New (Ageing) Astronomer - Advice Needed

[cajen2]

Yes, the 127 is a very good scope if you don't mind a small field of view.

If you decide to go down the 8" dob route, consider the StellaLyra 8". It has things the Skywatcher doesn't have: a better focuser, a 90° RACI finder, butter-smooth alt/az movement, a lens cooling fan, balance adjustment. And all that aperture for £60 cheaper than the Mak!

[SuburbanMak]

Welcome to this amazing forum that for me has become an unexpected pleasure in what I thought two years ago would be an essentially solitary hobby - not so at all! 

As you’ll quickly have gathered, folk are passionate about their gear and sharing the pleasure they’ve had from it - there is no completely wrong answer and all of the setups suggested here will give you some wonderful views.  

I was bought a ‘scope for my 50th and opted for a Skywatcher Mak 127 on the AZGTI mount and it’s opened up the hobby for me. If your initial motivation is the planets and the moon then this is a great start - on a still night it will show bands and the Great Red Spot on Jupiter, shadow transits of its various moons, Saturn’s rings with the Cassini division and the planet’s crisp shadow on the rings and an Apollo 8 flyby feeling on the moon. Out of the box it comes with a 25mm eyepiece which is crisp and bright and a 10mm, which is not. That said eyepieces can be picked up gradually and high quality, (particularly for the planets where a widefield is not vital as the AZGTi will be keeping the target in the field for you) can be achieved around the £50 mark. 

It’s portable in a backpack and very robust and that allows easy trips out to darker skies where the Mak 127 is no slouch on Deep Sky Objects. In any light conditions it’s a mean double-star splitter too! 

I’ve subsequently picked up a number of other telescopes as my interest has developed in both the hobby (an ST80 for widefield an, the latest, a 10” Dob for galaxy hunting) and the equipment for its own sake (bit of a thing for old refractors here).
 
So my point, I think, is to go with what you think is best to begin with and will be both practical and exciting enough to get used a lot - chances are as your observing projects develop you’ll end up expanding your collection anyway but this need not break the bank. Unless you start reading all those Takahashi owner posts of course! 
Oh and btw, that Starbase 80 rig looks the business too  

Clear skies. 

 

 

[Cosmic Geoff]

Paul- if you are ping-ponging between various designs of 'scope and mount, I would suggest you take a systematic approach to narrow down the choices:

Portability - how far do you have to carry it?  Weight (you can look up the spec)

Assembly time - this can vary vastly, from carry it outside and start using it, to over half an hour with a complex setup.

Visual or imaging?  If you have a clear idea that's good. For visual, you can avoid equatorial mounts unless you particularly want a manual mount that rotates about one axis, or tracks with an electric motor.  An alt-azimuth GoTo will track on both axes.

GoTo or manual? GoTo can save you a lot of observing time, once setup, but some people prefer the old-fashioned approach.  

Manual or equatorial GoTo?  For visual the alt-az GoTo is much less bother to set up, and you can also image with it - you'd be surprised what is possible.  You only need an equatorial GoTo for the more challenging long-exposure imaging.

Dobsonian design - vey popular because of low cost and simplicity - but GoTo versions are no longer cheap, and none of the Dobs are well suited for any sort of imaging.

Focal ratio - be aware that different telescope designs have different focal ratios, which have a bearing on what they are best suited for. 

That said, it does not matter hugely what you get, so long as it is usable and of decent quality. Once you have had a go with it you will have some valuable experience and can buy something else if you feel the need.

 

[doublevodka]

Also one thing I don't think any of us have mentioned so far is you don't HAVE to buy new, your money can go a lot further by buying used equipment and it's usually well looked after

Once your post count is high enough, you'll be able to see the buy and sell sections on the forum, there is also https://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/index.php and for the daring among us, facebook marketplace and gumtree (although this is a bit more like the wild west, I've personally had some success)

There is also eBay, although again can be a bit iffy and the pricing on there has been a bit nuts since the first lockdown

It's also likely that your local astro society has some sort of buy and sell, always worth a check as there may be a bargain on your doorstep so to speak

[Paul_Sussex]

After a lot of help, both here and from PM's, I am narrowing down some options. I'd never looked at Maks because I always thought of them as more professional (and expensive) telescopes, but that's obviously not, or no longer the case. A 102 would come very close to my original choice - £249 on an AZ Pronto mount or £449 on an AZ-GTi - while a 127 might be better long term - £495 on an AZ5.

I could buy either of the alt/az versions and get an AZ-GTi at a later date, but maximum load might be an issue - workable with the 127/AZ5 but marginal with the 102/AZ Pronto?

The other issue is tripods - nearly every review I've come across considered the packaged tripods borderline. I could buy a separate OTA and FLO's steel alt/az mount by pushing the budget a bit.

Going to Geoff's list above -

Portability - how far do you have to carry it?  Weight (you can look up the spec)

The above in various combinations are 5.75-12.3kg.

Assembly time - this can vary vastly, from carry it outside and start using it, to over half an hour with a complex setup.

Grab and go for the alt/az 102 with some cool down, about 30 minutes cool down for the 127.

Visual or imaging?  If you have a clear idea that's good. For visual, you can avoid equatorial mounts unless you particularly want a manual mount that rotates about one axis, or tracks with an electric motor.  An alt-azimuth GoTo will track on both axes.

GoTo or manual? GoTo can save you a lot of observing time, once setup, but some people prefer the old-fashioned approach.  

For both the above, primarily visual, at least to start with. Possibly with an AZ-GTi in the future.

Manual or equatorial GoTo?  For visual the alt-az GoTo is much less bother to set up, and you can also image with it - you'd be surprised what is possible.  You only need an equatorial GoTo for the more challenging long-exposure imaging.

Manual, in spite of my original posting.

Dobsonian design - vey popular because of low cost and simplicity - but GoTo versions are no longer cheap, and none of the Dobs are well suited for any sort of imaging.

Not a Dobsonian, in spite of the advantages. My garden has very high sight lines because of fencing and surrounding buildings.

Focal ratio - be aware that different telescope designs have different focal ratios, which have a bearing on what they are best suited for. 

Hmmmm...there you have me. I understand Maks are generally high(er)  focal ratio (or am I confusing focal ratio and focal length?) and better for planetary observation. On the other hand, some reviews have had reasonable results with the 127 on brighter DSO's? Which does push me towards the larger aperture.

Starting to think that the 127 AZ5 combo might be the one?

PS - Edited to add, I've just seen the SW steel tripod for £129 as well - another option.

PPS - An AZ-GTi purchase will also have to budget for a tablet - I don't think my current mobile phone will work with the app?

 

Edited April 1, 2022 by Paul_Sussex

[malc-c]

3 hours ago, Paul_Sussex said:

Focal ratio - be aware that different telescope designs have different focal ratios, which have a bearing on what they are best suited for. 

Hmmmm...there you have me. I understand Maks are generally high(er)  focal ratio (or am I confusing focal ratio and focal length?) and better for planetary observation. On the other hand, some reviews have had reasonable results with the 127 on brighter DSO's? Which does push me towards the larger aperture.

 

Focal ratio is the focal length divided by the diameter of the objective lens or mirror.  So for argument sake a 1000m focal length 200mm reflector will be f5, where as a 2000mm focal length MAK with the same 200mm mirror will be f10.  The larger the focal ratio the higher the magnification is achieved for any given eyepiece.  The down side is that in this example the 2000mm MAK will have a darker image, with less contrast.  In theory, assuming the same ISO and other settings remain unchanged, you need to expose for twice the duration with the f10 scope than for the f5.  Now with longer exposures that then means all other factors such as tight polar alignment and guiding come into play.  This is the main reason MAKs are more suited to planetary work and bright DSO's.  Obviously for visual observing tight polar alignment and guiding don't really matter.  This example would be based on comparing these scopes under the same conditions, and everyone's eyes being the same.  In reality the quality of seeing and the observers eyesight can make a big difference.  If you have some nice dark skies, then you will see fainter targets than someone close to a town.

My advice would be to contact a local astro society and pop along to their next observing session.  OK you may not find the same two scopes as per my example, but you should still be able to look through different types of scopes and get a hands on idea of how each type performs.  We used to a 150mm f5 reflector and a 127 MAK pointed to the Moon, and swap the same eyepiece between the two scopes so people could see the difference.  Then we would move to a bright DSO such as M42 or M31 so they got a feel and understanding that there is no such thing as a one scope fits all.   Yes you can use focal reducers in a MAK or Barlow lenses in the Reflector to compensate so to speak, but the more glass you put between the target and your eye, the less photons get through...

The bottom line is that no one here can really advise you what suits your needs.  We all have subjective opinions based on the equipment we use, often based under our own skies.  I had a 127 MAK on an EQ5 mount

It made for a great portable rig, and was taken to one of the SGL star parties around a decade ago (struth don't time fly !)  

But just to through a spanner into the works... here are some images taken from a fairly light polluted Stevenage.  I used two 2x barlows, stacked and a Philips SPC900 web cam in the 8" 200P, which gave an effective focal ratio of f20  A week or so later I repeated the experiment with an MS Lifecam (720p) webcam, which gave a larger image, but not as sharp (I'm sure someone will chime in with the reason being pixel size or something ).  The final image taken in 2011  is Jupiter, taken with stacked barlows and the Phillips webcam.  I've included them to show that with a little messing about you can use a fast scope to get some decent planetary images (I'm happy with the results so that's the main thing), and I dare say there will be those with long focal length refractors or MAKs that have used reducers and taken stunning images of DSO's.... I'll be honest, I have a stack of 30 or so images that ended up on the cutting room floor before I got an image I was happy with, and didn't have too much aberration or some other artefact caused by using cheap barlows, something a 8" MAK or CAT wouldn't have, but that was all part of the fun in experimenting.....

Edited April 1, 2022 by malc-c

[Starwatcher2001]

Just to add a comment to Malc's great explanation, as the focal ratio goes up, the field of view gets smaller. A smaller FOV makes finding objects by star-hopping more difficult as there's less visible sky in the eyepiece. It also means that larger objects like Andromeda won't fit in the eyepiece. For lunar, planets and double stars, the higher magnification given by a longer focal length (eg f/10) is ideal.

[malc-c]

👍  -  Cheers Mark.  Yes I forgot to mention the field of view decreased with longer focal lengths.

[Paul_Sussex]

Think I've got my head round that now. So the Skymax 127 is quoted as f/11.8. But apparently has a "virtual" aperture of 118mm, which would make it an f/12.7? Or does it go by the quoted figure?

In the meantime, I must try and get some more posts up - I really want to get into the sales section. I was really interested to come across this Youtube article about a 40 year old C5!  

 

 

[Paul_Sussex]

Also, regarding Malc-c's comment - "...and I dare say there will be those with long focal length refractors or MAKs that have used reducers and taken stunning images of DSO's..." - I'm guessing this can be used to produce a shorter focal length? Does this degrade the image at all? Not something I'd be looking at immediately, but this would seem to make the MAK a more flexible choice?

 

[Cosmic Geoff]

13 minutes ago, Paul_Sussex said:

Also, regarding Malc-c's comment - "...and I dare say there will be those with long focal length refractors or MAKs that have used reducers and taken stunning images of DSO's..." - I'm guessing this can be used to produce a shorter focal length? Does this degrade the image at all? Not something I'd be looking at immediately, but this would seem to make the MAK a more flexible choice?

Yes, as the name implies, focal reducers reduce the effective focal length (just as a Barlow lens effectively increases it). I have not come across any focal reducers sold for use on Maksutovs.  They are frequently used with SCTs ( and I can personally attest that they make a huge difference if you want to image certain objects with a SCT). Focal reducers are also used with the varieties of refractor used for imaging.  The reducer will not degrade the image, and indeed may actually improve it if combined with some other function.

Note that focal reducers are not cheap. (Some of them cost more than your entire £500 budget).  The alternative, of course, is to buy a scope with a faster focal ratio in the first place. Such as (in the budget range) a f5 Newtonian, or one of the Skywatcher Startravel short-focus achromats.

[Shimrod]

14 hours ago, Paul_Sussex said:

Think I've got my head round that now. So the Skymax 127 is quoted as f/11.8. But apparently has a "virtual" aperture of 118mm, which would make it an f/12.7? Or does it go by the quoted figure?

In the meantime, I must try and get some more posts up - I really want to get into the sales section. I was really interested to come across this Youtube article about a 40 year old C5!  

 

 

If you're considering a 127 Mak, there is a Celestron 127 nextstar SLT available - used, like new - in the Amazon Warehouse sale - this link should show it as the first telescope in the list. It shows the cheapest option available at £408, but click on the six used offers link next to the price to see all available in the amazon warehouse. The 'like new' is £533, but there is a 20% off offer which brings it down to £426, or about £170 off new price.

[Zermelo]

15 hours ago, Paul_Sussex said:

Think I've got my head round that now. So the Skymax 127 is quoted as f/11.8. But apparently has a "virtual" aperture of 118mm, which would make it an f/12.7? Or does it go by the quoted figure?

Because Maks focus by moving the mirror, the focal length (and hence focal ratio) changes a little depending on the eyepiece (and also choice of diagonal). If you're interested, there's a recent thread here.

The Synta Maks (including the Skywatcher and Celestron) have a slightly shorter focal ratio than some others, and so have slightly wider fields.

[Paul_Sussex]

Thanks for the info. It's starting to make sense, but I've obviously got a long way to go. And I'll certainly be considering used options as well.

[malc-c]

15 hours ago, Paul_Sussex said:

Think I've got my head round that now. So the Skymax 127 is quoted as f/11.8. But apparently has a "virtual" aperture of 118mm, which would make it an f/12.7? Or does it go by the quoted figure?

In the meantime, I must try and get some more posts up - I really want to get into the sales section. I was really interested to come across this Youtube article about a 40 year old C5!  

 

 

The C5 is a SCT not an MAK - (I'll let you google the difference)

As some members have already mentioned some accessories are more suitable with some scopes and not others.  Generally I would expect a focal reducer when used with an SCT to have no degradation of the image, in fact it will seem brighter but smaller as the effective magnification will be reduced.  The opposite happens when using Barlow lenses to double, triple or quadruple  the focal lengths.

In addition to my recommendation to visit a local society I would suggest you spend some time on the phone talking to the guys at Rother Valley optics, or First Light Optics as they are more likely to have had the opportunity to compare scopes within certain budget levels than most of us and can possibly steer you down the right road.

Personally with a budget of £500 I would look at the SW 150P-DS / EQ3 as an all rounder.  It has the upgraded focuser compared to the stock 150P, and whilst aimed at being used with a camera, also makes for a decent visual platform.  As shown, using barlows to extend the f5 focal length you can still get decent planetary images when the planets are well placed.  It can be upgraded, with three motor drive options, from basic through to full on synscan goto, so you don't have a large initial outlay.  The combo is light enough to make it portable, easily fitting in the boot or back seat of most cars.

If you want a computer driven scope for the same amount,  the SW 150i Star Discovery could be an alternative, but it lacks the equatorial mount which means field rotation comes into play when imaging.  However I personally prefer the 150P-DS being on  an EQ mount that can be expanded to a system that can offer an automated imaging system at a later date if required.  

Get your post count up and have a look in the classified section, where you money will go further...

As mentioned, we are all different and have different viewpoints.  It's very difficult to find a one scope fits all, as there basically isn't one.   There are also so many pro's and con's for each type of scope and the mounts they sit on, so there will always be a compromise, especially on small budgets.  But take your time, do your research and resist that impulse to impulse buy.

[Paul_Sussex]

Malc-c - Yes, I knew it wasn't a MAK, but I was more interested to see that older (and second-hand) telescopes can still be in useable condition. Once I pass the magic 50 posts I'll be all over the classifieds...in the meantime, must...resist...impulse...buys...!  🤐

[StarryEyed]

The late Sir Patrick Moore always recommended an eight inch newtonian or four inch refractor. From a young boy to grown man I always took his advice first last and always. 

or

Read this from the British Astronomical Society 

https://britastro.org/2018/what-is-the-best-telescope-for-an-adult-beginner

Edited April 2, 2022 by StarryEyed

[PeterW]

Get yer self some 8x40, 10x50 bins and a star guide or two and get out there and work out where things are, how to find stuff etc. useful in the daytime too for looking at birds, planes etc etc

get along to a club (hopefully soon, though the evenings won’t make observing so easy till late summer) and look thorough different kit and see what things look like through them. Also what types of object you prefer and how easy things are to setup/use etc. You’ll always need some spare £ for filters, extra eyepieces and other bits and bobs you never realised existed.  I’d only recommend an eq mount if you wanted to image in which case you’d need a good one. Goto is nice unless it decides not-to-goto in which case it’ll drive you nuts. Also quite often you’ll find all sorts of interesting stuff when you’re hunting for something else.. goto only takes you to what you wanted to look at.  Bit like walking across London vs taking the underground. 
I’d avoid too small an aperture as it will limit what you can see. The old “rule”’of minimum 4”refractor or 6” reflector.  I’ve got plenty off the secondhand fine and sold plenty too.

good luck

 

Peter

[LukeSkywatcher]

On 29/03/2022 at 10:35, KevinPSJ said:

Highly recommend naked eye and binoculars to start with. If you have not done any astronomy before and especially if you don't have someone with you to talk you through things like using finderscope, starhopping and generally finding your way around, then jumping straight in with a telescope will be very challenging and more likely to lead to frustration and disappointment than joy and wonder

If you are starting with no experience then I definitely think a pair of 10 x 50s or even 7 x 30 binoculars and a tripod will be money well spent. You can get some really quick wins - the moon looks amazing and is very easy to find! Scanning the milky way on a summers night with binoculars is always an amazing experience - I never get tired of that. Spotting jupiter's moons is easily within reach. You can see globular clusters, open clusters and, if you have a dark sky, galaxies and nebula. The other advantage is you don't need to worry about finderscope or inverted or mirror image views so locating things is considerably more straight forward.

If you are still interested after a season or two then adding a telescope to your equipment doesn't mean you won't stop using the binoculars - they will always be useful and enjoyable for astronomy. And if you lose interest in the hobby they are still a handy thing to have whenout walking or on holiday - same can't be said of an EQ3-2 mount  

I can't agree more. I've been observing for 42 yrs. I started out with a pair of 10x50 bins. I didn't buy my 1st scope until 2007.

Since then, I can hardly remember what scopes and bins I own:

 

[Paul_Sussex]

17 hours ago, PeterW said:

get along to a club (hopefully soon, though the evenings won’t make observing so easy till late summer) and look thorough different kit and see what things look like through them [...] I’ve got plenty off the secondhand fine and sold plenty too.

good luck

Peter

Well...got out with a local club last night at a (fairly) dark sky site. Great views after the clouds cleared. Saw imaging of the Orion nebula and viewed the crescent moon through a 102mm Celestron NexStar. And plenty of helpful advice. Need to have a look through a few more telescopes, but I was impressed with the Celestron for what I'm after. Hopefully a 127 would be more of the same.

Will certainly be on the lookout for secondhand gear, but also keeping an eye on new prices, in case nothing comes up.

[Geoff_L]

24 minutes ago, Paul_Sussex said:

Well...got out with a local club last night at a (fairly) dark sky site. Great views after the clouds cleared. Saw imaging of the Orion nebula and viewed the crescent moon through a 102mm Celestron NexStar. And plenty of helpful advice. Need to have a look through a few more telescopes, but I was impressed with the Celestron for what I'm after. Hopefully a 127 would be more of the same.

Will certainly be on the lookout for secondhand gear, but also keeping an eye on new prices, in case nothing comes up.

More interaction with your local club is my advice FWIW. I wish I'd listened to what I'm now saying when I started in 2017. I made the mistake of jumping in and buying our first scope only to become quickly dissatisfied. Pretty much everyone at my local club had been there, done that and got the tee-shirt -- and they all said I needed to take my time, to look through a few of the other members' scopes, start with naked eye and maybe some binos, learn about the night sky (how to identify the constellations etc.), find my niche in astronomy and then go out and buy a scope. Not only does this increase the chance of buying the 'right' scope, but you get to save a little more to afford something better. They pretty much guaranteed that I'd be wasting money if I bought with haste -- and they were right!

[Paul_Sussex]

Interestingly, I came across this thread - https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/757499-skymax-127-opinions/ - at Cloudy Nights. In particular the last post by BlueTrane2028:

“I have an update regarding my personal 127mm Mak.  I made a Mak to SCT adapter on my 3D printer and tried it with the 2" SCT diagonal I've been using on my C8.

I'm certain that vignetting is there but my eyes weren't offended by it, when using my current lowest and widest eyepiece, a 40mm 68* by Explore.  Also looked great with my 20 and 30mm 82* eyepieces.

With the 40mm, it fit the Pleiades, and it didn't seem like a waste of time.

It. Fit. The. Pleiades.  That's a BIG target for a Mak.

Suddenly, this telescope is infinitely more useful to me.  I paid for a metal version of the adapter immediately, will retire the plastic one when the metal arrives.

This is an especially interesting development, as I detect noticeable vignetting with my 82* 30mm in my 8" Dob.  Don't know what magic is going on with this Mak, but it can realistically be a go anywhere lightweight go-to scope for me now.”

Any opinions on this? All the parts mentioned are available from FLO, and if they make the 127 more of an all-rounder...?

[Louis D]

Yes, it does work to use 2" accessories on a 127 Mak.  You do get gradual vignetting toward the edge as is visible in the Meade 40mm SWA part of the image below.  You do get a much wider true field of view than is possible in a widest field 1.25" eyepiece as with the 24mm APM UFF part of the image.  The eye is very forgiving of gradual vignetting.  I do get an odd reflection from bright objects once they pass the edge of the rear baffle tube.  I need to flock the inside of it to see if will suppress this artifact.

The telescope does not suddenly become an all-rounder, you'll just be able to draw upon a degraded, wider field of view occasionally for large objects and for centering objects.  It is not the same experience as using an unvignetted refractor view.  Even many Newtonians will have some vignetting due to undersized secondaries, but no one complains about it visually.

[Paul_Sussex]

I'm now wondering if I had "target fixation" on the SkyMax? I know there's no one size fits all for telescopes, but I do want something that has a fairly wide application and that I won't outgrow, or at least not too quickly.

Going solely on new costs, a SkyMax 127 on either an AZ5 or EQ3-2 mount and an upgraded tripod would be about £620-630. But I could get a reflector OTA - 130P-DS, 150P or 150PL - and an EQ5 mount for £535-545. Any of which would be okay-ish for planetary observation and better for DSO's. And with better potential in the future?

Oh dear...round and round we go...🤔

Edited April 6, 2022 by Paul_Sussex

[LaurenceT]

I think the time has come for you to stop agonising and bite the bullet. Similar to your position being retired and getting interested in astronomy I bought a Skywatcher 130p scope on a manual mount.

The telescope doesn't really  need collimating and will give decent views. My next step was a fairly ancient goto mount which enabled me to find my way around the skies. You don't need anything else as the scope retails with very basic eyepieces. Go for it!

Edited April 6, 2022 by LaurenceT