Is this a viable next scope?

[fluxfluid]

Hello , I'm looking for my next telscope after 1 year of using a skywatcher explorer 130p .

I'm looking at the celestron nexstar 6se for the goto and tracking functions plus maybe a bit of planetry photography and hopefully some better views than the 130p I've been using ..

Will I see clearer images and have more magnification with the 6se ? , my basic understanding is I'll have more magnification but not sure what to expect...

Or am I better off with something else for the money ? Bearing in mind I do want goto/tracking and a little astrophotography..

[Mandy D]

@fluxfluid The 6 inch mirror will only gather 33% more light than the 130 mm, so objects will appear 33% brighter at the same magnification. Will you actually notice this? Most of the time, probably not. Will you be able to see fainter objects or resolve final detail? Yes, but probably not enough to notice. You will be able to go to magnifications about 15% greater, but it won't look that different. It is generally considered that a 50% increase in aperture is the minimum that is worthwhile, so you would want a 200 mm to reap the benefit.

Edited January 20 by Mandy D

[Beardy30]

It’s a good scope I’ve had the 8se and it was superb at lunar and planetary plus great for star hopping if mounted well - the mount itself is fine for causal visual but not imaging- it’s wobbly so worth investing in a better mount and tripod 

in terms of the scope I’d recommend the 8se over the 6se in term if you wanting a bigger leap from the 130

[Ags]

Or keep the 130 and mount it on an AZGTI.

[RT65CB-SWL]

Hi @fluxfluid and welcome to SGL. 

I have the XLT version. Very good for lunar and planetary. There are times when I wish I had gone for the 8” as it has nearly an extra 500mm of focal length, plus the extra 2” of aperture.

Don’t forget to purchase a dewshield. Why they are not included is anyone’s guess! 

If you have not seen or read it, this may help... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes.html 

Also http://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/ is a great app/tool for planning your next purchases, as it gives you a virtual representation of what to expect things to look like.

[fluxfluid]

Thanks all for the replys and advice..

I've entered both telescope details into the astrotools site and it looks like I would get approx double the magnification with the 6se over the 130p .

Does this look right ? 

I thought one of the replys stated I wouldn't see much more magnification on the 6se..

Thanks

Edited January 20 by fluxfluid

[Louis D]

11 minutes ago, fluxfluid said:

I thought one of the replys stated I wouldn't see much more magnification on the 6se..

No, the reply was talking about a 33% increase in light gathering due to the larger aperture when squared to account for area increase.  More importantly in experience, the linear increase in aperture from 130mm to 150mm is insignificant when it comes increasing resolution.  That's only a 15% increase in linear aperture which determines resolving power, thus the comment about only being able to go 15% higher in magnification.

If you want a significant increase in linear resolving power for planetary observing, you'll need at least a 50% increase in linear aperture which would be 195mm (200mm) or 8" as suggested above several times.  Thus, the recommendation of the 8SE over the 6SE.

Also, keep in mind that the half as fast f-ratio (f/10 versus f/5) of SE line versus the 130p means you will not be able to easily get to large exit pupils when using narrowband nebula filters.  It takes a 56mm Plossl to yield even a 5.6mm exit pupil.  It also means you'll be giving up lower powers and wider true fields of view relative to an f/5 or f/4 Newtonian.

In my experience, an 8" Newtonian with a well figured primary yields a higher contrast and sharper planetary image than an 8" SCT.  The only exception to this I've found is the 8" Celestron EdgeHD which puts up images rivaling Newtonians with well figured primaries.  Of course, if you're doing image stacking, it tends to be able to resolve more detail than the human eye can see, so it may not matter if you're not a visual observer.

[John]

I agree with the advice above that you will need to move to a 200mm aperture scope, or more to see noticeable gains visually.

 

[fluxfluid]

27 minutes ago, fluxfluid said:

Thanks all for the replys and advice..

I've entered both telescope details into the astrotools site and it looks like I would get approx double the magnification with the 6se over the 130p .

Does this look right ? 

I thought one of the replys stated I wouldn't see much more magnification on the 6se..

Thanks

Thank you Loius for that detailed explanation,  that has certainly cleared things up a bit for me ...

So many factors to take into account