Skywatcher 150p/pl what to expect?

[kev78]

I'm looking for a Skywatcher 150p or pl ..not decided yet. It will be the new black one.

The question is what can expect to see? I don't want to spend hundreds just to look at a glowing spec of light. I want to see planetary detail etc. Obviously I know because of the size/entry level scope that the viewing isn't going to be hubble detail but if there are any images that people have taken through the scope to give a good representation that would be great.

[astoc]

I'm new to this myself, but from what I've read so far you simply can not expect to see what you see in images from a similar scope. Where a long exposure shot will show colour and vast detail, to the naked eye against the eyepiece you will see monochrome and much less resolved detail.

John

[John]

You can see planetary details with that scope but it will take practice and patience to see them. It's the same with larger scopes as well - astronomy is not really a hobby of quick and easy "wins" with the exception of the moon which is spectacular in any scope. As you learn a bit about what you are looking at, the appreciation grows so even faint fuzzy patches take on a real fascination when you realise what you are seeing.

As astoc says though, don't expect to see what the photos show - even with larger scopes our eyes cannot compete with CCD's and image processing.

[solarwallace]

It's all about seeing it for yourself - well it is for me . I have an explorer 150 and it blew my mind when I saw a grey elliptical blob of light. This particular blob was the Andromeda Galaxy - so you're looking 2,500,000 years into the past at a different galaxy. Wooh!

So it aint Hubble level by any means, but you are seeing it for your self.

Same with the planets; the first time you actually see Jupiter and it's moons or Saturn - amazing. Just that's it's tiny, and there's no huge colour contrast. BUT, you, are seeing it with your own eyes.

If your expections are realistic then you won't be disappointed.

Do ask questions on here as everyone is very patient and helpful. Myself I've got very confused with my scope initially. But you get there and that's what makes those moments worthwhile.

Hope that kind of helps (!).

Steve

[coxie]

the most common mistake is thinking you will see what you do in images

[acey]

Steve (solarwallace) has said it all. Looking at photos versus looking through a telescope is like the difference between being at the match and watching it on telly. Don't expect a perfect view - but enjoy the experience.

With a carefully looked-after 150mm scope, given practice and good viewing conditions, you can see cloud belts on Jupiter and the shadows of its transiting moons; rings of Saturn; lunar craters down to about a mile; and (if you're away from man-made lights) a couple of hundred deep-sky objects (galaxies, nebulae, star clusters).

None of it will be like the photos - it'll be better, because you're seeing it for real.

Andrew

[Astro_Baby]

If you want a rough approximation this is a pic of the moon taken through the eyepiece of a Sky-Watcher 130. Also two sketches done of Saturn and Jupiter seen through the same scope.

The moon was done at quite low magnification.

Its a very rough guide as to what you'll see.

[acey]

They're very nice images - but I'd take them as only a very rough approximation. With my 80mm scope I can see the gap between Saturn and its rings, and the Cassini division, but can't see them on screen (maybe I need a better screen).

[DarkerSky]

I owned a 150mm scope for some 3 years in the late 80s. With practice I saw a fair amount of detail on Mars. Jupiter was astounding. Equatorial bands showed crisp detail at moderate mag powers, including festoons, dips and bandings within the bands. You'll need a set of decent filters and EPs though.

As for DSOs alot will depend upon the quality of your sky. If you are rural and away from light pollution, a 150mm scope will give you some stunning views. I used that scope from a rural location and got to see things like the dark lane in M82 and nebulosity in the Rosette

[John]

I owned a 150mm scope for some 3 years in the late 80s. With practice I saw a fair amount of detail on Mars. Jupiter was astounding. Equatorial bands showed crisp detail at moderate mag powers, including festoons, dips and bandings within the bands. You'll need a set of decent filters and EPs though.

As for DSOs alot will depend upon the quality of your sky. If you are rural and away from light pollution, a 150mm scope will give you some stunning views. I used that scope from a rural location and got to see things like the dark lane in M82 and nebulosity in the Rosette

Good post

I think the key words here are "with practice" - time and experience at the eyepiece is the key to unlocking the finer planetary details.

[gazmass]

I have one and it is a great telescope. I have just brought a new telescope and will be sorry the day that i have to sell it as it is awesome. No one could beleive how much you can see with it. The bands of jupiter and the rings of saturn are a must! The moon is always great to look at and the galaxies are a wonder. I had this as my first telescope and it was a great buy. There is so much to see and so much fun to be had with this telescope. I do not for one second wish i got a different one. It is great

[kev78]

Thanks for all the input. I'm even more excited now!!! I think you guys are right about "seeing it for real" as if I were to see jupiter and saturn with any detail through the scope goose pimples would follow! lol

Also I know this has been discussed a million times but I cannot find a difinitive answer on the "p or pl" choice.

[Brunty12345]

i have the 150p but i cant judge really because i havent even had the chance to properly use it, i used to one night and that was my first time using a scope in years so i was quite useless with it, but i viewed the moon and that seems to be crystal clear so im happy with just that to tell the truth il get onto viewing the m42 (my favourite DSO) when i am more experienced and when/if we ever have another clear night lol

[Brunty12345]

i used it one night*

[andyr]

Hi there, I have the 150P and love it, with the supplied EP's and Barlow I have seen M42, Mars, Saturn and it's moons and of course our trusty old moon (with the help of a ND filter). Now just saving up for a few decent Ep's to compliment this fabulous scope (just a shame I've only had three clear nights so far since purchasing from FLO last month).

Just my opinion anyway, though I did spend 4 weeks deciding and went for this 'cos of the Crayford focuser and the fact you can then use 2" or 1.25" Ep's with this model (not available on the PL).

Depends what you're looking for really, I read the PL is best for planets etc, the P is a more all-rounder and better for DSO's, but that's what I read. There's plenty of reviews out there of them both from Sky At Night magazine and also Astronomy Now to name two.

Andy

[russ]

Kev, the 150P is the more all rounder, has the much better focuser and less stress on the mount. The 150PL will be the better lunar/planetary scope (150mm f8 Newt is a classic planetary scope), won't be far off on the deepsky either, will work better with budget eyepieces and collimation not so critical. Swings and roundabouts. I personally prefer the PL but a lot pf people prefer the P. I suppose it depends on what you think your main interest will be.

A decider could be the mount. If you are buying this as a package with the EQ3 I'd go with the 150P. Or go with the 150PL but budget for the Accufocus as well.

Russ

[Astro_Baby]

My sister has the P verion and likes it lots. I have only used it a few times but its a nice scope. Hers is an older one with the old rack and pinion focuser rather than the Crayford.

The PL would have advantages too, its longer focal length means its happier with cheap eyepieces and collimation would be less critical. WIth that said fast scopes can work well with low cost EPs but you just ned to be careful what you buy. Collimation, to be honest, is a perisher for the newbie whatever you buy and in truth its not much easier with either although a short tube scope does mean you can reach round the back to twiddle the adjusters while looking through a collimator.

Portability is the other issue - the PL will be almost a meter long versus a little less than 650mm.

A longer tube will also apply a greater leverage on the mount (ie its long tube will be far from the mounts centre) making it a bit more wobbly - how much more I cant say cos I havent used one. My sis has a long tube scope as well but it sits on its own ancient mount of peculiar origin.

Its a tough one really. If I were buying on a strict budget I'd get the 650 version - if I had money to spend on upgrades I'd get the PL version and swap the focuser out but I am comfy doing engineering on scopes - not sure if the PL has a hole large enough to take a 2" focuser. If not it would be scary engineering time to get the hole large enough to take a bigger focuser and upgrades can be hairy enough for me - without sounding patronisng a beginner might (and probably should as well) be cautious about messing about wirh modifications.

It really is a tough call.......

Oooh- eck - not sure what I would buy now either

I'm sure though that either will excite you and give you some memorable views.

[andyr]

Good advice from Astro, though being a 150P owner just wanted to let you know it's 750 long not 650....

And the Crayford is nice and smooth...

Cheers:D

[H2IKXF]

I caution all those who read this comment to NOT think in any way that my intent is to cause hurt with my words. Quite the opposite in fact.

Perspective is what's needed. It most often but not always occurs when people get older and wiser. Experience sometimes helps in the development of this particular facility but it's been proven to not be a causal relationship.

So. The perspective concerning your future telescope and what you will/won't see is this:

Galileo Galilei beginning (approximately) around 1609 using a telescope possessing an objective lense of only 1 1/3 inches and an eyepiece of 3x. The lenses were not duplex, triplex, coated or even properly ground to correct for lensing errors. Yet with this equipment he saw fuzzy lights moving around Jupiter. He revolutionised the human condition.

Sir, I put the following to you.

A) Galileo Galilei (his contemporaries or those who would come in the next 300 years) would gladly slit your throat from ear to ear to possess what you are considering to purchase.

You would do well indeed to discover anything nearly as revolutionary to the human condition as Galileo Galilei.

My suggestions to you are:

Be content.

Be humble.

Look up at the sky and marvel at the wonders you can see.