Maksutov-Cassegrain conundrum.

[Nugs]

So, i have decided that i want a compact portable scope for lunar, planets, and brighter Messier object visual fun.

Having settled on a 5" Mak-Cas, the choices seem fairly limited between the Skywatcher Skymax 127 (https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-127-ota.html) and the Bresser Messier MC-127 (https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-mc-127-1900-maksutov-cassegrain-ota.html)

Celestron do have a 127, but not available as OTA only, and from what I've read and heard, the single arm mounts on cheaper Celestron products are less than desirable, plus i already have a Skyguider Pro and CEM25p.

As i already own a good diagonal, and a set of BST star guider EP's, im not too concerned abut the supplied accessories, but some real world feedback on the performance of the two scopes would be useful, especially around what makes the Bresser worth £40 more. I would imagine that the lions share of reviews would be on the Skymax as they seem very popular (for a particular optical reason or purely the price point?)

Anyhoo, over to you...... 🤔

[dweller25]

I believe the Skywatcher 127 works at a true aperture of around 120mm and a focal ratio of around F/12 whereas the Bresser is a true 127mm scope working at F/15. This should on paper give the Bresser an edge at the eyepiece but maybe not so much in reality. 

The SW has a “standard” type finder mount, the Bresser does not.

The Bresser is white and the SW is blue.

Back to you …. 🙂

[Zermelo]

You're correct in thinking that more has been said about the Skymax 127 than the Bresser, and I suspect there aren't too many people out there who have owned both.  I have only the Skymax, so I can't give you any personal comparisons, though I'm very happy with the one I have.

The Bresser is perhaps the more typical Mak at F/15, and most suited to smaller targets with higher magnifications. So certainly solar system, which you mention, and also the brighter globulars, planetaries and doubles. The narrow field of view will be a limitation on larger DSOs. My understanding is that the Skymax has more of a compromise design (effective aperture of less than 127mm, slightly larger secondary spot, tweaked baffling) in order to achieve a faster ratio of around F/11.8.  This increases the maximum true FOV to just over 1 degree using a 1.25" visual back (more is possible with a 2" back, though it will vignette the outer field slightly). This makes the Skymax a bit more versatile in terms of targets, though possibly not quite as good as the Bresser as a planet killer.

Some threads discussing one or both:

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/289452-bresser-or-sw-mak

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/413328-mak-127-or-102/

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/334665-bresser-messier-127mm-f15-maksutov/

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/406070-bresser-127

[StarryEyed]

A 5" Mak might be portable but a mount to keep it steady at high power won't be or at least of resonable cost compared to the scope. Certainly that's what I found.

Edited September 13, 2023 by StarryEyed

[sojourneyer]

I concur with StarryEyed. The 127 weighs about 8 lbs so when you get above 160X there will be settling issues unless you have a good sturdy mount.  Then with a sturdy mount you lose portability

[RT65CB-SWL]

Bear in mind @Nugs Meade was brought by Bresser. Instead of ‘spot the ball’ it’s going to be ‘spot the likeness’… https://www.bresser.de/en/Astronomy/Telescopes/BRESSER-Messier-MCX-127-GoTo-Telescope-EQ-AZ.html

[Paz]

I went through the same conundrum and went for the MC127 in the end. I haven't used the skymax so can't compare from experience but my rationale was... larger effective aperture, smaller secondary obstruction, slower focal ratio so easier on the optics.

I've been happy with the MC127, it's light and short and I can't think of any time when the slightly smaller maximum field of view meant I missed out on something I wanted to observe.

I preferred it with a Skytee 2 or EQ5 but the lightest mount I used with it was a Vixen Porta 2. At higher magnifications it does vibe more but I used that Porta 2 a lot and had a lot of good times with it.

The only issues I would flag are the finder it came with was tinted a bit as if it was inteded for daylight use (I use a telrad with it) and the focuser has developed a bit of play over time, but I've had it for years and its functionally fine.

[Nugs]

Cheers @Zermelo, your use of the term 'versatile' with regard to the Skymax does have appeal, and looking through the FOV calculator using the EP's i own, the shorter focal length would be of benefit on most of my intended targets (being a newbie, bigger is better)

Am i correct in thinking that the faster a scope is, the harder it is on your choice (quality) of EP's?

Oh, and now I've gone down this rabbit hole, i still haven't ruled out a bigger refractor (4") as i'm led to believe that the colour rendition is better with a frac'. I do realise that the considerable weight and price increase has to be factored as well.

[Zermelo]

45 minutes ago, Nugs said:

Am i correct in thinking that the faster a scope is, the harder it is on your choice (quality) of EP's?

That is true, but you won't see any difference between F/15 and F/11.8, if that's why you're asking.

[sojourneyer]

21 hours ago, RT65CB-SWL said:

Bear in mind @Nugs Meade was brought by Bresser. Instead of ‘spot the ball’ it’s going to be ‘spot the likeness’… https://www.bresser.de/en/Astronomy/Telescopes/BRESSER-Messier-MCX-127-GoTo-Telescope-EQ-AZ.html

Meade is now owned by Orion and Explore Scientific is the exclusive distributor of Bresser products in the United States

Edited September 14, 2023 by sojourneyer

[Beardy30]

I have the Bresser 127 and wouldn’t swop it for anything- lovely scope and highly recommend it 

Edited September 14, 2023 by Beardy30

[tico]

How is this for the double Star? 

Best R. 

Tico

[GTom]

On 13/09/2023 at 18:06, StarryEyed said:

A 5" Mak might be portable but a mount to keep it steady at high power won't be or at least of resonable cost compared to the scope. Certainly that's what I found.

My motorized EQ3-2, sitting on a solid steel tripod holds my 105/735 refractor+Barlow fine for planetary work. Would work well with the Mak too. The mount head is quite portable, the tripod is whole another story.

[Louis D]

On 13/09/2023 at 15:11, RT65CB-SWL said:

Bear in mind @Nugs Meade was brought by Bresser. Instead of ‘spot the ball’ it’s going to be ‘spot the likeness’… https://www.bresser.de/en/Astronomy/Telescopes/BRESSER-Messier-MCX-127-GoTo-Telescope-EQ-AZ.html

Meade was bought by Ningbo-Sunny and then awarded to Orion USA as a result of an anti-trust lawsuit filed in US courts by Orion USA.  Synta (Celestron), another defendant, wisely settled with Orion for a mere $500,000 early on and kept control of the Celestron brand.  Sometimes it pays to settle for a nominal sum and admit no wrongdoing.

On 14/09/2023 at 11:30, sojourneyer said:

Meade is now owned by Orion and Explore Scientific is the exclusive distributor of Bresser products in the United States

Technically correct about Meade, but I just wanted to clarify that Orion never actually bought Meade, it simply owns it.

[sojourneyer]

Touché ..my bad

[sojourneyer]

Touché ..my bad

 

Actually I understand that the litigation is not over.  The fat lady  still needs to sing

[Planets]

On 14/09/2023 at 21:44, Beardy30 said:

I have the Bresser 127 and wouldn’t swop it for anything- lovely scope and highly recommend it 

Looks great, however, I've seen reports online that F15 127mm Maksutovs suffer from mirror flop unlike Synta F12, does it occur in your unit too?

[RT65CB-SWL]

Most Catadioptric ‘scopes suffer with ‘mirror-flop’. Usually it is retaining ring that holds the mirror and slides along the baffle tube becomes a little bit loose.

Many users use or add a third-party focusser, ie a ‘crayford’. Only downside is it makes the ‘scope back/tail end heavy.

[Louis D]

On 01/10/2023 at 10:14, RT65CB-SWL said:

Only downside is it makes the ‘scope back/tail end heavy.

That, and it moves the focal point away from the design point adding SA for SCTs.  I'm not sure about Maks, though.

[dino_jr]

Hello / Bump

Looking at the Bresser, I see 2 versions. Presume this grey one is the older model: But at £168 cheaper and with 2 eyepieces vs 1, is there any reason to still spend on the newer white model?

 

[Mandy D]

55 minutes ago, dino_jr said:

Hello / Bump

Looking at the Bresser, I see 2 versions. Presume this grey one is the older model: But at £168 cheaper and with 2 eyepieces vs 1, is there any reason to still spend on the newer white model?

 

Yes, the white one comes with and EQ4 mount, whereas the grey one gets only an EQ3 mount.

[davidc135]

On 02/10/2023 at 16:07, Louis D said:

That, and it moves the focal point away from the design point adding SA for SCTs.  I'm not sure about Maks, though.

It should be just the same where the secondary surfaces are spherical.  David

Edited November 14, 2023 by davidc135

[raadoo]

No one has mentioned it, so I'll chip in another candidate: the Orion Optics OMC 140 https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/product/omc140dx/

I don't have personal experience with one, nor can I remember anyone who has, but it does fit the requirements, albeit at a much higher price than the aforementioned Bresser and Sky-Watcher alternatives.