. From what I can tell, it would be better for observing planets than the 150 Newtonian and better for observing deep sky objects than the 127 mak. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's the right.

Re-reading this post and you maybe better off with either one of these... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html or https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/sky-watcher-heritage-150p-flextube-dobsonian-telescope.html

 

[Tiny Clanger]

6 minutes ago, Spier24 said:

My budget is around £680 but prepared to stretch it to just over £700 if anyone knows of something very good available at that price range.

I'm only interested in scopes that have a GoTo mount.

Portability is not an issue for me. I'll be using it in the back garden and don't mind having to travel with a big scope to dark spots.

That's  all useful information which will help you get more properly targeted answers, it would also be helpful to know if your back garden is a truly dark location , or with some streetlights etc, or very light polluted .

The best purchase for you may very well not be a packaged tripod/mount/OTA deal , but carefully chosen tripod/mount and separately chosen OTA.

Heather

[Tiny Clanger]

4 minutes ago, Philip R said:

Re-reading this post and you maybe better off with either one of these... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html or https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/sky-watcher-heritage-150p-flextube-dobsonian-telescope.html

 

If only the O.P didn't specifically want a goto , a dob (and a rather bigger one given their budget and lack of worries over physical size of 'scope) would be great . I think go to dobs are out of this price range though, aren't they ?

[Spier24]

7 minutes ago, Tiny Clanger said:

That's  all useful information which will help you get more properly targeted answers, it would also be helpful to know if your back garden is a truly dark location , or with some streetlights etc, or very light polluted .

The best purchase for you may very well not be a packaged tripod/mount/OTA deal , but carefully chosen tripod/mount and separately chosen OTA.

Heather

 

I don't live on a busy street. South facing garden with no street lights on either side. However there are some street lights to the south of the garden behind the hedge.

[Spier24]

5 minutes ago, Tiny Clanger said:

If only the O.P didn't specifically want a goto , a dob (and a rather bigger one given their budget and lack of worries over physical size of 'scope) would be great . I think go to dobs are out of this price range though, aren't they ?

 

 

I've always liked the idea of getting a dobsonian, some super views through the bigger ones. Unfortunately it's the price of their GoTo's that put me off. 

[Spier24]

I could get a 250 dobsonian for just over £500. The idea of not going for a GoTo mount is becoming tempting... 

[KP82]

Living in a suburb location with no direct light pollution nearby makes star hopping doable. In this case I'd strongly recommend a manual dob. An 8 or 10 inch one would serve you well for a long time.

If you ever want to get into imaging like you mentioned earlier, you can grab an 80ED doublet with an EQ5 GOTO mount in the near future.

[Waddensky]

2 hours ago, Spier24 said:

Really enjoying all the feedback. From what I can tell you're all saying that the nexstar 6 slt Schmidt Cas won't be much better for observing deep space objects than the 127 mak? I want to know what advantages the 6 slt has over the 127

In general, deep-sky objects benefit from larger aperture and a shorter focal length. The Nexstar has the larger aperture, the focal length of both scopes is the same. I'd say the Nexstar is the better deep-sky telescope.

1 hour ago, Spier24 said:

I could get a 250 dobsonian for just over £500. The idea of not going for a GoTo mount is becoming tempting... 

Why is GOTO so important? I've never used a GOTO or a comparable system. It's not that difficult (and fun!) to find objects manually 🙂.

[Spier24]

22 minutes ago, Waddensky said:

In general, deep-sky objects benefit from larger aperture and a shorter focal length. The Nexstar has the larger aperture, the focal length of both scopes is the same. I'd say the Nexstar is the better deep-sky telescope.

Why is GOTO so important? I've never used a GOTO or a comparable system. It's not that difficult (and fun!) to find objects manually 🙂.

 

Yes, from the original 3 that I listed I thought that the nexstar gives you a decent taster of both worlds. The focal length of the Mak with the aperture of the Newton. The reason I'm keen on a GoTo is that I've used telescopes owned by friends and family before.  A 200 manual Newtonian and the 127 mak GoTo. I found the GoTo system to be more enjoyable but that's just me I guess. 

Edited January 2, 2021 by Spier24

[Tiny Clanger]

2 hours ago, Spier24 said:

I could get a 250 dobsonian for just over £500. The idea of not going for a GoTo mount is becoming tempting... 

Now if you'd said that before ... 😀

If you are worried it may be difficult to  locate objects without  go to , consider that I am an idiot with the spacial awareness of a concussed bluebottle trying to eascape a window , and I've still managed to locate and see Mars, Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus (but not Neptune yet : still working on him ... ) and dozens of Messier objects , double stars etc. For me the hunt is part of the fun.

A combination of the free software Stellarium , some free observing guides (see jasonb's thread on the Moore Winter Marathon) and a RACI finder added to the RDF one on my 150 heritage dob , and some patience was enough.

For a low tech (and low price)  dobsonian target locating solution, do a search on here for 'dobsonian setting circles' , a combination of free software like stellarium, a little £15 AA powered electronic level (mine is even magnetic on the base , so sticks on my dob, tube) and a custom made printed circle can cut your search area right down. I've not sorted the setting circle yet (friends with access to large format printers /laminators still off work !) but have tried the electronic level (sometimes folk call them a 'wixy' , which is a brand name, but there's dozens of clones around) and it is really good for the alt part of alt/az.

There are also 'push to' solutions available using smart 'phones (smarter than mine, sadly so I can't comment on them) .

Heather

[Waddensky]

9 minutes ago, Spier24 said:

I found the GoTo system to be more enjoyable but that's just me I guess. 

It's not just you, there are many stargazers that use GOTO. It's just that it's relatively expensive, and if your budget is tight I'd rather invest in aperture than other bells and whistles. But again, nothing wrong with a GOTO if you've experienced the advantages and enjoyed them.

I'm with Heather: the hunt is part of the fun for me, as well as sitting outside with only a bunch of mirrors and lenses.