Jupiter: Skywatcher 120ED PRO (gold) vs MAK127

[Fedele]

10.07.2021 - Matera
Skywatcher Refractor vs Skywatcher Mak
Skywatcher 120ED PRo, MAK127, Barlow 2x, ASI224
Asistudio, AstroSurface

 

[Craney]

I like these Telescope "shoot-outs".....

I would say the 120ED  gets the nod.

[Mr Spock]

It's close. The 120 by a whisker.

[John]

There is a "snap" to the ED120 image that is lacking in the mak 127 one. The ED120 did quite well compared with a Mewlon I seem to recall from another post from @Fedele ?

Skywatcher put a lot of effort into getting their 120mm ED doublet objective right.

 

[Tiny Clanger]

Assuming I'm  looking at the correct refractor : Skymax 127 £319, Skywatcher  120ED pro £1399

The second image is better, but is it £1000 better ?

Heather

[maw lod qan]

I agree, my old eyes like the ED120!

[John]

14 minutes ago, Tiny Clanger said:

Assuming I'm  looking at the correct refractor : Skymax 127 £319, Skywatcher  120ED pro £1399

The second image is better, but is it £1000 better ?

Heather

We were not asked to put a value on it were we ?

Astronomers always seek the best optical performance that they can afford in my experience

If you took hundreds of planetary images over the life of the scope, with similar performance gains, the price difference would soon become forgotten I think.

 

Edited July 11, 2021 by John

[dweller25]

9 hours ago, Tiny Clanger said:

Assuming I'm  looking at the correct refractor : Skymax 127 £319, Skywatcher  120ED pro £1399

The second image is better, but is it £1000 better ?

Heather

In my opinion - Yes 

You have to make the best of the few clear spells we get in the UK, so a fast cooling scope with no central obstruction does it for me.

But clearly Fedeles images show what good value the Skymax 127 is.

[Stu1smartcookie]

Taken purely as the question , the 120ed is actually quite a bit better , IN THIS IMAGE ....  But , this is one image . I wouldn't be swayed either way if i was thinking of buying either of these scopes , but it is an interesting comparison , especially as the Maks forte is planetary and lunar. If we are going on value ( which as has been written , we are Not ) then i still think the 120ed has it.. . Until you factor in the appalling viewing conditions that the UK has to contend with most of the time . One clear night in the last two weeks in Herts ( even that one had more moisture than the Sahara gets in one year ) . So , that is a leveler in my opinion . 

[AstroMuni]

17 hours ago, Fedele said:

Skywatcher Refractor vs Skywatcher Mak
Skywatcher 120ED PRo, MAK127, Barlow 2x, ASI224

If an identical number of images have been taken in both instances, I would say the 120ED image is crisper. But that could just be a focus issue. Is it worth paying £1000 more for that image, thats a subjective matter. In my case I would say No.

[Nik271]

Speaking as a SW 127 owner I think it punches well above its price bracket. Sure it is not as good as a 5 inch refractor, as these comparison images show. Perhaps a more competitive shootout  will be with a 4 inch APO.

I think it's considerably more portable and lighter that the  Evostar 120 ED Pro (based on specs).

 

[vlaiv]

Interesting comparison, but not sure if it is representative of what both scopes can achieve?

At least as far as Mak is concerned.

It says in specs that x2 barlow is used on both scopes? ED120 is F/7.5 while Mak127 is F/12.5 scope (if I remember correctly effective aperture in that one is 118-119mm rather than 127?).

With x2 barlow and ASI224, ED120 is properly sampled if bayer drizzle algorithm is used for stacking. Mak127 with F/25 is over sampled by quite a margin. If short exposures are used - this puts Mak at disadvantage, even with low read noise camera like ASI224 - overall stack will have lower SNR and so will individual subs.

Lower SNR of individual subs makes it harder for software to properly align alignment points thus increasing motion blur somewhat over properly sampled version. Lower SNR of whole stack makes it less responsive to sharpening - or rather - noise floor is reached sooner.

@Fedele

Can you provide more technical details - like exposure time used in both cases, calibration applied, software settings used to produce image?

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

The first image is better, but with a £1000 difference in price that should be the result. A true comparison would be a series of images taken over several sessions. Saying that, the Mak 127 image has just about the same level of detail. It's just not quite as sharp as the ED120 pic.

[Fedele]

Hi
So what you see also represents the trend in visual.
The Mak surprised me because it shows an image close to that of a good apo, at a fraction of cost and length / price.
I took it as a telescope for vacations and travel. Unfortunately I must say that the quality is not what I thought, even if I like the final visual result.
It suffers from a little diffused light compared to the refractor and less contrast.
I demonstrated how a 120ED can do planetary imaging, within the limits of the diameter. this telescope does the same with slightly less contrast.
You can stumble upon successful specimens.
After having put my eye in C11 HD, Dobsonian of 40 cm, etc .... I am more and more convinced that for me the primary instrument for my needs is an excellent refractor.
Little Mak stays on the move.
Yes, the samples are different as I wrote in a post in the "planetary imaging" section, but the trend remains