Newbie needing help!

[koko.pelli]

Hi everyone,

I am new to this forum, and very new to astronomy, since I can remember I have always been fascinated with the night sky.

I have always wanted to view Jupiter through a telescope and would love to see some nebula also.

I have been watching Wonders of the Solar System on the BBC and this has reawaken my interest and I really need to do something about it so am looking at telescopes. I have starmap for my iPhone and am looking to the skies with my naked eye but want to delve deeper but have a bit of a dilemma:

I am looking specifically at the Skywatcher Explorer 150PL and and the 200P, I would really love to get one of these but my issue is space. I'm not too sure how big the 200 actually is but from photographs it looks pretty massive and storage for me (and particularly my wife) is a major concern.

Is a SkyMax 127 an inferior scope than the above? Would I be able to see a lot less with this scope than the Newtonians? The reason I ask is that the Maksutov's are real space savers, but I really don't want to get a scope that won't deliver - I would love to see some Nebula/clusters.

Does anyone have 150PL/200P and could they tell me dimensions?

Also - can the scope be stored separately to the mount? Can the scope be easily removed from the mount to be stored safely if done carefully, or would you advise against this?

Also, how feasible is it for me to expect to be able to find things in the night sky? I realise it will take some getting used to, but am I asking too much of myself to do this? I am aware of GOTO but I kind of don't want to take away the fun element and satisfaction of finding things.

I also saw a guy had demonstrated a photo taken of the M42 with a Explorer 200P on this site... ForthImage - Astronomy from Edinburgh [First image with 200P]

Is this possible or am I missing something, does he have a modified version of the scope or something? I wasn't aware a scope of this price could see so much.

Sorry for the deluge of questions - just totally new to this and clueless

Thank you very much for any responses in advance.

[brantuk]

I started with a 150P (Parabolic mirror) - great scope - ideal starter - stores nicely in two main parts (ota and tripod) - protable and light - and great views (depending on focal length and e/p's used). Can't go wrong really.

Don't expect views like the glossy pics you see in mags/internet sites though. Those are taken using modified cameras and accurate tracking mounts. You'll see colours in the scope on solar system objects - but outside of that most everything is black/white/grey etc. Still lots of exciting stuff to explore though.

Welcome to the group

[yeti monster]

Skymaxs are rather well thought of, and very compact. I'm looking into getting one as a travel scope, but I keep getting distracted by lovely old TALs etc...........

[ollypenrice]

The big difference, optically, between the Maksutov and the Newtonians lies in the focal length and focal ratio.

The Mak, which has a 'slow' f ratio and longish focal length, works best on the moon and planets where its 'tunnel vision' is an advantage. However, many nice things in the sky are quite large and the wider feild of view of the Newts, and their brighter image on faint, extended obects, is a mighty advantage.

If you have a fairly dark site then the Newt will make more targets available at a pleasing level of brightness. However, if your site is not going to allow you to see faint things anyway, then you might prefer the Mak for its lunar/planetary performance.

(You can watch the shadow of a Jovian moon transit the disc of Jupiter from under a sodium street light. I've done it.)

To be honest, in terms of space I would say that the difference between all three scopes is unlikely to make the difference between finding a home or not finding one. There is a sort of 'minimum volume' for storing any scope and you might find no real difference. Could you get along to a local astrosoc and have a look at some?

Personally I would have the 200mm Newt but that's just me.

Photography is complicated and requires a great many additional bits and pieces. I would leave that till later, myself. If you do want to consider it, though, the Mak would do well with a webcam based device for imaging the moon and planets but is too slow for deep sky imaging. For this long exposure stuff with a DSLR a fast Newt is good. Webcamming the solar system is easier to get into and does not require an elaborate mount.

Small scopes do well well in astrophotography, you might be surpised to hear. I took this with a little (but good) 85mm refractor and CCD cameras;

I hope you will greatly enjoy your astronomy.

Olly

[BazMark]

I had a SKYHAWK 1145PM that I sold to help finance the purchase of a SKYMAX 127 Mak.

Of these two scopes My preference is the 127 Mak. That is because of the much higher mags it can achieve on the planets. However, I also enjoy viewing DSOs.

The Mak isn't bad at this even in the urban skies I view from. It does well with globular clusters, even resolving a handful of stars in the larger ones. It works well with open clusters though the larger ones don't fit entirely within it's FOV even with a 40mm EP. This is where the shorter focal length scopes with their wider FOVs are better.

In the urban skies I view from (Medium LP - can't see milky way) I have yet to succeed in finding an easily viewable galaxy. Andromeda I'm sure will be fine as I can see it clearly with 7x25 binos but it's currently too low in the sky for any viewing. M51 is high in the sky but so faint it is really hard to see. (127mm of apature is not enough for this scope to see it well.) This is where the larger aperture reflectors will have a big advantage.

Like you, I'm limited for storage space which is why I went for the 127 mak and I don't regret it one bit. It is an excellent scope, providing superbly clear views of the main planets and moon, and it takes up even less space than the 1145PM that I had. However, in time if I can make the room for it, I would like to add either the 150P or the 200P to my stable, so to speak, for their ability to tease out faint DSOs and fit the larger open clusters within their FOV.

Clear Skies, (Haven't had many of those lately)

Mark

[koko.pelli]

THank you very much guys:

@brantuk thanks for the welcome, I am tempted by either the 150PL or the 200, and as you say they can be stored separately from the mounts, this makes things easier, I could store in the loft quite easily. Would just need to be gentle.

How heavy is the 150? Anyone know if the 200 would be a lot heavier and what is the maintenance like for these scopes?

@yeti monster I was just about to bit the bullet and buy the Sky Max but visiting a local astronomy shop, the guy put me off the scope, saying the mount is very poor, it is very hard to set up (even though I have read multiple times it is easy) and that it isn't particularly good for DSO - the more I think about what I am after, the more I would love to see ad hopefully eventually produce the photos like Olly's above.

@ollypenrice I am gobsmacked by that photo, absolutely breathtaking.

The guy in the shop I spoke to left me feeling totally unsure what to do, He said with the skymax, the large planets such as Jupiter/Saturn would be tiny in the field of view, so that has made me want to see DSO a lot more and open up my possibilities.

I live in the Worthing area in West Sussex, so light polution isn't a major problem I don't think, there are streetlights about, but there are places I think I could go to.

In terms of photography, I have a very good DSLR so it is that I would want to take advantage of.

Back to your photo, what refractor did you take that with and what do you mean by CCD cameras? Also what is that in the photo - it is stunning - do you have a website where I can see more of your photos. Really stunning.

@BazMark Thanks for the info bud, could you explain what view you can actually get of the planets, how big or small they appear, how sharp they are etc?

Apologies for all the questions, just want to be sure to make the right decision.

[BazMark]

Sounds to me from your last post that the 150P or 200P reflector would be your best choice for imaging if you have the space to store it. But remember you will need an RA motor fitted to track whilst imaging.

I have never owned one of these scopes so I can't compare the views that the 127 Mak is capable of with them. However, I have had very clear views of Mars and Saturn with the equivalent of an 8.4mm EP (16.8mm barlowed 2x)

Firstly as with all scopes it's essential that you allow the scope to match the outside temp where you are going to observe. If you don't you will think there is something wrong with the scope as it is not likely to focus properly.

Even with the lowest mag, 37x (40mm EP) you can clearly see the rings of Saturn and the disc and pale colour of mars though they appear small in the FOV.

At 89x (16.8mm EP) they are considerably bigger and Saturn's moons are clearly seen and are very sharp.

Our Moon at this mag just blew me away. Absolutely fantastic views.

At 178x (16.8mm barlowed 2x) The views are still very clear. Mars' polar cap can be seen (when it's turned toward us) and you can begin to see dappling on the surface. One particularly good evening I could see Saturn's rings transversing in front of the planet and the planets shadow on the rings where they passed behind the planet on one side. I could also just begin to see banding on the planet's surface.

I have also used a standard 6.3mm plossl with reasonable views but at this mag you are pushing this scope to it's limit. The views aren't sharp but they are acceptible. I've even barlowed this EP which is rediculous I know, but you've gotta try haven't you. On the night I did it I was supprised. Not good focus by any stretch of the imagination but viewable. Saturn was BIG.

Overall I'd say the best views of the planets I've had with it so far was with the 16.8mm orthoscopic both on it's own and barlowed to 8.4mm. (89-178x)

I've never tried imaging with it and not sure that I ever will so Im not the best one to get advise from on that subject. However, I will say that it tracks very well when set up right. I had it set up on Saturn at 89x mag and it tracked for half hour or more on one occasion. That should be plenty for imaging I would have thought but someone who has imaged with this scope could give you better advise on that score.

I will say , that to get it tracking accurately it is crucial to get the tripod level as without that it will not track for long if you can even locate what you're looking for. However, once you've got the hang of it it works very well.

Mark

[ollypenrice]

Glad you like the pic. It is The Great Nebula in Orion, comprizing M42, M43 and NGC1977, 'The Running Man.'

The scope was a very expensive Takahashi FSQ astrograph, but only 85mm. That was my main point. An astrograph is a scope designed to be used as a camera lens.

A CCD (Charge Coupled Device) camera uses a chip which is highly sensitive, so much so that it needs a built in cooler to run it at around minus 15 or lower. There are plenty of makers who make them for astronomy using chips intended for a variety of scientific purposes. I use Atik cameras myself. They are most often monochrome so you shoot through red, green and blue fiters in turn and then use dedicated software to blend the colours. On a daytime camera, as you probably know, the colour filters are placed in a matrix over the pixels in a red, green, green, blue pattern. This is also an option with CCD cameras.

I'll PM you my websites because one of them is commercial.

Olly

[Astro_Baby]

If you want an idea of scope sizes this is me (5'7" girl) against two scopes - a 5.1" Skywatcher 130PM (bit smaller than a 150) and a Skywatcher 200/HEQ5. This may give you an idea.

Normally the big scope is left in the lounge - we have a small flat. But going forward its to be stored in a blanket box in the hallway which I have ordered up specially as storage for the scope.

They are quite heavy(ish) and buly. I'd suggest the loft isnst agood unless you have ready access because if the scope is stored somewhere difficult to get at it will never be used. It will always seem like too much hassle to get it out.

Anyway - welcome to the world of astronomy - I'll wish you clear skies.

ps Worthing Astro Society will be near you and they would be well worth a call - do a search form them on the web.

[ollypenrice]

Five foot seven???? Blimey, I'm going to keep quiet.

Olly (Less than five foot seven.)

[koko.pelli]

@BazMark Thanks for all the advise bud, seriously considering the 200P, just got to think about space to store it.

@Olly Thanks for the info on the picture, it is truly stunning. Going to check out all of your other work now!

@Astro Thanks for adding the photo for me, wow the 200 is pretty big! You're right also about storing it in the loft, so thinking now either in the garage covered snugly in a box to keep out damp, or somewhere in the house separate from the mount.

Thanks for the heads up on the Worthing Astro Club, definitely going to get in touch!

Astro - how do you find the 200 - what have you been able t osee with it and with what clarity/scale etc?

Can anyone give me an idea of how difficult it may be to polar align/set up the scope alignment (sorry if I have the lingo incorrect there!). Just consciousit isn't a go to scope, would really love to find things myself but not sure if it's totally unrealistic!

[Sierra Golf Mike]

I got my first scope two weeks ago a Skywatcher Explorer 150P, polar alignment was a doddle. Still getting used to it but I have had great views of Saturn, Mars, The Moon, Orion Nebula M42, M44 etc. I am delighted with this scope and could guarantee that you would not be disappointed. The 150P is 750mm long the 150PL is 1200mm long, that is why I chose the 150P.

Hope this helps

Cheers

Steve

[hemihaggis]

the skymax 127 is very popular for a reason

[koko.pelli]

I got my first scope two weeks ago a Skywatcher Explorer 150P, polar alignment was a doddle. Still getting used to it but I have had great views of Saturn, Mars, The Moon, Orion Nebula M42, M44 etc. I am delighted with this scope and could guarantee that you would not be disappointed. The 150P is 750mm long the 150PL is 1200mm long, that is why I chose the 150P.

Hope this helps

Cheers

Steve

Pheeeeew - I was worried about polar alignment etc. Thanks for the response bud

What can you see of the Orion Nebula M42? How big does it appear to you and can you make out colour at all?

Also - what eyepieces are you using?

[BazMark]

Took the Mak out this evening. Just after sunset saw Venus and Mercury for the first time ever in a scope and using my variable polarizing filter to cut down the glare could even make out that Venus isn't quite full. Saturn was a beautiful sight with banding on the planet and three moons clearly visible. Tried my new TS Planetary HR 6mm EP and was impressed but it definitely takes the 127 Mak to the edge of it's limit. Mars is not so impressive now. Could make out the pale colour but no polar cap tonight. M3 and M13 made good viewing and I even managed to just make out M87. Though very faint it was definitely in my FOV. I finished off with the Cats Eye neb just as the scope begun to dew up.

That's my fix till the next time I can find a couple of hours free at the same time as clear skies.

[Sierra Golf Mike]

I'm just using the supplied eyepieces and Barlow lens. The 25mm eyepiece is enough to give you a good view of M42. No colour but you can see the shape of the "clouds", not sure but I think they call it nebulosity, someone more experienced may be kind enough to confirm or correct this.

Steve

[Flinthead]

Hi Koko,

as a newbie myself I cant comment on the relative merits of the scopes you mention, however I was in your position a few months ago, and bought a 200P with an HEQ5 mount. I also had the same idea about goto, that I'd rather learn my way round the skies a bit b4 I upgrade (also quite expensive to go the whole hog straight away). Several months later I van honestly say that I do not regret buying the 200p. I am always pleased with what I see thru the EP. And yes it takes a while, but you do get to learn your way round. its also quite nice to be able to look up and ID constellations and stars without a book or computer. If you dont have a pair already then I would recommend a pair of bins (I use a pair of 10x50), and a skymap, great for just popping out to the garden on a clear night when you dont have time to set up the scope. Also suggest you download Stellarium (free).

One thing you might want to think about if you are interested in imaging is the mount. As I understand it you will need a substantial mount, and as they are quite expensive its makes sense to buy a heavy mount at the outset rather than upgrade later. As already stated you will also need to be able to track accurately. Have a look at OTL's website (they import the Skywatcher into the UK). Lots of images taken thru a 200P.

As you have already seen they are quite substantial bits of kit, but the tube is light but bulky and if you keep the mount on the tripod is heavy and awkward to carry.

Lastly, once you've got your scope start saving, it wont be long b4 the lure of nice shiny accessories becomes irresistable, especially EP's and filters.

Lastly, once you get going be patient, many DSO do not jump out of your EP, they may take time to see, depending on conditions LP etc (and you, your eye is also a variable). There are however some easy and impressive sights to see.

This is a great forum to be on, loads of really friendly helpful people hang out on here. If you have a question or problem, just ask away. Its highly unlikely that you will the first person with that problem. Also have a look at some of the threads. Most likely any questions you have, will already have been answered.

Oh, and by the way, welcome to SGL.

[Astro_Baby]

HI,

Sorry to take so long to come back. Views through the 200. Its very hard to describe. I am loathe to point you at pictures because photographic images are always VERY misleading. Youw ont see color on any deep sky object - occasionally under a very clear sky I can just about make out a blueish tinge in the Orion Nebula (M42) and sometimes in the Pleaides (M45) as well.

Jupiter appears about the size of a processed pea and you can make out the two larger cloud bands of North and South Equatorial Belts ( I have yet to see the great red spot (GRS) )

Saturn appears at a slighlty smaller size, rings are easily visible and the Cassinin Division before Saturns tilt changed.

Deep sky objects are always a grey, smoky color to the naked eye. The Ring Nebula (M57) appears like a small polo mint with a diamter about equivalent to a pea again. Andromeda (M32) can look very appealing as a smokey spirla shape. I have yet to see dust lanes in it.

Bang for the buck the 200 delivers some great views and you couldnt see much more without spending some serious wong. You could save money by not having the HEQ5 and not going the imaging route and buying a larger Dobsonian style scope which may get you 12" which would be an improvement in the views BUT it would also be bigger and if storage space is at a premium it might be a problem for you.

Bear in mind as soon as you buy the scope there will be extras you'll need. A dewshield for a starter for the scope as they can dew up fast in damp conditions, a red light torch and almost cerianly some better quality Eyepieces. The ones with the scope are perfectly adequate but every beginner always wants better ones almost immediately.

You say your near Worthing - the Worthing AS know me (I'm a member) but I dont go very often. BUT if your around for an observing evening (and this weather ever clears) you'd be very welcome to come take a look through my 200 set-up.