First scope advice – Evostar 102 v 120?

[KP82]

1 hour ago, Basementboy said:

It was actually the conjunction that made me decide to finally get the damn telescope I've always been dreaming of. Bad luck Stu, sorry to hear

@Tiny Clanger How do find the 127 Maks would compare to a 4/5" refractor like the Evostars? FLO suggested that the Evostar 102 would actually be clearer than the Skywatcher 127 I was looking at (here: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/sky-watcher-skymax-127-az-gti.html)

And  I've heard they need at least an hour to cool down?

And does anyone have thoughts on this combo – Explorer 150 with AZ4 mount? Seems like a reasonable price:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-150p-az4-mount.html

The Skymax 127 is much more portable than the refractors and can provide nice colour free views of the planets and the Moon. However the fov of a Mak is far narrower than a refractor, so might not be ideal for large DSOs such as M31, M42 and M45. At f/8+ the residuel CA in the Evostar 120 should be minimal. And when comparing refractors that aren't plagued by serious CA or SA to any mirrored designs in the same aperture class, refractors always win in image quality.

The 150 newt is a good choice for beginner. However I'd recommend getting the OTA on its own and then get a Skytee 2 Alt-az mount for it. Far more stable than AZ4.

Edited February 15, 2021 by KP82

[domstar]

Is there anybody here with experience of a long focal-length scope (like a Mak) on a non-goto mount as a first scope? I'm concerned that the narrow field of view would make star-hopping quite a challenge.

[domstar]

I used to carry my 100ED refractor in its flight case in one hand, an aluminium AZ4 resting on my other shoulder and a rucksack with accessories for 5 minutes. It was OK but cumbersome. I still needed a chair. Now I don't walk because I don't have access to that site. 

[Tiny Clanger]

4 minutes ago, domstar said:

Is there anybody here with experience of a long focal-length scope (like a Mak) on a non-goto mount as a first scope? I'm concerned that the narrow field of view would make star-hopping quite a challenge.

Not exactly, but my second buy was the 127 mak, following my first scope,  a tabletop mounted 150 heritage dob

I have never yet used or owned a go to mount (and probably never will) . When I first got the mak I had a heck of a time trying to find things with it, the narrow FOV caused me problems.

Time, patience, practise, and (inevitably) throwing money at the problem by buying an optical finder and a Rigel quickfinder to mount on the mak instead of the standard red dot finder has made it easier, but it is a reason why I'm reluctant to unreservedly recommend the 127 mak (focal length 1500mm) as a first 'scope.

I'm close enough to being a beginner that when I was having my initial struggles with it , I thought it was for the best that I had the 150 dob (with a focal length of 750mm)  first, and had at least some idea what I was doing.

Heather

[Tiny Clanger]

7 minutes ago, domstar said:

I used to carry my 100ED refractor in its flight case in one hand, an aluminium AZ4 resting on my other shoulder and a rucksack with accessories for 5 minutes. It was OK but cumbersome. I still needed a chair. Now I don't walk because I don't have access to that site. 

I need a chair just reading that 🙂

[Basementboy]

44 minutes ago, KP82 said:

The Skymax 127 is much more portable than the refractors and can provide nice colour free views of the planets and the Moon. However the fov of a Mak is far narrower than a refractor, so might not be ideal for large DSOs such as M31, M42 and M45. At f/8+ the residuel CA in the Evostar 120 should be minimal. And when comparing refractors that aren't plagued by serious CA to any mirrored designs in the same aperture class, refractors always win in image quality.

The 150 newt is a good choice for beginner. However I'd recommend getting the OTA on its own and then get a Skytee 2 Alt-az mount for it. Far more stable than AZ4.

Thanks @KP82, this is really helpful – I've read it three times

[Basementboy]

 

11 minutes ago, Tiny Clanger said:

Time, patience, practise, and (inevitably) throwing money at the problem by buying an optical finder and a Rigel quickfinder to mount on the mak instead of the standard red dot finder has made it easier, but it is a reason why I'm reluctant to unreservedly recommend the 127 mak (focal length 1500mm) as a first 'scope.

 

Yes I'm also very conscious that I'm almost inevitably going to have to throw some money at future problems – so I really would prefer not to break the bank before even getting started. 

Given the narrower FOV of the Maks and the refractor v mirror and the weight issues and the AZ v EQ etc etc etc, I'm leaning towards getting the Evostar 102 with an AZ4 mount.

 

[Basementboy]

1 hour ago, KP82 said:

The 150 newt is a good choice for beginner. However I'd recommend getting the OTA on its own and then get a Skytee 2 Alt-az mount for it. Far more stable than AZ4.

I assume the 102 would be more than fine on the Skytee-2? (Though it's a bit expensive for me I think right now)

[Basementboy]

1 hour ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

If you are really set on a refractor and able to stretch to £700, then an Altair Astro Starwave Ascent 102 and Sky-Watcher AZ4 with steel tripod .

 

Interesting! I hadn't considered any Altairs. Looks like a higher end scope than the Sky-Watcher Evostars? 

Also by no means convinced I need an EQ mount. Heather has convinced me that an AZ might be a lot more fun while learning. (But I don't feel like I need a Goto mount yet – would like to learn the basics of navigation by hand first.)

How do you think the Discovery 150 compares to the Evostar 102?

[John]

9 minutes ago, Basementboy said:

Interesting! I hadn't considered any Altairs. Looks like a higher end scope than the Sky-Watcher Evostars? 

 

The Altair is an ED doublet so will be in a different price bracket than the Evostar achromats which are what have been discussed so far. The level of false colour control of an ED doublet is a substantial step up from that of an achromat. Plus the Altair is better engineered and finished and has a much superior focuser. Skywatcher do an ED doublet version of the Evostar:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/pro-series/skywatcher-evostar-100ed-ds-pro-outfit.html

The Altair version is very well priced for a 4 inch aperture ED doublet refractor.

 

 

[Basementboy]

8 minutes ago, John said:

The Altair version is very well priced for a 4 inch aperture ED doublet refractor.

 

Thanks John, that's very helpful, I see now about the ED doublets – and yeah the Altair is much more reasonable than the equivalent Sky-Watcher. Thanks for flagging 

I suppose I'm less concerned about chromatic aberration than I am about trying to see as much as possible as sharply as possible.

How important is the focuser? I'm not quite sure how much to pay attention to this factor

[Commanderfish]

4 hours ago, Basementboy said:

Thanks @Commanderfish! I guess I'd settled on an EQ mount because I gather it's easier to track objects as they move through the sky ... and while I'm still learning I reckon I want it to be easy to stick with an object once I've found it.

Do you think the 102 is a lot less good for deep space objects than the 120 (though maybe you haven't owned both)?

I have just sold a 102, I've got a 115 apo and a 127 apo.  The extra aperture of the 120 over the 102 is definitely a good thing.  If you are just doing visual then tracking is not hard at all using an Alt Az.  Setting up and carrying counterweights for an EQ is definitely hard!

[Basementboy]

2 minutes ago, Commanderfish said:

I have just sold a 102, I've got a 115 apo and a 127 apo.  The extra aperture of the 120 over the 102 is definitely a good thing.  If you are just doing visual then tracking is not hard at all using an Alt Az.  Setting up and carrying counterweights for an EQ is definitely hard!

Cheers. What would you say to the idea of a 120 with an AZ4 mount, if I'm carrying it to the park to set up every time? Obviously the 120 is larger/bulkier to carry – but the AZ would mean it becomes much more portable than it would be with an EQ... does that sound right?

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

1 hour ago, Basementboy said:

Interesting! I hadn't considered any Altairs. Looks like a higher end scope than the Sky-Watcher Evostars? 

Also by no means convinced I need an EQ mount. Heather has convinced me that an AZ might be a lot more fun while learning. (But I don't feel like I need a Goto mount yet – would like to learn the basics of navigation by hand first.)

How do you think the Discovery 150 compares to the Evostar 102?

John has expertly answered your first question regarding the Altair Starwave. It's a great 4" refractor at a competitive price.

As far as the Discovery 150 vs Evostar 102. Both probably have equal good and bad points. However, the whole Star Discovery 150i package is hands down worth the money imho. Manual mounts are great to use - I have one, but I'm sold on GoTo and tracking. Walking away from a mount, to return 15 minutes later and the object is still, at least roughly, centred in the view is priceless. Showing someone else an object? No messing around nudging or using slomo controls to keep the object in view.

As is the Skymax 102 & AZGTI package, which also allows a degree of flexibility for future upgrades and mix/match possibility i.e. want a more stable platform? Add a steel tripod. Fancy a small refractor or picked up a used 130mm reflector one day? Mount it on the AZGTI and the steel tripod you bought. Want to travel, maybe camping? The Skymax AZGTI packages are small and light. 4" aperture will show a massive amount of objects in a rural setting. If you can push the budget, even better - the Skymax 127 AZGTI.

Edited February 15, 2021 by ScouseSpaceCadet

[Stu1smartcookie]

32 minutes ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Manual mounts are great to use - I have one, but I'm sold on GoTo and tracking.

I agree .. there is something quite magical about returning to a scope and finding the target still in the frame . Where manual mounts thrive is the quick set up time . Sometimes this hobby is made so complicated but in reality it can be the easiest and most relaxing past time . Stick your scope on a mount and look through it . Hey , I could start a trend there lol 😂 

[Commanderfish]

1 hour ago, Basementboy said:

Cheers. What would you say to the idea of a 120 with an AZ4 mount, if I'm carrying it to the park to set up every time? Obviously the 120 is larger/bulkier to carry – but the AZ would mean it becomes much more portable than it would be with an EQ... does that sound right?

Yes, moving an AZ4 around is going to be so much lighter than an EQ of any kind.  The EQ itself is heavy, but it also has to have counterweights roughly equal to the scope on it.  So you're effectively carrying two scopes and a mount.  With the AZ4 it's just a scope and a mount.

[Tiny Clanger]

3 minutes ago, Stu1smartcookie said:

I agree .. there is something quite magical about returning to a scope and finding the target still in the frame . Where manual mounts thrive is the quick set up time . Sometimes this hobby is made so complicated but in reality it can be the easiest and most relaxing past time . Stick your scope on a mount and look through it . Hey , I could start a trend there lol 😂 

OP is going to view the sky from a park in South London, if he goes away from the scope for a while, and the 'scope is still there when he comes back, that would be a magical thing by itself !  🙂

[Stu1smartcookie]

9 minutes ago, Tiny Clanger said:

OP is going to view the sky from a park in South London, if he goes away from the scope for a while, and the 'scope is still there when he comes back, that would be a magical thing by itself !  🙂

lol   what are you saying? 😂  (probably accurate though)

[Basementboy]

11 hours ago, Tiny Clanger said:

OP is going to view the sky from a park in South London, if he goes away from the scope for a while, and the 'scope is still there when he comes back, that would be a magical thing by itself !  🙂

Yeah, I wasn't kidding about bringing along a baseball bat. And probably another person

[Basementboy]

12 hours ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

As is the Skymax 102 & AZGTI package, which also allows a degree of flexibility for future upgrades and mix/match possibility i.e. want a more stable platform? Add a steel tripod. Fancy a small refractor or picked up a used 130mm reflector one day? Mount it on the AZGTI and the steel tripod you bought. Want to travel, maybe camping? The Skymax AZGTI packages are small and light. 4" aperture will show a massive amount of objects in a rural setting. If you can push the budget, even better - the Skymax 127 AZGTI.

Thanks! This is extremely helpful. I'm leaning away from the Maks for now, just because of the narrower FOV (while I'm learning I want something a little more forgiving) and because I want a roughly equal balance of deep space and planetary. So I think a refractor is my best bet for an all-rounder first scope. But I take your point about future upgrades and the versatility of the AZGTI mount. Cheers

[Stu1smartcookie]

16 hours ago, KP82 said:

The 150 newt is a good choice for beginner. However I'd recommend getting the OTA on its own and then get a Skytee 2 Alt-az mount for it. Far more stable than AZ4.

Or get an AZ5 which can hold up to 5kgs on a skywatcher aluminium tripod ( 9kgs on a steel tripod ) .. its half the price of the Skytee 2 . The skytee is an exeptional AZ mount that can hold masses of weight but , for portability the AZ5 is perfect 

[Tiny Clanger]

2 hours ago, Stu1smartcookie said:

Or get an AZ5 which can hold up to 5kgs on a skywatcher aluminium tripod ( 9kgs on a steel tripod ) .. its half the price of the Skytee 2 . The skytee is an exeptional AZ mount that can hold masses of weight but , for portability the AZ5 is perfect 

I concur with Stu, admittedly the az5 is my only actual experience of using an az mount, but I bought it because of the slo mo controls ( really important to me for a narrow field scope) and partly as it has a weight limit which will take pretty much any 'scope I'll ever be able to afford and comfortably physically carry outside. I was surprised by the weight and sturdiness of the thing, it's about 3kg on its own . Do take care to buy a 'scope which has a mounting rail on the right hand side as you look along the tube from the back end though, or one which can be rotated inside rings, or the design of the az5 will I suspect ( and I'm only guessing here, but can see it could be an issue)  get in the way of pointing a long 'scope up at nearly overhead objects . FLO ought to be able to confirm if your mount.'scope choice is a good one.

I'm a longtime photographer , and always err on the side of over heavy sturdy tripods and heads, even for small cameras. I have the az5 on an old Manfrotto 55 series photo tripod, it is held steady and the tripod closes down to a nice compact size. (wanting to replace the 55 for photo use, I looked on the internet for a second hand one with no head, just the legs, recently, they seem to go for around £70-£100 ) There are plenty of other photo tripods around, but the vast majority are not up to carrying the weight of anything but a tiny 'scope.

I did look at the skytee mount, and rather liked it, but the jump  in price was a bit too much, and I knew if I bought a mount designed to take two telescopes it would cost me even more, as I'd soon feel the need to buy it another 'scope to wear    😼

Heather

[Stu1smartcookie]

13 minutes ago, Tiny Clanger said:

Do take care to buy a 'scope which has a mounting rail on the right hand side as you look along the tube from the back end though, or one which can be rotated inside rings, or the design of the az5 will I suspect ( and I'm only guessing here, but can see it could be an issue)  get in the way of pointing a long 'scope up at nearly overhead objects . FLO ought to be able to confirm if your mount.'scope choice is a good one.

I agree ... some of the scopes that are sold without rings are a problem when you wish to attach a finder . So glad the Evostar has rings 

Edited February 16, 2021 by Stu1smartcookie

[Tiny Clanger]

I'd clean forgotten this advert from gilesco which has the 120 OTA and a rather nice bag to carry it in as well as all the standard accoutrements and some things you probably don't want (but they are small and postable, so could probably sell on to recoup a few £)  . You could ask him about the portability of this longer tube . I bought a diagonal off him, good chap to deal with.

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/367636-startravel-120t-ota-and-accessories-electric-focuser-carry-case/?tab=comments#comment-4040792

[Basementboy]

Thanks! Interesting advert. The ST120 is a nice looking scope. And much more portable than the Evostar 102, which I'm starting to think I don't really want to be lugging around London. (I know it's light but it's very ... prominent.) 

I suppose the question is whether the Startravel 120 is much worse on planets than the Evostar 102? ST120 has the bigger aperture but 102 the longer focal length. Different animals, I suppose?