So , what is next ??

[Stu1smartcookie]

Hi , I feel that I am on here asking questions every week lol but , here is another one . 
So , I have a 200p on an EQ5 mount which is motor driven and works brilliantly. But , I also want another , more portable scope to use at short notice . I have the chance to purchase either a 102 evostar ( not ED) or an st80 . Out of the two the evostar wins  handsomely in most areas but the portability of the St80 is its plus point . Would the evostar be too similar to my 200p this rendering it a bit of a waste of money ? Thoughts welcome 

kind regards 

Stu 

BTW , I am mainly visual .. although like many I will take the occasional photo 

[vlaiv]

I had ST102 before and I now have Evostar 102 - that did not get much use for various reasons.

I purchased Evostar102 for variety of reasons - some among them are:

- as lower chromatic aberration version of ST102

- to do various tests on this telescope - check suitability as all around instrument - this means planetary and lunar observing and imaging and DSO observing and imaging

In the mean time I got myself SkyMax102 as well.

Here are my thoughts of Evostar102 so far - it is rather big, it is not very stable on AZ4 mount, although I have version with steel tripod - this might change when I switch to SkyTee2 at some point as my heavier AltAz mount.

For planetary and lunar, as well as grab'n'go - I feel that SkyMax102 is better choice. I miss ST102 as wide field grab'n'go instrument. Evostar 102 simply can't go that wide / low power (I do have reducer that I'm going to try to make work with, but so far it was not simple plug and play due to needed 85mm of spacing between reducer and EP).

It is rather long tube and I would not call it portable - not in sense ST102 and SkyMax are (and ST80 would be, I'm sure). Another one of the reasons I got this scope as I was planning to get quark combo for Solar Ha observing. That now seems far less likely given mounting evidence that DayStar simply has exceptionally poor QA and customer support. Once I'm done testing Evostar for different purposes, I'll probably just pass it on to someone who wants it.

If you want portable, easy to setup and use, grab'n'go type instrument and prefer wide field observing - get ST80 or ST102. If you on the other hand prefer lunar and planetary and occasional DSO - get SkyMax102. I would not recommend Evostar 102 scope that is portable, easy to setup and use and grab'n'go. It can probably be main instrument to a lot of people and has potential to do a bit of everything - but not well suited for this secondary role.

[Cosmic Geoff]

The Evostar does not seem to offer much advantage over the Newtonian - similar weight, length and focal length.

A ST80 will be very portable, but maybe a bit small? 

I have found a ST102 to be a useful instrument. It can be safely carried with one hand, and can be used for widefield, comet hunting, and EEVA style imaging with a planetary camera, and it has a 2" focuser, so you can attach a DSLR to it.

[Stu1smartcookie]

Thanks for your input here .. in the end I am going for the 80 as I can also use it for a guide scope ( when I inevitably get a bigger mount) the evostar 102 , Vlaiv was indeed a long scope but the seller didn’t have all the accessories and as it was sold as “new” I declined it . The ST80 is brand new and I will sell the mount it came with as I certainly won’t use it . I have to say both these scopes were  a lot cheaper than buying through a store .. so I am happy with my purchase . I certainly know their limitations so CA is going to be my friend rather than my enemy lol I am going to use the 80 as a quick get up and go wide field low power scope , after all my 200p can give good planetary views 

[Stu1smartcookie]

On 30/01/2021 at 11:38, vlaiv said:

I would not recommend Evostar 102 scope that is portable, easy to setup and use and grab'n'go. It can probably be main instrument to a lot of people and has potential to do a bit of everything - but not well suited for this secondary role.

Hi Vlaiv , so the evostar 102 has reduced in price and is now becoming a bit of a bargain . The tube weight for the scope is listed at around 3.5kgs ... would you say that was accurate ?

I no longer have my 200p Newt and i now have an AZ5 Mount so i intend to use that for the evostar , or even on my AZ-Gti ( as that mount can take 5kgs ) . 

What are the views like on planets and the moon ... does the scope take magnification well ? Are double stars a good target for it ? 

I like the idea of a Mak but i hate the cooling down time associated with them , although i know that a 102 mak would not require as much as say a 127 .

 

[Cosmic Geoff]

I never found the effects of cooling very noticeable with my 127mm Mak.  Maybe the setup time was enough to cool it, or maybe I just have bad eyesight. 🙂  If necessary, you could put a Mak outside a bit earlier to cool down, or look at the less critical targets first.

But if you really want a bargain priced Evostar 102 you might as well go for it. If it is anything like the Startravel 102, it will be a handsome and well-made 'scope.

[Stu1smartcookie]

i have had a couple of Maks before and i agree with you , most of the time they are reasonably quick to cool .. but, the fact that most of the time we have to get outside for a quick 30 minutes of viewing in this country due to clouds, rain , wind , fog , ( think i've covered everything there) i like the immediacy of using a refractor from my light polluted garden . I do love a good Mak though .  I really liked Vlaiv's report about the Evostar because he was realistic. 

[vlaiv]

37 minutes ago, Stu1smartcookie said:

The tube weight for the scope is listed at around 3.5kgs ... would you say that was accurate ?

Probably accurate, however, scope is very bulky / long / has high moment arm

I'm not comfortable how it sits on my AZ4 - version with steel legs - which is otherwise very solid mount.

40 minutes ago, Stu1smartcookie said:

I no longer have my 200p Newt and i now have an AZ5 Mount so i intend to use that for the evostar , or even on my AZ-Gti ( as that mount can take 5kgs ) . 

I have AzGTI as well - and I would not even think of trying to mount Evostar 102 on that little mount head.

Just to give you idea of the size of it:

That is the picture of a friend of mine once I first got that scope - he came over for as I tested the scope to have his first views of the Moon (so I took a picture for documentary purposes   - yep, he really looked thru a telescope).

In any case - he is not short - probably about 5'10" or something like that. That scope is rather long.

46 minutes ago, Stu1smartcookie said:

What are the views like on planets and the moon ... does the scope take magnification well ? Are double stars a good target for it ? 

I like the idea of a Mak but i hate the cooling down time associated with them , although i know that a 102 mak would not require as much as say a 127 .

It has been a while since I last used that scope and I haven't had a chance to use it much, so I'm going to refrain from giving any serious comment on its performance. I remember being surprised at levels of CA - I believe moon had less than I thought scope will have but stars had more than I thought they would have.

Baader Contrast Booster does help quite a bit with CA.

If I was to choose planetary / lunar / quick grab'n'go scope - I would choose SkyMax102 instead (have that scope as well - and that one sits perfectly on AzGti mount).

[Stu1smartcookie]

Thanks for the answers Vlaiv . The seller is giving me an eq3 mount with the scope .. so I will use that . My Az-Gti will be used for my st80. I will try the scope on the Az5 though . Interesting to read your report on views on the moon and stars .. I hope I will get a chance to try it out this week .

Edited February 8, 2021 by Stu1smartcookie

[Stu1smartcookie]

So , a lovely clear night and the first light of the evostar 102 .. I certainly cannot evaluate the scope in much detail as I am just scanning the sky with it tonight . What I will say is that the AZ5 holds the scope really well .. the finder scope will be in an awkward position though . Then I realised I only have to adjust the tube in the rings (sometimes the simple things are the hardest to think about lol ) 

so , all in all , really happy .. although frozen solid !! I

[Louis D]

I'm a bit of a contrarian on the ST-80.  I say just avoid them.  I've had one for 20+ years, and have hardly ever used it due to the excessive CA (chromatic aberration) and SA (spherical aberration).  Views through it are highly unsatisfying.

I would highly recommend a 72ED on an alt-az mount instead.  The wide views are astoundingly sharp and satisfying through them.  They are also extremely compact and relatively light.  I really love that they come with 2" focusers for extremely wide views.  They allow you to see the sky in an entirely different way from your 8" Newt.

If you trend toward higher power viewing, I would recommend a 127 Mak.  They can be mounted on the same mount class as the 72EDs, so you can swap them depending on your observing mood.

[Stu1smartcookie]

Hi Louis , had both of those scopes and ( stupidly ) sold them . I prefer the WO z61 if I’m honest over the 72ed but at present that’s too expensive for me . The Mak was great ( really don’t know why I sold it ) I love the st80 on my az-gti , sure there is CA .. but there must be a reason why so many have been sold and loved . It’s horses for courses of course and if I have the chance to get a 72ed then I will . Mind you , I like the look of a lot of small scopes . When will it ever end ???