Which Telescope out of these 3?

[Argentum]

I am contemplating the following telescopes:

Skywatcher Startravel 120 EQ3-2

Skywatcher Evostar 120 EQ3-2

Skywatcher Explorer 200p EQ5

Which one is better for a) a semi urban area with moderate light pollution and details on planets and also capable of viewing deep space objects?

TIA:confused:

Argentum

[hemihaggis]

sw 127 mak

[ollypenrice]

Not the Startravel.

Too much false colour and coma. On another thread some say they can live with it and others that they can't. I'm a 'can't.' It is very bad on planets and the moon.

I had a 120 and still have a 150 SW achromat. Pretty good. They have no collimation issues, assuming no defects, and that is where they score over the Newt.

The Newt will do best on deep sky but you will need to collimate it.

Olly

[ollypenrice]

More duplicate issues. Sorry. Please delete.

Olly

[Argentum]

sw 127 mak

Is this the same as the Skymax 127 Supatrac - Auto?

[RobH]

I have the ST120....good low power scope but useless on the planets for the reasons Olly states.

The 200 will be good but need collimating...lots more light grasp for faint objects though.

The Evostar 120 will be OK for brighter DSO's and moon/planetary viewing, but not go as deep as the reflector. You can also use a focal reducer with it if you want the wider field of the startravel scope.

If you want a quick, no fuss scope, go for the Evostar....if you don't mind collimating every time you go out, get the 200 reflector.

Cheers

Rob

[Argentum]

Does the light pollution affect the Explorer 200P reflector? I know that people ssay that collimating is easy when you have done it a few times, but to a beginner it does seem problematic with regards to having to set it up almost everytime I want to use it, or is this really not an issue?

[brantuk]

I'd go for the 200 and stick a dew shield and/or filter on it to help with the lp.

[Cornelius Varley]

Is this the same as the Skymax 127 Supatrac - Auto?

The SW127 Mak comes in three flavours. EQ3-2 mount, Suptrak or AZ-goto mounts.

Peter

[dweller25]

The 8" Newt is a very capable scope and a brilliant all rounder as long as you put some work into it. It will need active cooling, flocking and collimating for best results.

The 120mm Evostar refractor would be a good second choice, no issues with cooling, contrast or collimation. But it will have some purple fringing.

[Argentum]

The 8" Newt is a very capable scope and a brilliant all rounder as long as you put some work into it. It will need active cooling, flocking and collimating for best results.

The 120mm Evostar refractor would be a good second choice, no issues with cooling, contrast or collimation. But it will have some purple fringing.

What would be the difference in what I will be able to see between these two scopes?

[dweller25]

See this comparison between a 8" reflector and a 5" refractor on Mars......

http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-sketches-unconventional/99038-mars-5-v-8-a.html

[ollypenrice]

There would not be a huge difference. I was using an 8 inch SCT at the time I had the 120 and the deep sky objects, the faint ones, were slightly brighter in the 8 inch but the refractor was more contrasty. Most people (or many people, of whom I'm one...) feel that refractors punch above their weight because of this high contrast. In light pollution it is probably hard to beat a long focal length refractor. There really won't be a lot in it. It comes down to other things, I guess. Which is better for you to handle, do you mind collimating, etc.

As ever, if you could get to an astrosoc or star party you would be able to try a few for yourself. Preferences are very subjective, witness the responses on threads like this one.

Olly

Olly

[dweller25]

Thinking about it if I could only have one of the three you mentioned I would go for the 120mm Evostar........

No collimation, good contrast, pin point star images, quick cooling. Use a minus violet filter to reduce chromatic abberation. Light pollution filter for deep sky. Light weight tube. Easy to mount. Only £225. Looks like a proper telescope (shame they don't paint then white ).

[Whippy]

I've looked through a couple of the Evostar 120's and they're really nice scopes, my only concern would be the EQ3 mount might be a little light weight for it. I have an ED120 which is of a similar size and I have it on an EQ5/CG5 which is nice and stable.

IMO, the 8" newtonian is the better all rounder. It'd be close on the Moon and planets but for Deep Sky Objects, you would see more in the 8".

[Argentum]

Thanks guys for all help. I think I'll go for the EvoStar 120 on a EQ5 mount instead of the EQ3.

Anyone bought anything from Telescopeplanet? Any good?

Just found thread on Retailers - Looks like I'll shop elsewhere!

[Argentum]

Actually...HAving had a look I might be tempted to get a 10" Dob, but my Garden is on a slight slope, so I presume this would preclude the use of Dobs.

[RobH]

A dob will be fine on a slight slope, and you could always knock up a base to sit it on easily enough.

A 10 inch will show you a lot.

Re. scope retailers...... Give Steve at FLO a call....you won't go wrong with him.

Cheers

Rob

[Argentum]

Thanks RobH for the advice.

I have a small piece of flat area where I could sit a Dob on, but won't give me views of one half of the sky as the house is in the way. So I'll have to construct a simple platform for the middle of my garden.

I was looking at the Skywatcher Skyliner 250PX from FLO. Just need to get this past the wife:eek:, she was just expecting a traditional looking telescope and not a great big cannon:o

[Moonshane]

the dob will actually take up less space and will show you more objects in my experience - I have both - see below - the Celestron refractor is pretty much the same scope as the SW one you mention I think.

I love both but for different reasons.

Rob, are focal reducers readily available for longer refractors? I always assumed they were only for SCTs and shorter refractors for imaging?

shows how little I know! any chance you could recommend a couple to put me on the right track please?

[tinvek]

If it's any help re storage space and wives etc i've got a skywatcher 250 dob and a 150 on an eq3 - 2 and even with the eq's legs retracted to their shortest they still have a larger footprint than the 250's dob base and if the scope is still on the eq then you can add a bit more width in one direction. obviously the 250 is taller but only by about 8" to 12" and that shouldn;t make any difference unless you want to store it under a shelf or similar. finally the dob, when upright actually looks a lot tidier than a scope on a tripod.

to some up unless you colapse the EQ mount and remove the scope off it, a dob takes up less real world space.

[RobH]

Rob, are focal reducers readily available for longer refractors? I always assumed they were only for SCTs and shorter refractors for imaging?

shows how little I know! any chance you could recommend a couple to put me on the right track please?

Hello Shane,

For visual use, Antares do a 1 1/4 inch 0.5x reducer that screws into the front end the eyepiece which works really well, plus, if you have the right adapters, the celestron/meade 0.63 reducer works fine visually. The Meade 0.33 reducer doesn't work though as there is masses of vignetting with it.

Cheers

Rob

[Moonshane]

cheers Rob

this is great info - might give one of them a whirl! I see they also do a 2" version.

[Argentum]

Still deciding on a scope:o..

Will an 8 inch reflector such as the Explorer 200P provide for a better viewing of the moon and planets that the Evostar 120 refractor?

Hopefully this will help me decide to whether to stick a refractor scope of a bigger reflector.

Thankyou for everyones help so far!

[dweller25]

Will an 8 inch reflector such as the Explorer 200P provide for a better viewing of the moon and planets that the Evostar 120 refractor?

Yes BUT as I said earlier you will have to put some work into it.