Bresser 127

[Astro74]

My new Bresser 127 OTA arrived today thanks to FLO with the super efficient delivery, ordered lunch time on Friday and it arrived by 10am this morning super impressive so thank you. Just waiting on my mount before trying it but will no doubt report back on its first light 👍🏼

[Astro74]

If anyone know which size Peli case would fit this please let me know 

[glafnazur]

I'm thinking of getting one of these for my Bresser 127

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/telescope-bags-cases-storage/oklop-padded-bag-for-90-102-127-mc-tubes-accessories-or-star-adventurer-mounts.html

 

[Carbon Brush]

My Skywatcher 127 lives in a sports bag with a towel for padding. Yes I'm poor, or miserly, or both😄

Unless I was regularly chucking it in the back of a vehicle to go to dark places, I would rather spend money on other things.

HTH, David.

 

 

[cajen2]

Can I just ask why the Bresser over the SW? Any advantages?

[Astro74]

17 minutes ago, cajen2 said:

Can I just ask why the Bresser over the SW? Any advantages?

Sure is in my humble opinion, it’s a full 127 not a 120 like the sw, it has a bigger primary mirror so should be sharper and crisper on its targets and for me it’s a nice solid quality ota,l with less of a central obstruction as well I believe, overall it seems a little more premium but it’s all just personal preference, nothing wrong with a skymax 127 they are also very good for the money and well loved by many , it’s just my personal preference 

[Astro74]

34 minutes ago, glafnazur said:

I'm thinking of getting one of these for my Bresser 127

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/telescope-bags-cases-storage/oklop-padded-bag-for-90-102-127-mc-tubes-accessories-or-star-adventurer-mounts.html

 

Yea I’ve seen those but I want a hard case for mine but may have to go for one of them - seems expensive for a bag thoughts 

[Astro74]

32 minutes ago, Carbon Brush said:

My Skywatcher 127 lives in a sports bag with a towel for padding. Yes I'm poor, or miserly, or both😄

Unless I was regularly chucking it in the back of a vehicle to go to dark places, I would rather spend money on other things.

HTH, David.

 

 

Yea that’s what I want it for transportation 

[bomberbaz]

1 hour ago, cajen2 said:

Can I just ask why the Bresser over the SW? Any advantages?

At F15 the colour correction should be near perfect and also provide a more contrasty view. (The sw is f11.8)

It would be interesting to here of a side by side comparison between the two. 

Edited February 4, 2023 by bomberbaz

[bomberbaz]

Just had a look at the pictures and from the looks it won't take a 2" fitting which is a shame given it's focal length.

However I think a Baader zoom or similar 8-24 zoom eyepiece is tailor made for this scope (magnification range of 238-79) with the 26 retained as a finder as it has a slightly bigger fov. 

Just FYI the 26 plossl provided gives you 68 degree tfov, an astro essentials 32mm plossl would provide 88 tfov.  Just something to consider.

[Astro74]

Thanks I’ll have a look at that 

[glafnazur]

2 hours ago, Astro74 said:

Yea I’ve seen those but I want a hard case for mine but may have to go for one of them - seems expensive for a bag thoughts 

To be honest I hadn't looked at the price until now.  It is a bit pricey, I think it can stay in its box for now.......

[bosun21]

3 hours ago, Astro74 said:

it has a bigger primary mirror so should be sharper and crisper

The primary mirrors are the same size. It’s just that due to the light path and central baffle on the Skywatcher it cuts out the outer ring of the mirror. This also helps with aberrations in the outer field of the images. I prefer the shorter focal ratio of f11 also of the Skywatcher. Having owned them both I personally can’t see any difference in the images produced by them both. What mount are you going for?

[Beardy30]

Great choice  

this thread above is a great review by johninderby

Edited February 4, 2023 by Beardy30

[Beardy30]

41 minutes ago, bosun21 said:

The primary mirrors are the same size. It’s just that due to the light path and central baffle on the Skywatcher it cuts out the outer ring of the mirror. This also helps with aberrations in the outer field of the images. I prefer the shorter focal ratio of f11 also of the Skywatcher. Having owned them both I personally can’t see any difference in the images produced by them both. What mount are you going for?

Good reasons here - speaks for itself, great choice Astro74  “bigger primary and smaller obstruction” and full 127 apature, unlike the sw 127 which is 118-120 at best  

Edited February 4, 2023 by Beardy30

[Astro74]

Yea that was my understanding after reading Johns review - the mount I’ve chosen will be the star adventurer gti , just waiting for it to come in stock , chose it over the Azi gti so I can do imaging with my frac without having to buy the wedge etc and it’s fine for visual too 👍🏼🔭

[Mr Spock]

Looks well built. I'm sure it will perform really well too. 

[bosun21]

1 hour ago, Beardy30 said:

Good reasons here - speaks for itself, great choice Astro74  “bigger primary and smaller obstruction” and full 127 apature, unlike the sw 127 which is 118-120 at best  

Both the mirrors are the same size as is the aperture. It’s just that the Skywatcher doesn’t utilize the entire mirror due to its optical design. 
The Bresser specs below show a 127mm mirror the same as the SW

 

Edited February 4, 2023 by bosun21
Add photo

[bosun21]

1 hour ago, Astro74 said:

Yea that was my understanding after reading Johns review - the mount I’ve chosen will be the star adventurer gti , just waiting for it to come in stock , chose it over the Azi gti so I can do imaging with my frac without having to buy the wedge etc and it’s fine for visual too 👍🏼🔭

Good choice for your Mak. I used a Mak alone for a year and loved it 👍

[Astro74]

not using the full mirror prevents the full aperture from being used to its intended use and therefore the sw which claims to be a 127 isn’t, the Bresser doesn’t  have this issue so has the full 127 and imo gives you a better ota , the sw is operating at 118 maximum due to not being able to use that mirror in the same way - watch the video below 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8rvCCm_LSQ

However, it’s still a good scope and very popular I just prefer the Bresser design and it’s aesthetics, looks nicer and feels solid 

[bosun21]

3 minutes ago, Astro74 said:

not using the full mirror prevents the full aperture from being used to its intended use and therefore the sw which claims to be a 127 isn’t, the Bresser doesn’t  have this issue so has the full 127 and imo gives you a better ota , the sw is operating at 118 maximum due to not being able to use that mirror in the same way - watch the video below 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8rvCCm_LSQ

However, it’s still a good scope and very popular I just prefer the Bresser design and it’s aesthetics, looks nicer and feels solid 

If you read my posts that’s exactly what I am saying! The physical size of the mirrors are identical it’s just that the SW doesn’t use all of it. I have owned both of them and I couldn’t tell them apart for visual quality. The Bresser obviously gives a higher magnification with identical eyepieces. I am in no way subtracting anything from the Bresser and think it’s a fantastic scope. That’s why I bought one myself.

[Astro74]

Good stuff 👍🏼

[bosun21]

6 minutes ago, Astro74 said:

Good stuff 👍🏼

You will get endless hours of enjoyment out of it and I wish you well on your Maksutov journey 👍

[Ricochet]

9 hours ago, bosun21 said:

Both the mirrors are the same size as is the aperture

No, they are not. The aperture of a Mak is the size of the front corrector plate, not the primary mirror. The corrector plate on a Mak causes the light rays to diverge, meaning that the primary mirror must be larger than the corrector plate in order to retain the full aperture. It is well known that the Synta Maks use a primary mirror that is the same size as the corrector plate, which is the cause of their reduced effective aperture, while the JOC Maks use a primary mirror that is larger than the front corrector. We know this because people have taken their telescopes apart and measured the components.

[Astro74]

1 hour ago, Ricochet said:

No, they are not. The aperture of a Mak is the size of the front corrector plate, not the primary mirror. The corrector plate on a Mak causes the light rays to diverge, meaning that the primary mirror must be larger than the corrector plate in order to retain the full aperture. It is well known that the Synta Maks use a primary mirror that is the same size as the corrector plate, which is the cause of their reduced effective aperture, while the JOC Maks use a primary mirror that is larger than the front corrector. We know this because people have taken their telescopes apart and measured the components.

Thanks for this, I thought this was the case as pointed out in Johns review, I took a great deal of time to choose the Bresser and this was one of the most significant reasons, thanks for clarifying much appreciated 👍🏼🔭