Best portable planetary scope

[stafford_stargazer]

Looking for an easy to carry in and out planetary scope.

I was thinking a skywatcher skymax 102 or similar.

Or even a long focal length achromatic refractor.

Would love your thoughts on what would give beat image bang for buck.

Thanks Gary 

 

 

[Cosmic Geoff]

The words 'portable' and 'planetary' do not fit well together.  For best planetary observing, you need aperture.  On a limited budget, this points to a Newtonian on a Dobsonian mount.

[knobby]

Hi Gary, you'd have to define 'easy'

For me I'd say a 150 dob, not too heavy, quick to set up and view.

Is this just for viewing, back garden or take to a dark field etc ?

[stafford_stargazer]

1 minute ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

The words 'portable' and 'planetary' do not fit well together.  For best planetary observing, you need aperture.  On a limited budget, this points to a Newtonian on a Dobsonian mount.

Thanks, been there got the t shirt, the size and bulk is too much for carrying in and out now and  not something I'm willing to do anymore.

I heard matsukovs are good planetary scopes,is this not true?

Thanks Gary 

 

[stafford_stargazer]

12 minutes ago, knobby said:

Hi Gary, you'd have to define 'easy'

For me I'd say a 150 dob, not too heavy, quick to set up and view.

Is this just for viewing, back garden or take to a dark field etc ?

Hi mate 

Yes at home but also take on holidays too. I don't want a dob, just sold a 200mm dobsonian 2 days ago as I need something I can quickly pick up and get outside .

Can you answer my question about matsukovs then, I thought they were good planetary scopes is this true then or they not that good?

Thanks Gary 

[cv01jw]

I have a Bresser 127 Mak and it is excellent for planetary observing.  It is also compact and not too heavy.

 

ETA: Bresser Messier MC-127 / 1900 Maksutov Cassegrain OTA | First Light Optics

Edited February 3, 2023 by cv01jw

[Elp]

A C6, C8 if you've got the mount for it. The mak will be studier to take on holiday as the front glass is thicker, but it might be a heavier scope in comparison size for size.

Edited February 3, 2023 by Elp

[M40]

I swapped from a 200p dob to a skymax 180 a good few years ago now because I knew one day I was going to drop the dob. The skymax is excellent for solar system stuff, similar ota weight but far more manageable.

Can I suggest, start with the mount, then look for the longest focal length, biggest aperture the mount can take and work from there. Interestingly a quick look on flo and you find maksutov's, classical cassegrain and newtonians of a similar size are very similar in weight, who knew that one. All the best.

[Guest]

Find a astro club and spend some time looking at different scopes.  There is no replacement for actually looking at the possibilities and getting some hands on time before buying one.  

[Carbon Brush]

The SW127 is quite popular and provides a good compromise between weigtht/size/aperture.
The similar Bresser offering of course attracts the same coments.

A long refractor (for CA) is less convenient for holiday travel.
It demands more of the mount/tripod rigidity for a given weight.

Why not look for a decent used example? That way if you don't get on, you can sell it for little loss.

I bought a used SW127 a couple of years ago. It doesn't get out much because of the other scopes.
But the view (planetary) for ££ spent is good. It doesn't occupy a lot of space at home - or in the car boot.

HTH, David.

[knobby]

1 hour ago, stafford_stargazer said:

Hi mate 

Yes at home but also take on holidays too. I don't want a dob, just sold a 200mm dobsonian 2 days ago as I need something I can quickly pick up and get outside .

Can you answer my question about matsukovs then, I thought they were good planetary scopes is this true then or they not that good?

Thanks Gary 

They're nice little scopes, come up on ABS quite often https://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=196163

But you'll still end up needing a mount, that's going to add weight !

AZ-Gtis are nice and compact ?

 

Whats your budget ?

Edited February 3, 2023 by knobby

[Cosmic Geoff]

1 hour ago, stafford_stargazer said:

I heard matsukovs are good planetary scopes,is this not true?

Yes, they are, but a mini-Dobsonian of similar aperture (130 or 150mm) might also fill the bill and could be cheaper and equally portable.

[stafford_stargazer]

26 minutes ago, Carbon Brush said:

The SW127 is quite popular and provides a good compromise between weigtht/size/aperture.
The similar Bresser offering of course attracts the same coments.

A long refractor (for CA) is less convenient for holiday travel.
It demands more of the mount/tripod rigidity for a given weight.

Why not look for a decent used example? That way if you don't get on, you can sell it for little loss.

I bought a used SW127 a couple of years ago. It doesn't get out much because of the other scopes.
But the view (planetary) for ££ spent is good. It doesn't occupy a lot of space at home - or in the car boot.

HTH, David.

Thanks for the info David. That would be fine, I will keep my eyes open for a used one I think, is yours for sale?

Regards Gary 👍

[mikeDnight]

Hi Gary,

 You mentioned at the outset a refractor. There's an on going thread on SGL at the moment about the Starfield 102ED at around F7, which would be quite a nice option to consider as it has virtually no cool down time required, and would perform straight out of the house.  Having said that, a few years ago a friend brought his SW 127 Mak Cass around for me to take a look. He said it hadn't been out of its case for about a year, so I attached it to a Vixen Porta mount and aimed it at Jupiter. Because it was already thermally stable, the detailed view it gave was really impressive and was comparable, but not quite as sharp as a Vixen 102ED which stood alongside it. I think the refractor will have the edge over the 127 as a planetary scope, but it is a bit more of a hand full. It depends on how big your hands are. 

Edited February 3, 2023 by mikeDnight

[SuburbanMak]

My Skywatcher Skymax 127 is my most used 'scope & I love it.

Its is great for planetary views: Jupiter - GRS, lots of banding with texture on the right night, endless dance of the 4 Galilean moons including shadow transits. Saturn 3 moons, rings + Cassini division, surface banding. Mars, at recent opposition I could see the main albedo features, polar cap/cloud hoods.  Venus, watch its phases. Uranus can be seen as a tiny disc and Neptune you can just about tell its not a star!

The Mak is superb on the moon, you could have years of observing it with it - super crisp on the best nights and taking very high magnification. 

Its a mean machine on double stars down to its optically theoretical limits at 1" separation,  will show form in the brighter planetary nebulae M57 as a perfect 'smoke ring' in space, the characteristic shape of the Dumbell Nebula M27 etc etc.  It will also show some form in the brighter galaxies (M81, M82, M94, M51) and, especially if you can get it out to a dark sky site reveal ghostly form in others.   Endless star clusters sparkle on an inky background.   

It is very portable and, crucially, rugged - I have had mine in constant use for 2 years in and out of a backpack and car boot to darker sites. I did some checking last week to confirm that collimation does not require adjustment & its still spot on. Mine has run very well on the AZGTi mount but it's quite happy on a range of small mounts.  It's short length means less virbration and wind interference than with a longer tube (I have some long refractors and love them but really they need a heavier mount & tripod to control to the same level as the short tube Mak which is fine but implies additional cost and weight to achieve the same stability = somewhat less portability). 

There are two accessories that I would say are vital - firstly a dew shield, as that corrector lens at the front will fog up on many nights in the UK without. I've found the basic Astrozap one to work all night on all but the dampest of evenings (i.e. I haven't felt the need to invest in heaters) & I believe Flo now do an Astro Esssentials version.  The second is an additional optical finder - the Mak's view is a about 1 degree which will cover all but the widest DSOs but you might need some help locating things.   I use an 8x50 RACI + a Telrad on mine (illuminated rings like a gunsight) and can scoot about finding things all night.  The Telrad is a bit big but there are others (Rigel quickfinder) that have a smaller profile, equally the supplied RDF + an additional optical finder would serve. 

At this price point the optics are hard to beat and it punches well above its weight in my biased (but based on happy experience) opinion. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 3, 2023 by SuburbanMak

[Alkaid]

You want a CAT.  Short, portable....

I wouldn't take my C8 on a trip, I find it just a little too big for that.    So if I were you, I would go with the 127 Mak at the lower price point, or a 4" APO refractor at the higher price point.  Both do well on lunar / planetary. 

[Astro74]

I’ve just purchased the Bresser 127 waiting for delivery 📦! 

[dweller25]

In my experience…….

A 4” ED refractor will cool quickly to give great planetary views and will not be too heavy.

Next best would be a Celestron C6*- takes a while to cool but they are very light and compact.

Also a 6” Maksutov* would be a good option but it will take longer to cool and will be a little heavier.

*Wrapping the C6 or Mak with two layers of reflectix from B&Q will allow you to use your scope straight out of the house.

 

[RT65CB-SWL]

My choice of 'best planetary 'scope would be my 're-modded' ETX105. [Images below].

Edited February 4, 2023 by Philip R

[Mr H in Yorkshire]

I have an ancient Intes Mk 65, 6" Maksutov. Doesn't get used too often but it is superb as a planetary scope. It's reasonably light, easily lift one-handed so certainly portable. I imagine its modern equivalent is pretty pricy but occasional Maks of this ilk turn up for sale.

[badhex]

For best portability, I would also recommend a Mak (specifically Mak over over SCT, I loved my Skymax 102 but have never managed to get the same enjoyment out my C5 - I've read other people have had similar feelings but of course it is somewhat personal choice). 

Obviously you will need a half decent mount for planetary viewing, I would also recommend the AZ-GTi for this class of smallish scope, but it may struggle with a mak larger than 127mm. I know some people have used it with a C6 also, but I can't say what their experiences are like. 

The AZ-GTi aluminium tripod is okay as a starting point for a small scope and lightweight enough to be portable but for best planetary views you may want to think about something more sturdy going forward. 

Depending on your budget, you could do worse than:

Mak 127 (Bresser or Skywatcher)

AZ-GTi

Carbon fibre tripod (can be expensive but well worth it IMO)

 

NB. Personally I have a 4" doublet which is excellent for both planetary and widefield, but it is larger (longer) and heavier, and definitely requires a sturdier mount and tripod. More flexible in terms of targets, but definitely less portable in my experience. 

Edited February 6, 2023 by badhex

[Elp]

24 minutes ago, badhex said:

Mak over over SCT

What is the difference that you perceived to be better? Be interesting to know, it's the one scope type I'm yet to own and I did consider one prior to getting the C6.

The azgti handles a C6, be careful not to add too many extras (metal fixings, guidescope cameras etc). Should be fine for visual, as per above, a better tripod will provide the greatest benefit to vibration dampening.

 

Edited February 6, 2023 by Elp

[badhex]

17 minutes ago, Elp said:

What is the difference that you perceived to be better? Be interesting to know, it's the one scope type I'm yet to own and I did consider one prior to getting the C6.

The azgti handles a C6, be careful not to add too many extras (metal fixings, guidescope cameras etc). Should be fine for visual, as per above, a better tripod will provide the greatest benefit to vibration dampening.

I found views through the Mak to be crisper and it handled average seeing better than the SCT, even though it was nominally an inch smaller. Some of this is probably due to the central obstruction being quite a lot smaller on the Mak, and also could be the SCT needing collimation where Maks rarely need it unless they've been handled roughly. Arguably though if portability is a key requirement, then you want something that holds collimation better. 

Of course it's somewhat just personal experience, and I really want to love my C5 but just somehow it's never worked for me. I've read similar comments on SGL regarding the less than perfect planetary views with SCTs vs Maka, IIRC Ed Ting may also have said something similar in the past. This could also just be my confirmation bias! 

[IB20]

I love planetary observing through my 3”APO. It’s so portable and easy to set up that I observe 95% of the time that conditions allow. They are extremely handy in winter too as is ready to use almost immediately out of the house and are great for gaps in clouds.

I wholeheartedly reject that you cannot do serious planetary observing with a small refractor; I have seen so much with mine but it depends on the observer, patience and a critical eye.

I’d definitely recommend a 3” or 4” APO. I have an 8” dob and I find that in regular seeing the ordinary magnification that planets accept leads to too bright an image, so you need filters. For me personally it’s all about contrast, contrast, contrast.

I have compared my 3” to a 3” long achromat too and the APO wins hands down due to the amount of colour fringing seen on planetary limbs in the achro which hides a lot of detail, particularly for events like  moon and shadow transits or occultations. 

As a bonus they work brilliantly on the moon, white light solar and double stars too; what’s not to like? 

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

On 03/02/2023 at 09:33, stafford_stargazer said:

Looking for an easy to carry in and out planetary scope.

I was thinking a skywatcher skymax 102 or similar.

Or even a long focal length achromatic refractor.

Would love your thoughts on what would give beat image bang for buck.

Thanks Gary 

 

 

Another vote for the Skymax 127. Compact, light weight, ED like optics, rarely if ever needs collimation and relatively cheap. Used units appear for sale regularly but I think that's down to their popularity as starter telescopes rather than poor quality.

For planetary the Mak works well on the AZGTI using Point and Track mode but the aluminium tripod that comes with the mount is barely adequate.

 

Edited February 6, 2023 by ScouseSpaceCadet