Total City-Based Beginner

[Mal22]

Here is the difference between the 102 and the 127 using a 10mm eyepiece for Saturn, Jupiter and the Moon. The outside circle is how much it will fill the view on the 102, and the inside the 127. 
 

[RT65CB-SWL]

7 hours ago, Lung said:

...With that in mind, is there a recommended 102 and/or 127 Mak to go for? I see there's the Skymax, the Messier and I think a Celestron, so do any of those stand out or is a case of finding the best deal on any of them? Or have I missed one from a different company i should be looking at?

This one... Quester 3.5! 

As much as I like the Questar 3.5, I would have to sell all my current gear/kit and donate parts of my body to get one. 

I am being serious now... my main reason for choosing my ‘scopes [as per my signature] was size constraints. Living in a small apartment without a balcony, climbing stairs, limited storage, etc., so they ticked all the boxes.

If there is a local society or club nearby, find out if they have any star parties or public outreach events and go along. If they have the facility for observing too, then better still. You can see the ‘scopes and give you an idea of physical size, weight, etc. and even get to look through them.

[Ricochet]

11 hours ago, Lung said:

Thanks again all. It does sound like a Mak is the way to go. The 102 is fine budget-wise, while the 127 is a bit more of a stretch once you add in mount, tripod etc. Will the benefits of the 127 over the 102 be noticable to a total beginner like me, or are they the kind of thing you'd need experience or different eyepieces etc to appreciate or make use of? There seems little point spending the extra now if the larger scope only comes into its on by spending more on accessories, or by having used it for several years first, but conversely if it really improves things for a beginner then it becomes worth the extra money from the outset.

 

The benefits of the 127 lie in its larger aperture. The aperture of the 127 is approximately 25% larger than that of the 102 which translates into a 25% better resolution for planetary targets, 55% brighter stars and a 25% increase in optimum magnification on all objects. The previously posted field of view images don't really show this difference too well. When you look though the eyepiece the apparent field of view is the same, so the different circles appear to be the same width, with all the contents magnified that little bit more. Setting up the various scopes and eyepieces in the desktop version of Stellarium would show this more clearly. As a beginner you won't notice the difference simply because you don't have any point of reference but I think if you had the two telescopes side by side you would see the difference. If I were buying myself one of these telescopes as my only telescope I would go for the 127 but in my current position with a larger telescope I would also be happy with a 102 as a planetary grab and go option.

11 hours ago, Lung said:

With that in mind, is there a recommended 102 and/or 127 Mak to go for? I see there's the Skymax, the Messier and I think a Celestron, so do any of those stand out or is a case of finding the best deal on any of them? Or have I missed one from a different company i should be looking at?

The Skywatcher and Celestron models are made by Synta so they should be the same with some minor differences to the fixtures. Ed Ting has recently done a review of the Skymax 102 that you might want to watch. Note that any visual DSO views will be small grey smudges nothing like the colour images he manages to get by sticking a camera on the end for hours and doing lots of post processing. The Bresser Messier scopes tend to be a little bit better mechanically, but optically probably about the same as the Synta scopes. The one difference between the two manufacturers that is notable is that the Bresser scopes are f/15 whilst the Synta scopes are f/13 so for any given eyepiece there will be a slight increase in magnification with the Bresser and a slight increase in field of view with the Synta. It probably means that the Bresser is slightly better for planetary but the Synta is a bit more of an all round scope. Any of these scopes would be a good choice and you're probably best off choosing whichever one comes bundled with the mount that you want to get.

[Lung]

Thank you both, lots to think about!

That Questar is a biiiiit out of my budget 😁

I've seen Svbony also do a 105mm Mak, is that worth considering or just stick to a 127?

As usual for me, my reading has gone down different rabbitholes this morning and now I'm eyeing up an 8" StellaLyra dobsonian. What's the downside to such a scope other than portability? Would a 6" Dob be a reasonable idea for popping out in the car? I had a look at a light pollution map and I have Bortle 4 ~20 mins away, 3 ~40 away and 2 ~75 away. Realistically the changes of making the 2 or 3 for a few years are low, but the 4 is very doable, so trying to weigh up a larger home scope for a few years to learn the trade, then get something more portable later Vs getting a smaller portable scope now and maybe not using it much away from home.

 

[bosun21]

The Skywatcher(Synta) 127 is actually f11.8 .

[PeterC65]

My first scope was a Skymax 127 and it is still my scope of choice for observing the Moon and Planets visually. Out of all the Maks of about this aperture I would say that the Skymax 127 is the most well regarded. Many people have one and there are few if any complaints.

The main downside to the Skymax 127, and the reason I bought my second scope, is that it has a small field of view. The best you can do is 0.9° of sky with a 24mm 68° eyepiece which is fortunately enough to observe the whole Moon disc (you can actually improve on this with a 2" eyepiece but that requires replacing the standard visual back). This is why the Skymax 127 is mostly used for observing the Moon and Planets, and for splitting Double Stars. You can use it for observing DSO, but mainly globular clusters and planetary nebulae as these are small.

The other thing to say about the Skymax 127 is that the focus control is very sensitive so that just the tiniest movement will change the focus. Many people use a clothes peg on the focus knob to allow more delicate adjustments. The up side though is that the Skymax 127 has a huge focus range so that it can achieve focus with anything, any eyepiece, camera, binoviewer (one of these and the Mak is a great combination for observing the Moon).

I also have Newtonian's now, a 6" and an 8". They give you more aperture and a wider field of view than the Mak, making them better all rounders in my opinion, but they are huge and cumbersome, and having the eyepiece sticking out of the side of the scope at its highest point is not very convenient. If you go down the Dobsonian route, and taking it out and about in the car, then that's quite a way from your starting point of city based observing with the kids!

 

[Lung]

43 minutes ago, PeterC65 said:

 If you go down the Dobsonian route, and taking it out and about in the car, then that's quite a way from your starting point of city based observing with the kids!

 

Sorry if I wasn't clear, I was more musing on whether it would be better to go for something less portable now (such as an 8" Dob) because the chances of getting out and about are likely to be few and far between for the next few years, or if the portability of a Mak is worth it even for just a few trips to clearer sky locations each year.

I probably muddled it up by asking if a 6" Dob would be portable *enough* to take it out a few times a year, but more as a mid ground between the 2 end members rather than the overall idea.

Edited December 27, 2023 by Lung

[PeterC65]

56 minutes ago, Lung said:

Sorry if I wasn't clear, I was more musing on whether it would be better to go for something less portable now (such as an 8" Dob) because the chances of getting out and about are likely to be few and far between for the next few years, or if the portability of a Mak is worth it even for just a few trips to clearer sky locations each year.

I probably muddled it up by asking if a 6" Dob would be portable *enough* to take it out a few times a year, but more as a mid ground between the 2 end members rather than the overall idea.

One of the things people like about the Skymax 127 is its portability, and on a tripod mount they can be setup quickly anywhere. I don't have a Dob but can't imaging lugging about even a 6" Dob, and having to find a flat spot on which to set it up.

Having said that, I only ever observe from home. But even at home the setup effort can become an issue (having gone from the Skymax 127 on a AZ GOTO mount to two scopes, one of which is an 8" Newtonian, on an AZ-EQ5 mount, with two cameras, half a dozen USB cables, and now dew heaters!).

 

[Lung]

That makes a lot of sense. Ok, 127 Mak it is!

Right, now which 127 Mak? So far I've found:

Sky watcher: £555 with the AZ GTI mount; £439 with the EQ3-2 mount

Bresser: Messier £668 with EXOS1, £763 with EXOS2, £900 for Goto. Space Explorer £350 with EQ3.

Omegon: Can't find stock of the 127

Svbony: MK105 £230 OTA, no 127 version.

Explore Scientific First light: can't find UK stock. £485 + duty and vat from overseas with EQ3 mount.

Orion Apex: can't find UK stock.

Celestron 127SLT: £470 with the Nexstar mount.

and I'm sure there are many others.

So, the Bresser Space Explorer at £350 jumps out immediately. Is that a reasonable choice? I'm not averse to putting together a set of kit myself if the bundles with tripod and mount aren't actually what I would want, So eg. A Messier OTA + manfrotto tripod + Dwarfstar or whatever happens to be a good setup.

Edited December 27, 2023 by Lung

[PeterC65]

The most popular 127mm Mak is the Sky-Watcher Skymax 127 I would say. It is F11.8 rather than the F15 of the Bresser which makes it more versatile. I wouldn't buy the Space Explorer type as it looks very entry level.

For visual astronomy people generally prefer alt azimuth mounts as they are easier to setup, more intuitive to point, and more likely to keep the eyepiece in a convenient position.

The AZ GTI mount is very well regarded and would be a good choice.

I don't have any experience with Celestron kit but the 127SLT on a Nexstar mount would also be a good option.

 

[sojourneyer]

On 25/12/2023 at 12:10, Ricochet said:

I think a maksutov will be better than an achromat for planetary but have a narrower maximum field of view for wide star fields. The 127 mak would perform better than the 102 and seems to be the Goldilocks size for the mak design. 
 

The skywatcher AzGti mounts are controlled from your phone or tablet but have dual encoders so you can move the scope manually without losing alignment. However, I’ve not used one to know how well they work in manual mode. Both the 102 and 127 Maks are available on this mount. Note that some of this range are AzGte rather than AzGti, which means that they don’t have the dual encoders.

I think you will need to go outside for the phone to pick up gps in order to use the goto system and aside from the window glass degrading the view, the chances of a planet being in the right place to view from inside through a window is very small. Using a goto system with children is often recommended as it means you can move quickly from one target to the next without the children getting bored waiting for you to find it.

If you don’t want a full goto system then the Celestron Starsense Explorer is a manual system that you can attach your phone to to aid with finding objects. However, the mounts are not so well regarded and there are no maks in the range. 

I have had my Celestron 127 Mak and Celestron 6SE on the Starsense DX  mount with no issues at all.

[sojourneyer]

2 hours ago, Lung said:

That makes a lot of sense. Ok, 127 Mak it is!

Right, now which 127 Mak? So far I've found:

Sky watcher: £555 with the AZ GTI mount; £439 with the EQ3-2 mount

Bresser: Messier £668 with EXOS1, £763 with EXOS2, £900 for Goto. Space Explorer £350 with EQ3.

Omegon: Can't find stock of the 127

Svbony: MK105 £230 OTA, no 127 version.

Explore Scientific First light: can't find UK stock. £485 + duty and vat from overseas with EQ3 mount.

Orion Apex: can't find UK stock.

Celestron 127SLT: £470 with the Nexstar mount.

and I'm sure there are many others.

So, the Bresser Space Explorer at £350 jumps out immediately. Is that a reasonable choice? I'm not averse to putting together a set of kit myself if the bundles with tripod and mount aren't actually what I would want, So eg. A Messier OTA + manfrotto tripod + Dwarfstar or whatever happens to be a good setup.

I have had 8 or9 Maks in the past few years ranging in all four sizes , 09/102/105/127.

 The brands were Bushnell, Svbony, Orion, Celestron and Skywatcher.

Of these my sharpest viewing was with the 90 Starwatcher Skymax followed by the 90 Bushnell (aka Celestron C90)

The worst was Svbony105.  The optics from my Celestron scopes always seemed better than the Orions. I owned all three versions of the Orions.

Skywatcher is a good bet but be careful about its dovetail. Some are regular vixen dovetails and the other is an inverted dovetail .

Edited December 28, 2023 by sojourneyer

[sojourneyer]

I much prefer my Maks on the Starsense Explorer mount than my Nexstar mounts ( GT, SLT and SE).  The old software and set up really serve no practical purpose for visual over the SSE mount.

Edited December 28, 2023 by sojourneyer

[PeterC65]

You've not mentioned whether mount GOTO and tracking are major considerations for you. If they're not then you could opt for a manual AZ mount such as the Sky-Watcher AZ4, although the OTA and this mount would cost almost as much as the Skymax 127 / AZ GTi package.

I find GOTO and tracking very useful and wouldn't be without them. Even with GOTO, some targets are hard to find, and tracking, so that once found the object stays in the field of view, is very good to have.

 

[bosun21]

Another 👍 for the Skywatcher 127 on the go to mount. Target acquisition can be tricky with Maksutov scopes due to the smaller FOV. Tracking is another major plus at long focal lengths.

[PeterC65]

10 minutes ago, bosun21 said:

Target acquisition can be tricky with Maksutov scopes due to the smaller FOV.

Good point.

[Lung]

11 hours ago, PeterC65 said:

 I wouldn't buy the Space Explorer type as it looks very entry level.

Could you expand on this a little? I've read a ton of reviews on the Skymax and Messier 127s and both have pretty flimsy accessories from the sounds of it. The Space Explorer comes with a Barlow and a phone holder which the others lack.

37 minutes ago, PeterC65 said:

You've not mentioned whether mount GOTO and tracking are major considerations for you. If they're not then you could opt for a manual AZ mount such as the Sky-Watcher AZ4, although the OTA and this mount would cost almost as much as the Skymax 127 / AZ GTi package.

I find GOTO and tracking very useful and wouldn't be without them. Even with GOTO, some targets are hard to find, and tracking, so that once found the object stays in the field of view, is very good to have.

 

I don't have any experience to base that decision on. I might be fine with a purely manual mount, or I might find I really want something more techy but I simply don't know at this point. I do lean more techy in general, and have been looking at whether I could control a mount from my PC and stream my phone as a webcam at the same time to let my kids use it from indoors when it's too late for them to be outside, but I'm also very happy to learn the basics the old fashioned way and develop into computerised viewing later.

 

26 minutes ago, bosun21 said:

Another 👍 for the Skywatcher 127 on the go to mount. Target acquisition can be tricky with Maksutov scopes due to the smaller FOV. Tracking is another major plus at long focal lengths.

If I got the cheaper Bresser I could also add some 10x50 binoculars for target acquisition.

[Jules Tohpipi]

35 minutes ago, Lung said:

I don't have any experience to base that decision on. I might be fine with a purely manual mount, or I might find I really want something more techy but I simply don't know at this point. I do lean more techy in general, and have been looking at whether I could control a mount from my PC and stream my phone as a webcam at the same time to let my kids use it from indoors when it's too late for them to be outside, but I'm also very happy to learn the basics the old fashioned way and develop into computerised viewing later.

If you lean towards techy and want to control the mount wirelessly from a PC then the Sky-Watcher AZ-GTi mount with a 127 Mak is certainly designed to do exactly that. There's a learning curve for the initial installation and set-up of getting the two talking to each other - but a PC literate person with the patience to look at a couple of YouTube videos should cope easily. The AZ-GTi mount would also allow quick switching to a second telescope for wider views (if the hobby bites), for example an entry-level refractor such as the Sky-Watcher 102T. Plus the latter telescope also makes for an excellent first step on the EAA (aka EEVA) ladder for observing galaxies and the like in real time (have a look at the 'EEVA Reports' sub-forum here for what's possible - with multiple members posting their EAA images). 

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-az-gti-wifi/sky-watcher-skymax-127-az-gti.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/startravel/skywatcher-startravel-102t-ota.html

Edited December 28, 2023 by Jules Tohpipi

[PeterC65]

3 hours ago, Lung said:

Could you expand on this a little? I've read a ton of reviews on the Skymax and Messier 127s and both have pretty flimsy accessories from the sounds of it. The Space Explorer comes with a Barlow and a phone holder which the others lack.

It's just based on looking at the Bresser website. I generally think that the Bresser Messier kit is on a par with Sky-Watcher kit (and Celestron kit) and the Space Explorer range looks to be cost reduced from that.

The Skymax 127 lacks a Barlow and phone holder, but the Barlow is likely to be very basic, as will be the 10mm eyepiece. The 25mm eyepiece will probably be OK.

If you are happy to spend a little more, then the Skymax 127 is of sufficient quality to serve you well for many years, and the AZ GTi mount would give you the option of manual control (via the phone app) or GOTO and tracking, and would accommodate other scopes up to its 5kg payload limit.

3 hours ago, Lung said:

If I got the cheaper Bresser I could also add some 10x50 binoculars for target acquisition.

The issue with finding targets with a Mak is that it feels like you're looking through a keyhole and need to see a bit more of the sky around the object in question, but you want to be looking at the same bit of sky at which the Mak is pointing. Binoculars are good for browsing the sky and learning the shapes of the constellations, but to find objects you really need a finder that is aligned with the Mak and gives a wider field of view.

The Skymax 127 / AZ GTi package comes with a red dot finder which will give a very wide field of view (no magnification). I use an RDF with my widefield refractor but a 9x50 finderscope with the Mak.

 

[Bivanus]

@Lung maybe give this a good thought before buying.  Yes , the Mak IS a good scope but not necessarily a good beginner scope , and a GoTo mount IS the bee's knees - IF you can get it to work...As I explained to another colleague : ask yourself if you want to cry due to the beauty of the stars or due to frustration at trying to use your gear.

From all the telescopes I've seen on the thread I incline towards the 102mm refractor on the AZ3 manual mount from FLO. Easy to set up, rather simple to use with intuitive controls , wider field of view and if the bug bites you can easily move the tube on a better mount with GoTo , buy eyepieces , filters , cameras for EAA etc.   https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes/skywatcher-startravel-102-az3.html

I live in a rather large city , light pollution galore. Yesterday I had a wonderful session with my 102mm refractor looking from my access road at the Moon , Jupiter , Orion Nebula and today I am waiting for the clouds to pass and for the Orion Constellation to rise higher to also have a couple of pictures . Most likely NASA will not be interested in my work , but  it's fun for me and my family and I consider that's more important. 

[PeterC65]

37 minutes ago, Bivanus said:

As I explained to another colleague : ask yourself if you want to cry due to the beauty of the stars or due to frustration at trying to use your gear.

Good point. It is certainly the case that the more technology you involve the more frustration you will experience. My first two sessions with the Skymax 127 and an AZ GOTO mount involved a lot of swearing, but now that I've got the hang of it, I wouldn't be without GOTO (or tracking).

 

[sojourneyer]

Personally, I would seek out a used 127 Skymax and a used Celestron starsense DX mount with cradle. The mount has slow motion controls and with the cradle you put your cell phone on the cradle open the star sense app on your mobile and you are off to the races. 
 
You do not have to worry about batteries, power Units, adapter, extension cords, lengthy set up time, etc.  No firm ware updates needed, no faulty motor issues.  
 

look on you tube to see how it works.  
 

HERE IS AN OPTION TO CONSIDER:
actually you can get. 127 SCT that comes with the entire Starsense set up.  Mount, tripod, slo mo  under $500 US on Amazon 

there is a special $100 off until the end of Dec .  That is a bargain.  The unit is called Starsense DX 5”.

with an SCT YOU has less cool down time , larger FOV, and it is lighter. You might consider this entire option

The OTA is the Celestron C5.  Highly rated with star bright XLT coatings.

As an aside I have recommended this scope to 5 people who have purchased and love them . One had a 127 Mak as well and preferred the SCT over the Mak and sold the latter.

Edited December 28, 2023 by sojourneyer

[sojourneyer]

The AZ3 mount would be at the bottom of my list for a mount IMHO

Edited December 28, 2023 by sojourneyer

[bosun21]

I have owned both SCT’s and Maksutov scopes and preferred my 150mm Skywatcher Maksutov over an 8SE. The Mak is optically sharper and provided better views imo. The downside is the long cool down time.

[sojourneyer]

1 hour ago, bosun21 said:

I have owned both SCT’s and Maksutov scopes and preferred my 150mm Skywatcher Maksutov over an 8SE. The Mak is optically sharper and provided better views imo. The downside is the long cool down time.

But you need the atmosphere to be very good for viewing.  Heavens where I am sometimes I can not get any clear views of Jupiter above 120X with a 127 mak whereas my 90 mak will allow me to go as high as 150X on the same day.

Also there is a weight difference of 9.7 lbs (mak) vs 6lbs for the SCT (both 127mm).   You have much more limited viewing opportunities with the Mak plus you can not use a focal reducer for it I believe. If  you put a focal reducer/corrector on the SCT the scope becomes much more useful for DSOs.