Evostar 120 vs Bresser AR 127L

[CasualObserver]

Please note that until I started digging into telescopes a few days ago, I believed that they were "simple" things. By this I mean that I always assumed I could ask for a 500£ telescope, and it would be easy to conclude which to get. I now know better!  So if any of my logic or thinking is wrong, please correct me. 

Based on the information I have been able to gather so far, I have concluded that for me, the best option seem to be a refractor. This is largely due to the fact that I would like for it to require as little maintainance as possible (no readjusting the mirror every now and again). My main interest would be the moon and planets to start, but of course the whole sky will be of interest. I also decided on a longer telescope so that the CA will be somewhat reduced, compared to a shorter one. 

My budget is somewhat flexible, but not unlimited. Up to about 700£ for the telescope and mount. 

I have found some great information in here and other places, and as far as I can see, larger aperature is basically what I want. I did consider the EVO 102mm for a while (as it can be used on a cheaper tripod as I understand it), but I feared that I would run a risk of kicking myself after a year for not going for a 120mm in stead. 

So I feel like the choice stands between two telescopes:

Evostar 120mm with either an EQ3-2 mount or an EQ5 mount (is the choice here obvious? The EQ5 is considerable more, but will the cheaper EQ3 give me any issues)?

Bresser Messier AR 127L, with an EQ5 mount (I am not sure if there are better mounts that I should consider for this)? 

I don't live in the UK, but it seems that my best option is to order from FLO, as they deliver to my country. The local shops that have telescopes have few options, and though I could get the EVO 120, it would cost 25% more than importing from the UK (and that is after shipping, import and taxes are added)! I could consider buying used equipment, but here they seem to be very few telescopes on the second hand market locally. I am not sure about buying used from another country, or if anyone would even consider shipping internationally. 

My main concern with the EVO is that some users here have noted that there are some bad problems with the focus knobs or something? As I have never used one, I would probably just assume that things were suppose to be as they are, and just live with the annoyance. Still, I would like the best experience possible when I first buy a telescope. 

A second concern I have is about storage. I would like to get a case to store the telescope in when not in use, but I can't seem to find one that would fit either of the two I am considering. Is there a solution I am just not seeing here, or do I need to get a smaller telescope to be able to store it with ease? I suppose I could just use the box it is shipped in, but that seems like a bad alternative. 

Lastly; is there anything I should buy of extra equipment together with my initial telescope to improve my enjoyment right of the bat? Like some usefule eye pieces etc? 

[johninderby]

The Bresser does seem to have better optics and higher build quality but the biggest difference is that it has a great high quality CNC focuser that is miles better than the cheap low end focuser on the Evostar. The focuser alone is enough reason to choose the Bresser.

Used to have one and was impressed by how good it was for the price. Now replaced by a 125mm APO.

The 26mm plossl that comes with the Bresser isn’t bad and quite usable. For a long focal length scope a great budget line of eyepieces are the Starguiders. Of course you can spend a lot more on eyepieces but the Starguiders are a great starting point.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/search/for/starguiders/

The stock finder is poor like most that come with a scope. A 9x50 RACI finder is a popular chpice.You will need to change the Bresser finder shoe for a Synta / Vixen type one though.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/finders/astro-essentials-9x50-right-angled-erecting-finderscope.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/finders/william-optics-vixen-style-finder-shoe-mounting-base.html

The stock diagonal isn’t the best and just a plastic one as seems to come with most brands. Just get a 2” dielectric diagonal. There are loads to choose from.

For long refractors most get a carry bag. Geoptik makes some very nice padded carry bags for telescopes.

 

Edited April 2, 2021 by johninderby

[vlaiv]

Hi and welcome to SGL.

Sturdier mount is always a better option - so pick EQ5 if you can. If you are mainly interested in lunar / planetary observing, then you would benefit from motorized mount. You don't have to get complete goto setup as these are expensive - you can simply add RA tracking motor to your EQ mount.

There come as add on kits - but you can also DIY a solution for mount motorization (usually arduino based controller and stepper motor - there are several open source projects for this).

Out of the two scopes, well - it depends, I'll give you my view on this, but you'll have to see what your priorities are.

Bresser has more aperture and longer focal length of the two. Aperture is important for both deep sky objects and planetary but focal length is not. Focal length is important for planetary but restricts how wide you can go with a scope. You won't be able to go wider than about 2.2° with 1200mm scope. Some larger objects out there benefit from wider field of view.

Difference is not that big - Evostar 120 will give you max field of about 3° so maybe 30% larger?

Bresser is of course longer and heavier. Heavier and longer scopes require heavier and sturdier mount. If you are worried about storage - well, that is also minus for bresser - as it is longer (again not by much).

By the way - one possible storage solution is to get this:

http://oklopbags.com/telescope-bags/bag-for-refractors/

and keep scope under your bed or somewhere where you can lay it down without it being in the way. It is also handy transport bag.

I personally don't like the look of Bresser scopes - there are couple of things that bother me. First is use of plastic parts - like screws that hold finder. Finder is also has non standard shoe so if you want to change finder - you'll have to replace whole assembly and possibly even drill holes if provided screw holes don't match stock finder shoe.

Focuser on Bresser scope seems better (one on Evostar is usable but not great). I don't particularly like oversized dew shields - but that is personal taste, nothing wrong with wider dew shield. Best dew shields are those that can retract / slide back - but you don't get that on budget scopes.

You get two eyepieces with Skywatcher and 2" diagonal - which is better as it allows for 2" eyepieces. 2" Eyepieces will give you wider fields of view for deep sky objects - completely unimportant for planets. Out of these two eyepieces, 25mm is usable and 10mm is going to be used only until you get replacement as it is not really good.

26mm EP that comes with Bresser is probably quite fine. Bresser comes with 1.25" diagonal so if you want to use 2" eyepieces with it - you'll have to get 2" diagonal separately (so additional expense).

Both scopes can be stopped down by using simple aperture mask (you can cut one out of cardboard or maybe print it on 3d printer if you have one and want something longer lasting). This means that your reasoning against Evostar 102 is sound one - Evostar 120 can be turned into similarly performing scope as Evostar102 with simple aperture mask. Only difference remaining will be weight of the scope.

If your primary targets are planetary and lunar and you have problems with storage - why don't you consider Maksutov scope? It will sit happily on EQ3 mount and take up very little space. It will be free of chromatic aberrations. Only drawback will be that it will have narrowest field of view of the lot  - so wide field DSO observing is out of the question with it. Price will be similar for the scope:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-127-ota.html

or

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

Hope this helps somewhat.

 

 

[johninderby]

The stock finder shoe on the Bresser can be directly replaced by a Synta / Vixen type using the stock screws and mounting holes. Just make sure you get one with slots in not the SW one.

Edited April 2, 2021 by johninderby

[Stu1smartcookie]

As someone who has owned both of these scopes the one I would go for is the bresser , not only for the fact that the aperture is larger. I really liked  the EVO but the bresser seemed  aesthetically more pleasing ( shallow , yeah I know ) .The bresser finder is absolutely rubbish but  as John wrote , this can be changed . One thing I would mention is that the bresser is larger than the Evo . Also the focuser on the bresser is certainly superior .I’m not trashing the Evo .. it really gave me fine views , but IMO the bresser is a fine scope , if you can get hold of one . 

Edited April 2, 2021 by Stu1smartcookie

[John]

I've owned both an Evostar 120 and a Besser AR127L although both were quite a few years ago.

Both were decent scopes. The 127L is somewhat longer and a bit heavier but does give the feeling of using a "big refractor" more than the Evostar 120 did.

The level of CA in the F/9.4 127L is a bit lower than in the F/8.3 Evostar 120.

I had the 127L on an EQ5 mount for a while and it was steady enough for visual observing. I was using a strong steel legged tripod with the mount which made a lot of difference to stability.

The EQ3-2 mount would not really be suitable for either scope in my opinion.

[CasualObserver]

3 hours ago, vlaiv said:

If your primary targets are planetary and lunar and you have problems with storage - why don't you consider Maksutov scope? It will sit happily on EQ3 mount and take up very little space. It will be free of chromatic aberrations. Only drawback will be that it will have narrowest field of view of the lot  - so wide field DSO observing is out of the question with it.

I was set on refractors based on two impressions. The first is due to maintenance. Would a Mak require me to adjust the mirror/glass at certain intervals? I don't really like the idea of that, at least not for my first. The second would be about the fov. To be honest though, the information a out fov, eyepieces and how much I will actually see based on these things is one of the things I have found most difficult to understand. I have no clue what to expect when I first will take a look through a telescope pointed at the moon, based on magnification, aperature, eyepiece and focal length. I assume that for experienced watchers, you instinctly know what to expect. I know refractors are not superb for DSO, but I still assume that I would get some enjoyment out of it, and so I expect that a refractor even with a large focal length (and a value of about f8-f9) would at least give me some interesting  views. Although I plan to focus on planets initially, I expect the interest for DSO to grow as well. 

What I really like about the Mak is the size, and that it even seems to come with a storage case included, so both are excellent points for going for that one. It would also be a lot easier to carry out to get a better view. 

 

There is a lot of great advice so far, I conclude that if I choose either the EVO or the Bresser the EQ5 mount will be needed. Personally, I think the EVO looks the best, but that will not be a consideration anyway.

Regarding the finder; would a beginner like me really feel that it is lacking, or should it be fine for the first year of usage? 

I feel really torn between the EVO and the Bresser still, but I am leaning towards the Bresser due to the focuser on the EVO. It just sounds like a piece where issues would be a hit on enjoyment (I mean, a focuser sounds like something that will need to be used all the time, so if it is not a great quality it could become tiresome)? Correct me if I am wrong. On the other hand, a larger fov on the EVO should make it a tad more useful for DSO, but it sounds like the difference on that part is neglable. Besides, a better focuser sounds more appealing. 

Regarding availability I feel like the whole world is emptied of telescope stock these days, so it seems I will have plenty of time to decide regardless. So with that in mind; do shops like FLO sometimes run sales, or should I just go for it if I know what I want whenever they get new stock again? 

[vlaiv]

3 minutes ago, CasualObserver said:

I was set on refractors based on two impressions. The first is due to maintenance. Would a Mak require me to adjust the mirror/glass at certain intervals? I don't really like the idea of that, at least not for my first. The second would be about the fov. To be honest though, the information a out fov, eyepieces and how much I will actually see based on these things is one of the things I have found most difficult to understand. I have no clue what to expect when I first will take a look through a telescope pointed at the moon, based on magnification, aperature, eyepiece and focal length. I assume that for experienced watchers, you instinctly know what to expect.

I think that is is more based on experience and a lot of times even experienced observers can be surprised if they have not tried such or similar combination before. Sometimes it is hard to extrapolate what is to be expected.

In the absence of actual experience - there are tools what can help you figure out what you could possibly expect. One of such tools is this one:

https://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/

For example, Evostar 120 with 25mm MA eyepiece that comes with it will give you following view of the Moon:

Same eyepiece will give you following view of Orion's nebula (M42):

So you can play with many eyepiece scope combinations to get the feel for things. Only think it can't show you is what different apparent fields of view look like.

If I tell you that one eyepiece has AFOV of 52° vs another eyepiece that has 68° AFOV - that is something that can't be displayed on computer screen (well it can but not easily and you really need to get in close for that to work). What you can do is use wall or white board or similar to get the sense of different AFOVs.

You can use this tool to get key pieces of information.

http://www.1728.org/angsize.htm

Say you have a wall and you stand 1 meter away from it. What diameter circle drawn on the wall needs to be in order to represent AFOV of 52 degrees?

97.55cm

How about 68°? 134.9cm

You can take something that is roughly 98cm or 135cm wide and place it one meter in front of you and that is how wide view will look like. Alternatively - you can take width of your window and calculate how far away you need to stand in order for width of the window to subtend certain angle.

14 minutes ago, CasualObserver said:

Regarding the finder; would a beginner like me really feel that it is lacking, or should it be fine for the first year of usage? 

Probably not. You can upgrade finder at any time and it is really only matter of comfort. Straight thru finder sometimes requires very awkward head positioning in order to use it - especially if you look for something near zenith (scope point straight up). That is the reason people swap for one with 90° prism / RACI type. Otherwise even simple finder serves the purpose - particularly for planets. It is very easy to just point a scope to a planet even with simple finder (if it's aligned properly).

For DSO hunting - it does pay to have better and larger unit - as those will show more stars by which you can orient and sometimes even DSOs themselves (at least bright ones).

19 minutes ago, CasualObserver said:

I feel really torn between the EVO and the Bresser still, but I am leaning towards the Bresser due to the focuser on the EVO. It just sounds like a piece where issues would be a hit on enjoyment (I mean, a focuser sounds like something that will need to be used all the time, so if it is not a great quality it could become tiresome)? Correct me if I am wrong. On the other hand, a larger fov on the EVO should make it a tad more useful for DSO, but it sounds like the difference on that part is neglable. Besides, a better focuser sounds more appealing. 

I used at least 5 Skywatcher scopes so far (two newtonians, two refractors and Maksutov) and while focusers were not very good - I never failed to focus properly with any of them.

Difference between good and bad focuser is not whether it can do its job (although there are focusers that can't even achieve that - and those go into awful category) but how does it feel when you are focusing - is it very smooth and easy to use or do you need a bit more force and you feel sort of roughness. Does focuser have play in draw tube or is it very solid and won't budge when you move it side to side and so on.

I now have Evostar 102 and it had pretty much the same focuser as Evostar 120 - it is perfectly usable focuser. It is far from buttery smooth but Synta-glue can be removed and proper grease applied to it (btw Synta-glue is some sort of "lubricant" that Synta - manufacturer of these scopes use that feels more like glue than lubricant as it is very sticky). There are a few tutorials online how to make it better.

Having said that - If I could choose to have that or hexa foc from Bresser on the scope of my choosing - I'd go for later.

27 minutes ago, CasualObserver said:

Regarding availability I feel like the whole world is emptied of telescope stock these days, so it seems I will have plenty of time to decide regardless. So with that in mind; do shops like FLO sometimes run sales, or should I just go for it if I know what I want whenever they get new stock again? 

FLO often has items on discount - customer returns and ex expo items and so on, but due to current situation - many retailers are very low on stock and prices have risen somewhat. Not sure if I could give sensible recommendation there. You'll probably have some more time to think about your decision before items are back in stock  - and in mean time you can scan second hand items.

[Louis D]

Have you ever picked up a fully laden EQ mount including scope and counterweights?  Once setup, they're very hard to move around.  Can you see the entire sky from a single, convenient location?  I can't, so I have to be able to pick-up my scope/mount combo and move it about.  Make sure to consider this in your decision making.

[CasualObserver]

I feel that I for some reason desire a reflector, but the more I read through old topics, the more in doubt I get. I believe that I feel that the EVO/Bresser would be a tad more usable to look at DSO with, and that they would be more or less equal to the SkyMax 127 on planets. 

Regardless, reading endless threads have made me conclude that a skymax 127 may be the best choice, as it would be much lighter, and easier to store and bring outside. As my only experience so far has been binoculars, I assume I should get quite a view regardless. To that point, I also have the option to keep my eyes on the local second hand market, just in case a good deal for something I have not considered should pop up. Given the large increase in prices, and decrease in availability in all the stores world over, I probably need some patience anyway. 

Thanks for all your input, it is much appreciated. 

 

Edit; if I end up with a Skymax 127, do I need to get the EQ3 mount, or are there better/lighter mounts I could go for? I assume that an EQ would be recommended above anything not EQ. 

Edited April 3, 2021 by CasualObserver

[Tiny Clanger]

20 minutes ago, CasualObserver said:

I feel that I for some reason desire a reflector, but the more I read through old topics, the more in doubt I get. I believe that I feel that the EVO/Bresser would be a tad more usable to look at DSO with, and that they would be more or less equal to the SkyMax 127 on planets. 

Regardless, reading endless threads have made me conclude that a skymax 127 may be the best choice, as it would be much lighter, and easier to store and bring outside. As my only experience so far has been binoculars, I assume I should get quite a view regardless. To that point, I also have the option to keep my eyes on the local second hand market, just in case a good deal for something I have not considered should pop up. Given the large increase in prices, and decrease in availability in all the stores world over, I probably need some patience anyway. 

Thanks for all your input, it is much appreciated. 

 

Edit; if I end up with a Skymax 127, do I need to get the EQ3 mount, or are there better/lighter mounts I could go for? I assume that an EQ would be recommended above anything not EQ. 

I have a skymax 127, and use it on an az5 mount. I have no intention of using it for astrophotography, so see little point in an eq mount. Be aware that maks do need time to cool down if taken outside from a warm room , I usually leave mine outside for 30 minutes before using it.

I've said on other threads in the past, that I think I'd have found it difficult to find objects in the narrow field of view of the mak if I'd bought it as a first telescope, and hadn't spent time with a 150 heritage dobsonian first, but the mak is a very good, compact  'scope for viewing the Moon and planets.

[fozzybear]

On 02/04/2021 at 14:19, CasualObserver said:

don't live in the UK, but it seems that my best option is to order from FLO, as they deliver to my country. The local shops that have telescopes have few options, and though I could get the EVO 120, it would cost 25% more than importing from the UK (and that is after shipping, import and taxes are added

are you based in Europe as a couple of suppliers will price match

[vlaiv]

41 minutes ago, CasualObserver said:

Edit; if I end up with a Skymax 127, do I need to get the EQ3 mount, or are there better/lighter mounts I could go for? I assume that an EQ would be recommended above anything not EQ. 

Not necessarily. EQ will have advantage if you want simple tracking like single motor tracking that is quite nice to have when observing planets. EQ3 will certainly hold Skymax127 - but so will cheaper AZ alternatives.

I've got scopes similar to those that you are considering and I'm now rather sorry that I did not do comparison between them - which could help you. Unfortunately, I don't do much active astronomy due to commitments, but hopefully that will change as soon as I move to darker location.

In any case - I've got both Mak102 and Evostar 102 - so basically 4" versions of two scopes that you are looking at.

I use Mak102 on AzGTI mount and I'm fairly happy with that mount. It holds little Mak without any issues and is very simple to use. I upgraded firmware so I can now use it in both AltAz and Eq mode (which is handy for wide field astrophotography with lens and short focal length scopes - but requires wedge and counterweights to be added).

Only issue that I have with AzGTI is that it uses mobile phone / or another android device to operate it. You can connect handset to it - but it is rather expensive to get one. Problem with smart phone that I'm having is lack of tactile feedback. If I'm looking at the eyepiece and want to move the scope - either for observing or when doing alignment - I can't do it without taking my eye of the eyepiece - phone screen is flat and I have no idea which "button" I'm pressing - or if I'm pressing any at all.

Other than that - I was rather surprised with how sharp image is in little Mak. Many people say that they feel boxed in with Mak - I don't feel that way. That little Mak has focal length only 100mm longer than my main observing scope - 8" F/6.

You'll never hear that someone is feeling "boxed in" with 8" F/6 dob and it is considered exceptional both beginner and advanced amateur scope. It has 1200mm of focal length while little Mak has 1300mm.

SkyMax127 will have a little more focal length at 1500mm, but that is the same focal length of C6 and lower focal length than C8 - popular Schmidt Cassegrain scopes. I don't often hear that their owners feel boxed in by their scopes.

From what I've written above - it would seem that I prefer the Mak - but that is just because I had more observing time with it. I really used Evostar 102 only once or twice. I do however feel that Mak is going to be better on planets in direct comparison - will need to check it though.

Evostar 102 has 1000mm of focal length and 2" focuser (same as Evostar 120 really) - so it can go quite a bit wider than little Mak - it can show about x2.5 more sky if I'm not mistaken.

Interesting link:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/sky-watcher-skymax-127-az-gti.html

 

[Sadiestorm]

I got a Skymax 127 as a first telescope. I adore it but mine came with a much better finder which I would have struggled without. Mine has a 9x50 right angled erecting finderscope and although it is heavy compared with the scope is great for me and I highly recommend investing in a decent one early on for someone getting this scope as a beginner.

Like @Tiny Clanger I have mine on a AZ5 mount as I enjoy visual and a bit of cellphone photography for my instagram to try and get friends interested. I love the simplicity of it and I am glad I never went equatorial but I know some people love the challenge and want to be able to set themselves up to image in the future. 

It is super portable, light and easy to transport. The photo below shows my case for it which is 54cm x 42cm x 22cm so pretty small and light.

 

Here's a photo I just got with my cellphone held up to the eyepiece. Nothing special but this is with the stock 25mm eyepiece and trying to get a quick shot before the moon moved out of view.

[CasualObserver]

Sorry for not quoting, but I use my mobile so I struggle a little with the technical part of quoting different users. 

Regarding price match, that is probably not an option. Some stores do have price match, but never against stores from another country. It is not a huge problem though, as I could just buy from whichever country is cheapest after taxes and imports are calculated for. 

I really liked the looks of the package with 127Max with an az-gti mount. Especially the combined weight of 7.5kg. That should be easy enough to carry when I want to, and the size makes it realistic to bring in the car on some of the vacation drives. Again an excellent  point of why I should choose this, as a telescope that will get me more usage will be much better than one that is just gathering dust because I can't be bothered to deal with the size (if my interest grow, I could always add a heavy refractor at a later stage if that is what I want). 

Is the GTi something that will make it possible to do photography if I want to? It is not a main goal, but as I do have a camera, I will at some point or another connect my camera to the telescope. If not, why would I want the GTi? For the GoTo only? 

This is probably a stupid question, but as the 127 OTA comes with a basic carry case, will it also be included in the packages that are bundled with a mount? I assume so, but they never seem to mention it under the "what's in the box" - section, which seems odd. 

[vlaiv]

1 minute ago, CasualObserver said:

Is the GTi something that will make it possible to do photography if I want to? It is not a main goal, but as I do have a camera, I will at some point or another connect my camera to the telescope. If not, why would I want the GTi? For the GoTo only? 

AzGTI is very portable imaging platform - but very limited one as it can carry only small scopes for astrophotography.

Most people limit scope that they use for astrophotography to 70-80mm APO refractors on that mount. It will be for wide field photography only.

On the other hand - it will let you get into astrophotography straight away if you already have DSLR and a lens.

All you need to do is upgrade firmware to one that supports EQ mode of operation - add a wedge (which can be simple ball or 2d photo head - or dedicated wedge from couple of vendors) and counter weight and you are ready to go. Counterweight can be DIY for very little money.

I made one from a piece of threaded rod, bunch of washers and couple of nuts:

Here it is with DSLR mounted on L bracket - with simple ball head used as a wedge:

Only drawback of using ball head as wedge is polar alignment - it is messy as you don't control each axis separately - ball head just moves all over the place.

Some people have much more elaborate setup with this mount:

( @david_taurus83 - for example, image taken from another thread on azgti payload).

Other than that - mount is good for tracking at high power. Some people like that it has goto capability - but I find the best use that it tracks planets / moon nicely. This lets you relax while observing without the need for constant adjustment of the scope to compensate for earth's rotation.

It is also handy if you want to share the views with someone - with manual scopes there is always a chance that target will drift out of view before you manage to swap - and less experienced will have trouble finding it again (say you want to show something to your friend - by the time you explain how to look thru the scope and adjust focus - target may have drifted outside of FOV of eyepiece).

Goto is sometimes nice - especially if you have trouble finding what you are looking for .