200P EQ5 any good for a beginner?

[GraemeG]

I’ve been researching for a while but never cease to feel overwhelmed. There is so much choice in telescopes. I’m keen to buy something decent, which will do me for both viewing and astrophotography. My budget is up to £1,000. Would the Skywatcher Explorer 200P EQ5 be a good choice? I’d rather buy once, than buy budget then upgrade.

https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/skywatcher-explorer-200p-eq5-telescope.html

[malc-c]

If you use the search function you will see peoples opinions on this combo, and like all things you'll get differing opinions - Mine is based on personal experience as I started with this combo and soon realised its limitations

In a nutshell - if you are in a sheltered area the combo makes for a very nice visual scope.  The scope is susceptible to wind given the size of the tube, hence the need for a sheltered area.  Imaging is a different story as the options are so wide, for using the camera on a mobile phone through to a dedicated mono camera with filter wheels.  But basically even with a dSLR and using the finder scope as a guide scope you'll be pushing the load capacity of the EQ5 beyond it's recommended limit.  If you want to do imaging then considering increasing your budget to get an HEQ5, or look for one second hand. An HEQ5 also provides a very sturdy visual mount that performs better in breezy conditions.

[Carbon Brush]

Biassed opinion coming up. My first proper scope was an 8" newt, shorter FL on manual EQ5.

Yes a good combination. I had many many hours of enjoyable viewing. Even after selling this first scope I have always owned a reflector in this size range, or a bit bigger.
The EQ mount takes a little while to get your head around, but once learned it is like riding a bike.
The scope is a good all rounder. A long FL eyepiece taking in larger objects and magnification up to 400 with the ight eyepiece - and a stable sky. Plenty of light gather.

Don't worry about photo use for now. just enjoy the views.
An alternative to consider (and save money) is a dob mount version. Again regarded by many as a 'keeper'.

You may have heard about collimation. Don't worry.
It is easily learned by hands on. A Cheshire or simple (low cost) laser are all you need.
Then how often? My experience has been hardly ever unless you throw the scope around a lot.
How long does it take? A couple of minutes - unless you have had the scope apart for flocking and cleaning.

The nice thing about a reflector is that being simple, you can modify or upgrade with ease.
They are basicaly a tube with a big mirror, little mirror and focus tube. all held by few screws.
Lots of light pollution from the sides? Flock the tube or use better black paint.
Mirror dirty? Bird droppings? pollen & sap? Easily sorted in the sink.
Focusser a bit rough or sloppy? Buy another better type.
Don't like the finder scope - fit a right angle. Always my first choice though ohers may differ.

If you do go for an 8" reflector, take a look at other offerings like Bresser & the FLO 'own brand'.
They all are similar, but have different accessories included.

HTH, David.

[Cosmic Geoff]

Opinions may vary, but I think this is a combination to be avoided. I had an 8" Newtonian on a manual EQ5 for a while.  I already had a smaller scope on a GoTo mount, and I found the 8" Newt/EQ5 to be almost unusable.  It worked well when I could find anything with it, which proved remarkably difficult.  The eyepiece got into awkward positions, including potentially over seven feet off the ground with the tripod fully extended.  I soon disposed of the tube, and bought an 8" SCT on a GoTo mount, where the eyepiece remained in a convenient position, and I could find things...

I kept the mount and later upgraded it to a Synscan GoTo.

I don't think the "buy once" theory works in practice, as one's astro interests develop and change. 

Edited February 14, 2023 by Cosmic Geoff

[dweller25]

3 hours ago, GraemeG said:

I’ve been researching for a while but never cease to feel overwhelmed. There is so much choice in telescopes. I’m keen to buy something decent, which will do me for both viewing and astrophotography. My budget is up to £1,000. Would the Skywatcher Explorer 200P EQ5 be a good choice? I’d rather buy once, than buy budget then upgrade.

https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/skywatcher-explorer-200p-eq5-telescope.html

It may be worth considering buying the skywatcher 200P Dobsonian - which is a very capable scope - to dip your toes in the water…..

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-200p-dobsonian.html

It is a great visual scope, inexpensive and adaptable for imaging in the future if you choose to go that way, as I did……

[malc-c]

I should have also added that if you feel that you may be tempted to do imaging, then look at getting the PDS version of the scopes.  

If you drop a little in aperture you could get the Skywatcher 150 PDS and place that on the Goto equipped EQ5, and still have a little change from your £1000 budget.  Link

You will always get people suggesting a dobsonian as you get more aperture for your money, no issues with being 7' tall to see the eyepiece (which can be resolved using a simple tube ring to allow rotation of the tube) etc.  But they are impractical for doing imaging of faint DSOs that require long exposures.  If you are looking for a scope that should end up being something that will cover both visual and imaging without the need to sell it and replace it with something larger (unless you really get bitten by the aperture bug) then the 150PDS on and EQ5.  If you did want a 200P then it needs to be on an HEQ5 (or EQ6 if your have some more cash in reserve). 

One other thing to remember though, is there is no one scope fits all option.  Whilst the 150PDS (or even the 200P for that matter) is excellent for imaging faint nebula and galaxies, you won't get detailed and large images of planets.  Both the 150P and 200P  (and there DS variants) are f5, meaning quite fast low magnification, where as planets require high magnification and ideally large aperture to get a bright and detailed image.

[Ratlet]

I use a 130pds newt on an alt az mount and attempted to use it on my GEM28 eq mount.  The eyepiece ends up all over the place.  It's not much fun.  From my experience you'll find it better to go for something alt-az like (dob or legit alt-az mount and normal Newtonian).

You'll see oodles even if you go for a smaller aperture so that's always an option.  I'm massively biased, but my 130pds is awesome.  Nice views of lots of objects.

[Mr Spock]

For me an 8" on an EQ5 is an unwieldy and wobble option. I'd much prefer a Dobson base on an EQ platform. Not only is it more sturdy but the eyepiece is easier to get to. With an EQ mount you have to rotate the tube to get the eyepiece into a comfortable position.

If you want to use an 8" Newt for astrophotography (deep sky) you'll want an EQ6. That option is well outside your budget.

[Franklin]

1 hour ago, Mr Spock said:

If you want to use an 8" Newt for astrophotography (deep sky) you'll want an EQ6.

I'd do that for visual as well.

It may say in the Skywatcher specs that an EQ5 has a payload capability of 9kg but that comes from "cloud cuckoo land". Anymore than 6kg and you will have a frustrating experience at the eyepiece, imo. I'd stick to a 6" Newt on an EQ5 or go for a bigger mount for an 8". Same applies for refractors as well, why do they still sell outfits consisting of a 6" f/8 refractor packaged on an EQ5, madness!  

[Mr Spock]

For an EQ5 the 102mm f7 I have is a perfect match; the biggest I'd put on there would be a 6" CC. 

[GraemeG]

Thanks everyone. Great to read so many helpful replies.

[malc-c]

7 hours ago, Ratlet said:

I use a 130pds newt on an alt az mount and attempted to use it on my GEM28 eq mount.  The eyepiece ends up all over the place.  It's not much fun. 

A strip of trunking capping and clamp banding overcomes this by allowing the OTA to be rotated in the rings.... making observation a lot more comfortable..

[Franklin]

2 hours ago, malc-c said:

A strip of trunking capping and clamp banding overcomes this by allowing the OTA to be rotated in the rings.

Back in the day Fullerscopes sold tube rings specifically for this purpose. Once attached above the top ring you could loosen your ring clamps to allow rotation of the tube without it slipping. Any old tube ring would do I suppose as long as it's the correct diameter.

[Ole Larsen]

I bought an extra ring to my scope, and placed it over upper ring, tighten it when all in balance, and can turn tubus.

[malc-c]

I took the cheap option -- as described - Both do the same job of allowing the OTA to be rotated in the rings, just that yours looks like it came form the factory with the ring fitted 🙂

 

[Ole Larsen]

Yes, both do the job, and that was what we was looking for. ;0)))

[sagittariancat]

The Skywatcher Explorer 200P EQ5 is a great telescope for both viewing and astrophotography. It offers a large aperture of 8 inches, which is more than enough to reveal distant galaxies, planets and nebulae in great detail. The equatorial mount also makes it easy to track objects across the night sky. Additionally, it is also great for astrophotography due to its large aperture and the fact that it is already equipped with a motorised tracking system. The £1,000 price tag is also quite reasonable for what you get. All in all, the Skywatcher Explorer 200P EQ5 is a great choice for both viewing and astrophotography and should be a good investment for the long term.

[malc-c]

1 hour ago, sagittariancat said:

The Skywatcher Explorer 200P EQ5 is a great telescope for both viewing and astrophotography. It offers a large aperture of 8 inches, which is more than enough to reveal distant galaxies, planets and nebulae in great detail. The equatorial mount also makes it easy to track objects across the night sky. Additionally, it is also great for astrophotography due to its large aperture and the fact that it is already equipped with a motorised tracking system. The £1,000 price tag is also quite reasonable for what you get. All in all, the Skywatcher Explorer 200P EQ5 is a great choice for both viewing and astrophotography and should be a good investment for the long term.

Can you elaborate on this...  was this from personal experience or a copy and paste form some sales literature 🙂

Yes the 200P is a great scope, and yes you can get excellent image.... but the mount will be at, if not over its limits which can make the task frustrating (and that is from personal experience as I started with that combo before converting the scope to a PDS using a larger secondary and then buying an HEQ5 as the EQ5 just didn't hold the scope still enough for imaging on anything other than a windless night) 

[GraemeG]

16 hours ago, malc-c said:

Can you elaborate on this...  was this from personal experience or a copy and paste form some sales literature 🙂

Yes the 200P is a great scope, and yes you can get excellent image.... but the mount will be at, if not over its limits which can make the task frustrating (and that is from personal experience as I started with that combo before converting the scope to a PDS using a larger secondary and then buying an HEQ5 as the EQ5 just didn't hold the scope still enough for imaging on anything other than a windless night) 

Funny. That’s how I read this reply. It seemed too well ‘scripted’ and sounded if it had been cut and pasted.  As I’m very new to this I’m greatly appreciative of people’s personal experiences and don’t really need sales pitches.

[sagittariancat]

On 15/02/2023 at 00:06, GraemeG said:

Thanks everyone. Great to read so many helpful replies.

I completely understand feeling overwhelmed with the multitude of options available when it comes to telescopes. It's great that you're willing to invest in something decent that will serve both your viewing and astrophotography needs, rather than opting for a budget option that may need upgrading down the line.

Did you wind up coming to a conclusion though? 

To be fair, I think no matter what you chose your interest will evolve into something else or you'll find limitations to find something else. This is partly why I always try to buy secondhand although it's v tough to find decent equipment. I'm also a stickler and get a persons' name so check their information through social media and other sites I found online. There's plenty of others though, just do your due diligence. 

Lastly, imo, the Skywatcher Explorer 200P EQ5 is a solid choice within your budget. It's a reflector telescope with a 200mm aperture and an EQ5 mount that can handle some astrophotography. However, it's worth noting that the EQ5 mount may not be the most stable for long-exposure astrophotography. If you're mainly interested in viewing, it should be a good choice.

[malc-c]

The best analogy I've used in the past is to use cars.   A Land Rover,  a Ferrari, and a Ford Focus are all quite happily driving along a motorway at 70mph. But if you also had an interest in off road driving then the Land Rover would be best suited and depending on the "level" of off road driving the Focus may be capable in parts, but could get stuck in others.  As for the Ferrari, well it wouldn't get passed the first curb.  Likewise if you were interested in track days, then the Ferrari will leave both of the other cars for dust and give you the best performance without being taxing to use.  The same goes for various telescope / mount combinations