Sky-Watcher Skymax-127 SynScan AZ GOTO

[starscy]

The Sky-Watcher Skymax-127 SynScan AZ GOTO looks interesting as a 'grab and go' solution. Does anyone have experience with this? How would it compare optically to a 100mm APO refractor?

[Stardust]

I bought a used Skymax 127 a couple of weeks ago. I've only had it out a couple of times and I must say that I'm quite inpressed for the price and size. Very compact, quite light, collimation was slightly off but dead easy to do. Pinpoint stars were lovely.

It's going to have more light grasp than a refractor but less contrast. They are two different beasts really, this is a higher power instrument, whereas the refractor is going to give you a much wider fiield.

I'm actually considering a side by side mounting of this or an OMC140 with my 85mm refractor, to cover most things.

You could always have both

[GazOC]

I've used the OTA only and its a very good scope for the money. A 100mm apo is probably more flexible due to the focal length/ ratio but you can still get close to a 1 deg field with the Mak which is enough for most objects. Other than that I don't think theres that much difference between the views of (say) an ED100 and a 127mm Mak.

[Macavity]

I begin (personally!) now to think the MAK127 on the S/W mount approaches the limit of capability of EASY "grab and go"? E.G. I find mine needs an area of hard-standing, and some "fiddling" to get it to "go-to" (invariably) in the MAK degree-or-so field.

Aside: I see the weight limit of that mount is now quoted as 4kg. Unfortunately, it seems rather EASY to pursuade (9x50 finder, hyperions...) a MAK127 to weigh slightly more than that... LOL.

Don't get me wrong - I think the barefoot GoTo MAK127 combo is just great. BUT I do sense it might be a tad more easy/pleasurable to use with a slightly lighter OTA? Maybe indeed, a MAK102 or a 100mm F6 APO etc.

[Space Cowboy]

I agree the mount is rather lightweight. Image shakes like a turkish belly dancer when focusing. But as a mobile kit it's very quick and easy to setup. The most anoying part is the connection for 12v power supply which can easily work loose and cut the power. Also there is no power on/off switch.

[starscy]

Could the mount handle a 100mm f/9 or 80mm f/7.5 APO OTA better?

[Macavity]

I think there are two issues contributing: First the total OTA weight, second the "intertia" of longer tubes. I sense one can be fairly well guided by the maximum size of scopes that usually accompany these mounts. The MAK127 is heavy (at both ends!) but relatively short. The 130P(?) reflector and ST102/F5 are longer, but significantly lighter...

A 100mm refractor beyond F6, might be pushing it? The mount relies on friction, to retain the altitude setting. (It's possible to move the scope manually, by <ahem> "leaning on it"!) I sense such might be exacerbated with longer tubes. Nov. S@N magazine reviews a number of GoTo refractors. Celestron's "NextStar" (similar?) mount seems happy enough with a 102mm (albeit achro) F6 'frac.

[John]

In terms of "grab and go" capability I think the only drawback for the Mak is the cooldown time which is considerably longer than for a 100mm refractor. The whole point about the grab and go concept for me is to be able to get out and observing quickly so the long cool down time works against this for me.

I think the F/9 refractor would be too much for the mount as our feline friend (Macavity) says. A short tube 102mm (one of the options for the mount that Skywatcher provides of course) would be OK.

John

[Stardust]

if you're going down the 102 refractor route, I think the celestron goto package came out tops in the sky at night test. The main problem these days is there's too much choice.