SW 120ed v Starfield 102

[Flame Nebula]

Hi

Given these two choices, which one would you pick? 

Use for planetary and double stars predominantly. 

Thanks 

Mark

[dweller25]

Assuming you have a suitable mount….

Both have probably similar optical quality, but the 120 has more resolution and light gathering so that would be my choice.

PS - there is an SW Equinox ED120 in the for sale section.

Edited March 27 by dweller25

[Flame Nebula]

15 minutes ago, dweller25 said:

Assuming you have a suitable mount….

Both have probably similar optical quality, but the 120 has more resolution and light gathering so that would be my choice.

PS - there is an SW Equinox ED120 in the for sale section.

Thanks Dweller 

I can't find the for sale section. I'm too stupid🤪. Could you point me towards it? 

Thanks 

Mark 

[dweller25]

Just click on the home button (the house icon) at the top of the page then scroll down to the “Astro classifieds” section. 

Edited March 27 by dweller25

[Mr Spock]

I think if I were moving up to that size and price, it would be the SM 125mm https://www.firstlightoptics.com/stellamira-telescopes/stellamira-125mm-ed-doublet-f78-refractor-telescope.html

[Telescope40]

My tuppence worth. Can’t see a price mentioned by the OP, so think I’d go the 120. 
John 

[russ]

3 hours ago, Flame Nebula said:

Hi

Given these two choices, which one would you pick? 

Use for planetary and double stars predominantly. 

Thanks 

Mark

If it was me, definitely the ED120 if the price is similar. I'm sure the optics are very nice in the Starfield 102 but I know for a fact they are great in the 120 as I use one as my main scope. Detail on Jupiter this past season, when conditions allow, has been superb. Doubles are extremely nice. 

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, russ said:

If it was me, definitely the ED120 if the price is similar. I'm sure the optics are very nice in the Starfield 102 but I know for a fact they are great in the 120 as I use one as my main scope. Detail on Jupiter this past season, when conditions allow, has been superb. Doubles are extremely nice. 

Have they improved the focuser on it recently?  5 years ago, I was looking at buying a used one that had been upgraded to a MoonLite focuser because the stock focuser was not so great.

[Mr Spock]

In terms of price, all the ones mentioned so far are:
Starfield 102mm £899
Skywatcher 120ED £1409
StellaMira 125mm £1599

For what it's worth when I tested the Starfield I found very little difference between it and the Takahashi FC-100 

The obvious question between a 100mm and a 120mm is size and weight, and what mount they need to go on as they are quite different beasts.

[Flame Nebula]

4 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

In terms of price, all the ones mentioned so far are:
Starfield 102mm £899
Skywatcher 120ED £1409
StellaMira 125mm £1599

For what it's worth when I tested the Starfield I found very little difference between it and the Takahashi FC-100 

The obvious question between a 100mm and a 120mm is size and weight, and what mount they need to go on as they are quite different beasts.

Hi Mr Spock, 

Yes, I stumbled across your, very excellent, review yesterday. Very tempting! 

I should probably have added a bit more info to my post, in that I already have a 80ed and 127mm mak. It may surprise you, but I reckon the 80ed out performs the mak, at least with what I've looked at so far. But, I am thinking of getting the C8 edge. I think there is a gap between my existing scopes and the C8, probably fillable with a 4 or 5 inch ED scope. The scope would be visual only, whereas the 80ed would be used for dso AP and the C8 for planetary AP, and visual (for the price difference of edge and non edge, it's a no brainer, as I prefer clean sharp views with no coma). I've heard the jump from 80 to 100 mm is lot bigger than would be expected. Is that true? 

[Elp]

For the budget you "may" be able to throw in the Askar 103/120 triplets into the mix too.

[Mr Spock]

33 minutes ago, Flame Nebula said:

I've heard the jump from 80 to 100 mm is lot bigger than would be expected. Is that true? 

I have an 80ED and it's not even close to the 100mm! The Starfield was still sharp at x223, the 80ED about half that. I'd rate my FS-60 higher then the 80ED.

[russ]

1 hour ago, Louis D said:

Have they improved the focuser on it recently?  5 years ago, I was looking at buying a used one that had been upgraded to a MoonLite focuser because the stock focuser was not so great.

For visual with lightweight accessories the original focuser is fine. But for 2" accessories it need swapping out. I just put the Astro Essentials focuser on mine and love it. As for a mount, the ED120 Pro is not heavy. If I can't be bothered lugging out the NEQ6, I'll use the CG5 and it works well for visual. In fact, I really do not know why I bother using the NEQ6 with the ED120. The ED120 Pro with rings, dovetail, diagonal and eyepiece, weighs in at 5.5kg. Very comfortably in the operating range for EQ5. And an absolute breeze for HEQ5. NEQ6 total over kill.

[Flame Nebula]

1 hour ago, Mr Spock said:

I have an 80ED and it's not even close to the 100mm! The Starfield was still sharp at x223, the 80ED about half that. I'd rate my FS-60 higher then the 80ED.

Hi, 

That's very interesting: I felt my 80ed was sharp(enough) to about 140, but rapidly faded after that. But, it's in the same ballpark. It seems to me that the starfield may be wiser in terms of cost and performance, given the C8 edge might overlap with a 120mm Ed. I suspect that the starfield would be ready to go whilst the C8 was still cooling down. 😉 It is a tough call between the starfield 102 and a StellaMira 125 and SW 120. 

[dweller25]

A good C8 SCT will have a similar contrast level to a 135mm unobstructed telescope when used visually on the planets.

So you are probably right, a 120/125mm refractor would be a close call.

The 4” Starfield offers quick setup, low mass = quick cooling and will outperform your 127 Mak and ED80.

The 120/125mm refractor offers more resolution and a slightly brighter image than the 4”. But they are more bulky.

In my opinion a 4” refractor and a good 8” SCT are a great combination.

 

 

Edited March 27 by dweller25

[Flame Nebula]

17 minutes ago, dweller25 said:

A good C8 SCT will have a similar contrast level to a 135mm unobstructed telescope when used visually on the planets.

So you are probably right, a 120/125mm refractor would be a close call.

The 4” Starfield offers quick setup, low mass = quick cooling and will outperform your 127 Mak and ED80.

The 120/125mm refractor offers more resolution and a slightly brighter image than the 4”. But they are more bulky.

In my opinion a 4” refractor and a good 8” SCT are a great combination.

 

 

Thanks Dweller, 

I had originally decided on the normal C9.25, but having seen one sitting next to Ed Ting when he was comparing the edge v std scopes, I thought "Crikey, they're big!" Also, I am particularly picky about nice sharp stars, and even though my main interest lies in planets and doubles, my instinct tells me, the C8 edge can do almost as well, but a lot less bulk. I've heard nothing but good stuff about the C8 edge and it having refractor-like views. I also need to account for my eyes getting older too. Some people reported finding it easier for their eyes to accommodate, with the edge. It would also be incredibly stable on an AZEQ6 mount too. So options for dso in future. 

 

[dweller25]

The best piece of kit that I ever bought to combat ageing eyes is ….

Binoviewers 🙂

[Elp]

11 minutes ago, dweller25 said:

Binoviewers

For which the Askars I've mentioned are perfect for...

[cajen2]

In your place, I'd be considering the Starfield or the StellaMira. I have the SF and it's an excellent scope optically, with great build quality and a very good focuser.

[mikeDnight]

I've had three SW 120ED's and they were superb. The first one was a DS Pro, while the other two were the Equinox version. The Equinox was a chunkier build with a better lens cell design, but all three gave great performance on moon, planets, deep sky, and double stars. If I couldn't have a Tak for any reason, I'd be very happy to have the 120 Equinox or DS Pro instead. They are optically very close to Tak's FS series in performance. A Vixen GP will carry one if on a good tripod!

 I found the Crayford focuser could be adjusted to suit most eyepieces, but always struggled holding the 31 Nagler without slipping when aimed towards the Zenith. Also, the rotating focuser is metal to metal, so with both of mine U unscrewed the silver locking ring and cut a tin plastic washer which allowed the focuser to rotate smoothly but firmly without loosening the silver ring. It worked like a dream.

Edited March 27 by mikeDnight

[Highburymark]

I wouldn’t say the C8 Edge has refractor-like views. It’s much closer to a standard SCT than an apo refractor in my view, despite all the claims made for the Edge range by Celestron. Still a great telescope, but some way short of a top notch frac. (That is based on an experience of one C8 Edge, I should make clear. I’m sure there are better examples out there. But my 120mm triplet easily beats the C8 Edge on Mars and Jupiter, and produces much crisper stars).

One question I have about Skywatcher’s current EDs: since moving away from FPL-53 in favour of ‘FPL-53 equivalent’ glass, I’ve seen very little analysis on how the new glass compares. Even if it is the same quality (FCD-100?), wouldn’t it require a redesign of the optics, and perhaps the mating glass too? I’m not suggesting that quality has diminished - I suspect that the new EDs reach the high standards of the old ones. But I’d do some research on this before buying a new Skywatcher ED today, as a secondhand FPL-53 ED120 would be a tempting proposition. For my needs, I’d also have to factor in the cost of a replacement focuser. Even the better Equinox focuser wasn’t quite up to the job of holding my binoviewers when I had an 80ED. 

[Highburymark]

To answer the original question, I’d definitely be looking at the 120mm or 125mm scopes. The leap in resolution between a 4” and 5” frac is considerable, and both the Skywatcher and (particularly) the Stellamira are svelte for their size. 

[GordonD]

6 hours ago, Louis D said:

Have they improved the focuser on it recently?  5 years ago, I was looking at buying a used one that had been upgraded to a MoonLite focuser because the stock focuser was not so great.

The focuser is a weak point on the SW120ED. Just a poor effort, I think. Mine has needed many efforts at adjustment and it is never quite right. Shame really as it is otherwise a great scope. I claim no great expertise, but the optics seem excellent to me. But if was buying now to be honest I would look at an alternative simply because of this part. (They stopped selling the Equinox version with a better focuser shortly before I got mine).
Great to have such choices, though - good luck!

[Flame Nebula]

40 minutes ago, Highburymark said:

I wouldn’t say the C8 Edge has refractor-like views. It’s much closer to a standard SCT than an apo refractor in my view, despite all the claims made for the Edge range by Celestron. Still a great telescope, but some way short of a top notch frac. (That is based on an experience of one C8 Edge, I should make clear. I’m sure there are better examples out there. But my 120mm triplet easily beats the C8 Edge on Mars and Jupiter, and produces much crisper stars).

One question I have about Skywatcher’s current EDs: since moving away from FPL-53 in favour of ‘FPL-53 equivalent’ glass, I’ve seen very little analysis on how the new glass compares. Even if it is the same quality (FCD-100?), wouldn’t it require a redesign of the optics, and perhaps the mating glass too? I’m not suggesting that quality has diminished - I suspect that the new EDs reach the high standards of the old ones. But I’d do some research on this before buying a new Skywatcher ED today, as a secondhand FPL-53 ED120 would be a tempting proposition. For my needs, I’d also have to factor in the cost of a replacement focuser. Even the better Equinox focuser wasn’t quite up to the job of holding my binoviewers when I had an 80ED. 

Thanks 👍

It is very useful to read this feedback. It does seem that even with the edge, there are still some variations, as in some cases I read it did better than a 5" Refractor, in other cases, vice versa. I must admit, I'm in the awkward position of wanting the best visual observation of planets and doubles, and the best planetary AP I can afford. These are not usually mutually inclusive in the same scope, unless we're talking about large dobsonians. Even there, I'll wager there may be times when a 5-6 inch apo would show more, if seeing limits. In principle, I could get a  StellaMira 125 mm or Sw120, which seem highly regarded and accept it would outclass the C8 on planets, BUT only for visual observation, not AP. 

[dweller25]

6 hours ago, Flame Nebula said:

I prefer clean sharp views.

News Flash…..

You are a refractor man 🤣